25
didn't realize we called racism "bias-motivation" now
Exactly! I kept wondering why they're not calling it a hate crime.
We hide behind obfuscated language when we dont want to say things.
« It seems the physical interaction was motivated by a slight difference of opinion »
The attack is being investigated as a possible bias-motivated crime.
The levels of avoiding saying "hate-crime"
Well in the USA white supremacists can't commit hate crimes since hate is their religion and their church is the state
You have to do some tap dancing these days to avoid saying Trump = hate.
They used to be called “hate crimes”. Why are we soft peddling violent racism like this
Because this is Trump’s America now :(
But I thought we told things like they are now, and euphemisms were woke?
~/s~
I think that's a bit like thinking Ronald McDonald owns McDonald's.
Like nah, man, that's just the clown they put on the adverts.
The racism was there before Trump. He just gave the klan permission to ditch the sheets
It's terrorism, actually, since it is politically motivated.
Terrorism and hate crimes are nowhere near mutually exclusive, though. This is a case of both.
As a former Marine, fuck this guy. He’s so lost his way with regard to what he’s actually supposed to be standing for.
I appreciate former Marines like yourself coming out across the socials to say this. We should be normalizing the good of what you volunteered to do, and its purpose. These crazies need to learn what they apparently completely missed, and that they are dishonoring the military position they served.
What a doofus... we all know this is Elon's America now anyway.
Wait, I think I've figured it out! All minorities need to get jobs at health insurance companies ASAP! That way any magats who threaten or attack you will be prosecuted as terrorists going after the health insurance companies.
To really make Republican heads explode, everyone who's not a Republican needs a small arsenal of AR-15s.
No no no, you're confused. The field the company is in doesn't matter. What matters is if that you get to a C-level position.
I'm thinking of the woman who said over the phone in response to her claim being denied, "deny, delay depose, you're next" or something close to that. She was talking to a regular employee at the health insurance company and was immediately arrested and charged, could get something like 10 years in prison. So you don't have to be a high-level employee.
edit: rechecked the details and found:
Boston was ultimately charged with threats to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism, with a bond set at $100,000, as first reported by local station WFLA. That's a second degree felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
Alex, who had been out reporting, then drove back to his news station in the city. After he got out of his vehicle, Egan chased Alex as he ran toward the station's door and demanded to see his identification, according to the document laying out police’s evidence in the case. Egan then tackled Alex, put him in a headlock and “began to strangle him,” the affidavit said.
He followed him, chased him down and proceeded to strangle him, and they still needed to determine if this was a "bias-motivated crime".
He said it - "it’s Trumps USA now". Get ready for a whole lot of fecal matter hitting the air circulation device…
and they still needed to determine if this was a "bias-motivated crime".
As is always the case, police need to be as neutral as possible in their public statements so they don't accidentally cause a mistrial by saying something that could be perceived as bias.
By not calling the guy out as a racist piece of shit, they're making sure the judge won't be forced to dismiss the case.
Egan, who was driving a taxi, pulled up next to Alex at a stoplight and, according to an arrest affidavit, said something to the effect of: “Are you even a U.S. citizen? This is Trump's America now! I'm a Marine and I took an oath to protect this country from people like you!”
Yeah still too early to tell isn't it
Prosecuting Attorney's office: "not enough evidence"
He'll be charged with terrorism...right?
If he attacked a CEO yes, otherwise no.
Come Jan 20, he'll be pardoned.
But a woman who got mad for having a claim denied for health care coverage THAT SHE PAYS FOR and saying something in anger, well that's a big problem, but stalking someone for 40 miles and strangling them is cool, right conservatives?
He followed him for 40 miles
40
That’s insane.
He tackled a man.
Because of his purported ethnicity.
That's insane.
These are the people that vote for Trump.
I wish the man wasn't right. But he is. This is Trump's America now and this is the new normal and the lügenpresse will be amongst the first victims.
This should be a thing. Every time something horrific happens it needs to be labeled as "Trump's America."
And I don't mean things like natural disasters. Increases in hate, poverty, brutality. Things that Trump stands for and causes.
Buy (or 3d print) a gun for your own safety if you are a minority.
I honestly would not trust a 3D printed gun. Even after some successful uses, there have still been plenty of fuckups.
I think guns are a case where precision machine tooling is a good idea.
Edit: Am I really getting downvoted for suggesting if people get a gun, they get one that was made with precision milling? Would you downvote me for saying people probably shouldn't assemble their own cars out of 3D printed parts either?
Yeah, you dont wanna have to rack the slide after every shot, like some goddam noob.
I mean I'm thinking of stuff I've read like this:
https://3dprint.com/285741/teen-shoots-self-accidentally-with-gun-made-with-3d-printed-parts/
It's a tool. You don't make your own screwdriver or drill.
This article explains it better than I can:
Well you may have just moved to Britain but with your knowledge of handguns I would assume you were born there. Guns are dangerous tools. Yes. The kid didn't shoot himself in the leg because of the 3D printed parts. He shot himself in the leg because he fumbled a partially assembled and cocked handgun that for some inexplicably stupid reason he had decided to load with a single round.
Due to a large amount of very stupid laws by a couple of different three-letter agencies, a handgun is actually defined as the frame that holds all the pressure bearing parts and not the pressure bearing parts themselves.
So he printed the hand grip basically and then put the upper assembly of a standard normal factory assembled upper of a firearm inside of that.
Are you really trying to argue with me that a tool which requires precision doesn't have to be made with precision?
I mean for fuck's sake, this isn't even a gun control argument on my part, it's a "be wise with what you have" argument.
You go ahead and 3D print all the guns you want though. Just don't come crying to me if one of them blows up in your hand because of a faulty print. Righteous indignation is the important thing here.
No, I'm telling you that the tool that was made with precision was inserted into a plastic handguard that was 3D printed. The upper assembly and pressure bearing parts of the firearm were assembled in a factory
Try reading what I wrote again or you know maybe reading your own article first
Cool. It's still generally a bad idea to 3D print a gun. You should get one made professionally for basic safety reasons. I provided a whole other link you're ignoring.
Are you actually this incapable of understanding what I'm saying? The gun wasn't 3D printed. Let's try this another way. Imagine I take a Honda Accord from the Honda factory. Imagine I strip off all of the paneling and replace it with custom paneling that I made and or assembled or got from a panel kit. Is my Honda now 3D printed?. I didn't replace the wheels. I didn't replace the drivetrain. I didn't replace the engine, it has the same naked frame. It rolled off the factory floor with.
Which "the gun?" I'm talking about hobbyist 3D printed guns in general. It's a bad idea to print one out on your home 3D printer. There are plans to do so which can be downloaded. Don't use them because it's dangerous. Why is this such a controversial thing to say?
This article you ignored the first time explains very clearly why you should not 3D print your own gun at home. Maybe read it this time. https://www.fastcompany.com/90290217/3d-printing-guns-at-home-is-dangerous-mostly-for-the-person-shooting-it
Because nobody is printing those and using those that understands or knows anything or has done a any research whatsoever into the topic. I am trying to show you the distinction between 3D printed firearms and firearms that have been modified but still are assembled from factory parts. You are very incorrectly stating that a piece of shit plastic 100% polymer non-metal build and a factory assembled upper mounted on a 3D printed lower are the same thing. They are not.
Ok. Cool. It's still a bad idea to 3D print guns because it's dangerous.
Driving a car is dangerous. Do you plan to revoke your license. I'm not trying to be a dick, but you decided to take your family and leave this country for your own safety and now you are telling people because of potential danger that they should not protect themselves from actual threats to their lives.
It's cute how you're trying to turn this into some sort of gun control thing. No one is trying to stop you from blowing your hand up if you are dead-set on doing it, certainly not me.
As I said above:
this isn’t even a gun control argument on my part, it’s a “be wise with what you have” argument.
You go ahead and 3D print all the guns you want though.
A new hero for the tankies
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
25 points (100.0% liked)
News
28429 readers
2611 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
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.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
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