2771
submitted 2 years ago by TheDudeV2@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 3volver@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

That's good bait, but I'm still not taking it. I repeat my stance, felonies should be considered on a case by case basis, but there are many felons I’d have an issue with running for office, not just this particular one.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 19 points 2 years ago

"Case by case" for political office is so obviously open to corruption you shouldn't bother with it though, and felony definitions are already weaponized as they are between drugs and protest laws.

Hell, for that matter, isn't a public record of convictions already your best version of a case by case system?

Each voter can decide which crime matters to them..

I'm probably more likely to vote for someone that caught a felony for protesting.

[-] Esqplorer@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago

It's not case by case, but crime by crime. It should be decided on a basis of rule of law as to which specific crimes, such as those reflecting character and not just a lapse in judgement.

Trump has many convictions reflecting on his character in this one trial.

[-] zaph@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago

Problem with that is you can't attack someone's character in court unless they try to use it as a defense so there's no way that's getting into the constitution in our lifetimes.

[-] Esqplorer@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago

You absolutely can reference character. It just isn't itself evidence of other crimes.

[-] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago

What's the felony charge for protesting called?

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

weaponized

My state has a law on the books specifying Abuse of a Sports Official as a felony. As in, "Hey you, the umpire's a bum."

As you have observed, the situation has gotten quite out of hand.

[-] 3volver@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Practically I think that all felons shouldn't be able to run for office given the nature of the system. Ideally it would be case by case, but yes it would be corrupted and used by those in power to stop people from running. We either need to allow felons to vote and allow felons to run for president, OR do not allow felons to vote and do not allow felons to run for president. Right now the system makes no fucking sense.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

So anyone who is caught with too much weed in a certain state?

Anyone who "resists arrest" at a protest?

No, fuck that. Felons should be able to vote and run for office, unless convicted of treason or insurrection.

Which Trump should be.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
2771 points (99.3% liked)

News

35849 readers
729 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS