| ▲ | liuliu 2 days ago |
| > Wow this administration is f*ing batshit insane. No, it is not insane. This creates perfect "everyone violates the law, we can selectively enforce it" scenario. That's how 10% Intel-like condition can be created for other companies. |
|
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| “For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.” -- Field Marshal Óscar R. Benavides, former president of Peru. ("History doesn't repeat itself but it often rhymes," attributed to Twain) |
| |
| ▲ | liuliu 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Also, let's not forget that Apple / Google is violating PAFACAA right now (the TikTok act, by allowing TikTok in the U.S. AppStore / PlayStore) b/c DoJ is instructed to sue anyone who is following PAFACAA. This will create a lot of headache for Apple / Google when a different administration comes into power. (The extension signed by EO is not to do the 90-day extension permitted by PAFACAA, it is merely says DoJ won't enforce PAFACAA and will sue anyone following PAFACAA b/c DoJ should be the only one who enforces PAFACAA). | |
| ▲ | layer8 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > "History doesn't repeat itself but it often rhymes," attributed to Twain https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/01/12/history-rhymes/ | | |
| ▲ | GLdRH 2 days ago | parent [-] | | "Don't believe everything you read on the internet." - Abraham Lincoln, 1868 | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | mothballed 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Even better, if they wait long enough between selections or only do minimal enforcement, then no one has any standing to challenge it (Knife Rights v Garland) even on constitutional grounds. Plaintiffs plainly lack standing when they fail to provide evidence that the statutory provision has ever been enforced against them or regularly enforced against others.
(key word here, regularly enforced against others)So if you think the law is bullshit the judge can just say you probably won't be prosecuted so you have no imminent fear of prosecution and you can't challenge it. |
| |
| ▲ | TimTheTinker 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The court's opinion in Knife Rights v Garland upheld a prior opinion where a "credible threat of prosecution" was interpreted to mean that a prosecution had occurred within the last 10 years. So if a single prosecution (including your own) under the relevant section occurred at any time in the decade prior, that's likely enough to argue standing to challenge that section, provided the other tests of standing are met. | | |
| ▲ | mothballed 2 days ago | parent [-] | | It may have been 10 years since a prosecution but it was far less than that since it was enforced. On Oct. 1, 2020, federal agents raided the home of an Adams County man.
They threw flash grenades, handcuffed the homeowner, used a Taser on his dog, confiscated hard drives — and seized $5 million of switchblade knives from locked cabinets in the man’s spacious garage, according to court documents.
Two and a half years later, government representatives returned the switchblades with the message that they did not intend to pursue the matter further.
Lumsden on Tuesday filed a federal lawsuit against the United States, alleging the government ruined his online switchblade business by taking his inventory, damaged his property and reputation, injured his dog, and caused him pain, suffering and severe emotional distress.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/tribune/article_popover.aspx?g...So as long as they only taser your dogs, flashbang your family home, take millions in inventory it's all good as long as there wasn't a successful prosecution and thus there is no standing? They don't need to actually toss people in prison to get compliance. Tasing their dogs and destroying their business is enough, using an unchallengeable law. | | |
| ▲ | 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | throw73738484 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | This was during covid lockdown. Government imprisoned millions of people and destroyed their business!!! This stuff is not so shocking any more!!! |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | intended 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s insane. You are “emperors new clothes”-ing their actions. There is no logic to it, it’s make believe for the narrative machine. |
| |
| ▲ | jama211 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The truth likely lies in the middle. Some are truely just insane, some are trying to shoehorn or steer special interests through the insanity, etc. | |
| ▲ | anigbrowl 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't think that's the case. Rather, GP argues that the policy is rationally corrupt. I tend to agree. Many people in the political center would rather believe that terrible policies are the product of stupidity than malice. I too am a fan of Hanlon's razor, but if stupidity were controlling you would expect occasional stupidly good outcomes as well as stupidly bad ones. When you have a decade-long pattern of evidence that decision-making is driven by animus and greed, blaming all the bad outcomes on stupidity or insanity devolves into hand-wringing helplessness instead of a willingness to take the necessary action. Hence the current Congressional Democratic non-policy of condemning Trump but also just waiting for him to die rather than trying to mount any serious effort to remove him. |
|
|
| ▲ | coliveira 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Exactly, that's how you create a corrupt state: enact crazy laws that are impossible to follow and then persecute only your enemies and grant favorable conditions to your friends. Trump is succeeding at that. |
| |
| ▲ | lazide 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Even better if who is an enemy and who is a friend changes daily based on whoever sucked up the most/bribed someone. |
|
|
| ▲ | 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
