view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
Ehhhh.
Okay, that sounds pretty unequivocal.
So it's possible, albeit not known, that she had previously violated the hijab law. And that's why they were pulling her over.
But that's not why they shot at her. She got shot because she didn't stop the vehicle.
Like, you could say "shot for refusing to stop", and I'd agree with that. Maybe someone would find that unreasonable as a matter of police procedure. I don't know what the legal standards are for use-of-force in Iran. In the US, I'm reasonably sure that that'd violate law enforcement protocol in most states. A police officer can't use deadly force just for not following an order; there are situations where it is possible to do so.
kagis
Yeah:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule
If a suspect drives a car at an officer, the car is considered to be a deadly weapon, and it's okay for police to use deadly force then.
But my guess is that just a refusal to stop, without some additional circumstances, wouldn't result in authorization to use deadly force anywhere in the present-day US.
I can imagine someone saying that they think that Iran's use-of-deadly-force law should be more-restrictive.
But I don't think that this is reasonable to reduce this to "shot by police over hijab".
Women have been beaten to death by police before for violating hijab law, I don't blame her for not stopping.
Yeah if she had already been warned, there's good reason she might have feared for her life if she stopped.
Fucked either way
I think the idea is the misleading title is classic of western propaganda to incite hate and iranphobia. They do the same for all middle Eastern countries. You might not see it, but it is clear as day for people who live there.
Did the same with Libya, Iraq, Sudan before the split and leaders dying but nothing after. It is these small inaccuracies in the title that keep building up.
It's true that in the situation and country, this is equivalent to someone fleeing a traffic stop when they remember they have warrants. Authority figure gonna do what they're enlisted to do, because it's their perogative and their "duty" (and I mean duty in the sense of being bound to their personal theology)
But yet, would either of those situations would cause said authority to use deadly force? Of course not.
Iran is a back asswards country. The US is shit in its own ways as well, I won't refute, it's a mess. But Iran has to literally be babysat by larger economic powers around the clock to keep them from cooking up doomsday doodads.
Getting this bent out of shape over women wanted to drive, get a proper education, vote, or fucking not wearing a piece of cloth, just furthers the sentiment that somewhere along the male Iranian genealogy some chromosomes got lost.
(Side note, I don't reread these so I apologize if anything sounds purposefully directed at specific groups. I harbor no hate towards the Iranian peoples, all hate is meant to be interpreted to whatever zealots churn up all this religious hoo-hah)