| ▲ | klustregrif 3 hours ago |
| Calling the self declared Internet troll a privacy activist feels disingenuous. This is the former corrupt cop turned drug dealer who publicly and proudly proclaimed that he was stalking the children of the prime minister of Denmark so he could figure out where she lived, because he wanted to expose those details. She currently lives at a secret address due to security concerns. |
|
| ▲ | foder 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The tone of the post sounds like smear since it entirely dismisses his advocacy of personal liberty with claims that havn't been published in Danish media as far as I know. It would be interesting if you could elaborate on the claims that be was a corrupt police officer and drug dealer. My understanding of his own account is that he left the force when he wasn't comfortable arresting people over weed and that he saw systematic abuse of power that he didn't want to partake in. Is there more to the story? His recent activism has been focusing on contrasting the privacy people in power demand with their work to deny the broad population privacy. |
| |
| ▲ | klustregrif 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > you could elaborate on the claims that be was a corrupt police officer and drug dealer. This is public record. It’s entirely published he’s charged and received a prison sentence for the crime, the investigation into corruption started but needed early when he handed in his resignation. which is just proof that he was a corrupt cop in a corrupt system. I mean no drug dealer who gets charged is going to get off by going “ok I’ll quit then”. > My understanding of his own account is that he left the force when he wasn't comfortable arresting people over weed This flips the script. He public made statements that he would carry drugs on the job, and felt I’d should be legal, and that he wouldn’t enforce the drug law. The investigation that followed he handed in his resignation. And the corrupt Danish police force being what it is, dropped the investigation. His “activism” has since consisted of amongst other things starting to sell drugs and then claiming that its activism when he got charged with prison for it. To be clear, he didn’t stage the public sale of a symbolic amount to get arrested and protest through civil disobedience. He straight up went breaking bad and started a drug peddling operation. | | |
| ▲ | Hamuko 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >And the corrupt Danish police force being what it is, dropped the investigation. How is that corruption? If the issue was that he was saying he wasn't gonna do his job, and then he quit his job, wouldn't that just rectify the situation? | | |
| ▲ | klustregrif 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | He was saying that he broke the law routinely and they decided to end the investigation. That’s corruption, police should be investigated for routinely failing to do their job just the same as when they break the law or abuse their office. |
| |
| ▲ | foder an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I get the impression that you have (or claim to have) information that isn't publicly available and think he is disingenuous or imormal as a person. Do you also disagree with the causes he is promoting or only the person and/or methods? Some of his ideas, like full anarcho capitalism, I would need to be convinced before being onboard with. But opposing mass surveillance and promoting government accountability seems odd to vigorously oppose. | | |
| ▲ | klustregrif 23 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I don’t have any non public information. This is all public record, he was found guilty and charged with jail on multiple occasions. He pops up in the news periodically for having broken yet another law and i charged and convicted for it. And “being opposed to mass surveillance” and literally stalking kids of the prime minister to attempt to expose the PET (equivalent to FBI) exposed secret location her family is staying at are not the same. Obviously every drug dealer is going to “be of the ideology that dealing drugs should be legal” but that doesn’t make dealing drugs activism. Same as abusing the office of being a cop. It doesn’t matter if you believe it should be legal for cops to beat up protestors, that doesn’t make a cop breaking the law to beat up protestors an act of activism. The guy is just a sleezebag who cries “activism” every time he faces consequences for breaking the law in this illegal activism or when he’s harassing politicians. That’s not actual activism and he’s not supporting any cause he’s just acting like an idiot doing what he’s doing. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | sword_smith 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Lars was a corrupt cop? Are you just using "corrupt" to mean "someone I don't like"? |
| |
| ▲ | klustregrif 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don’t care if you think drugs should be legalized, or even if you do drugs in your free time. If you are a cop doing drugs while on duty and decide to take it on yourself to not enforce the law against drug dealers you are corrupt, because you have decided to subjugate the law you are forced with enforcing. Now it’s true that he wasn’t officially charged with taking kickbacks from the drug dealers he would let operate but in my optics that is entirely due to them letting him hand in a resignation to stop the investigation, propably to protect his fellow cops who would have been named and shamed for also doing drugs on the job. But to be clear, deciding to protect drug dealers in your job as a cop is. It activism it’s corruption. Claiming it’s about ideology defies the point. He spent years as a cop letting drug dealers deal drugs and then came out saying the only reason he was breaking the law was because he didn’t believe in it. That’s not ideology that’s corruption. If he had decided to stop being a cop to not enforce a law he didn’t like that’s different. But that’s not what happened. He quit hen his illegal enterprise got caught. Cops do not get to enforce the law selectively based on what laws they like and dislike and get off just by claiming “ideology”. | | |
| ▲ | zaptheimpaler 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is the slave mindset that is letting politicians all over the world erode our rights. More and more and more. Every country is now passing deep anti-privacy, anti-VPN, anti-encryption and age-verification laws. The law is not written by us, its written by people who are only barely accountable to us once every couple of years. Authoritarianism is rising very sharply all over the world, corruption amongst the elites is high, they are increasingly unaligned and unafraid of common people. There's a million tricks to pass laws that citizens don't really want, including skipping public debates, secret amendments, or just relying on plain old propaganda and ignorance/inaction by the majority. The only actual power we have is in action and organization. Following the laws that they write with barely any input from us off a cliff is not right or noble, its death. | | |
| ▲ | klustregrif 18 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I think you’ve got his fake activism mixed up. When he was a cop he wasn’t claiming to be a privacy advocates his stick then was that cops should be allowed to do cocain while on the job and that if a cop though selling drugs was ok they should be free to not uphold the law whenever they felt like it. His fake stance on privacy came later when he faced consequences for doxing politicians and using the public Facebook pages of politics to advertise his drug peddling enterprise. |
| |
| ▲ | sword_smith 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Corruption is defined as "the abuse of entrusted power for private (usually financial) gain". Lars' case falls under the category of conscientious objection, as he's ideologically motivated. Pretty disgusting to frame that as corruption. | |
| ▲ | LtWorf 24 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think the nazis tried the whole "obeying orders" thing and it didn't work for them. Do you think this defence should have been considered valid for them? | | |
| ▲ | klustregrif 17 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Scenario: cop does cocain on the job and allows friends to sell drugs without enforcing the law. Me: that’s kind of fucked up and not activism. You: So you support Hitler!?! |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | tommica 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Highly doubt that is the only reason he got this treatment. Need to go through his tweets to figure out what is his deal. |
| |
| ▲ | klustregrif 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The guy constantly does crazy shit so sure, but this comes days after he announced he was stalking her children, so it’s very likely connected | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | mhitza 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What security concerns? Of a person telling people where you live? Are the homes of Danish prime ministers secret? |
| |
| ▲ | foder 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think some context is being lost in a literal translation. I think they mean secret as in unlisted where their records aren't accessible in public government databases. The same protection you would get if you were stalked for example. | | |
| ▲ | klustregrif 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No, it’s not just unlisted number and address. PET (Danish equivalent of FBI) by administrative decision has had her move out of her Copenhagen apartment and to an undisclosed location due to security concerns. Her and her family are literally under protection due to security concerns and this guy is stalking her kids trying to dox her. | |
| ▲ | mhitza 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I get that it's a secret location now, but I don't understand in context if this activist is the trigger of the situation. An if so how can this be considered a threat. Stalking falls under the broad category of harassment in my eastern european country. I feel as if this would be a non issue given an official police warning. At most. |
| |
| ▲ | bazoom42 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Usually it is not a secret, but currently the prime minister and her family live at a secret address. |
|
|
| ▲ | throwaway27448 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Regardless of intent, this does reveal that certain people are protected by warrantless arrests while the general public is not. |
| |
| ▲ | bawolff 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Did his arrest not have a warrant? I'm not familiar how these things work in Denmark, but is there any reason to believe there was no warrant? | | |
| ▲ | throwaway27448 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Presumably if they had one they would have told him the charges, but I am not sure how the danish law works so perhaps my assumption is incorrect. | | |
| ▲ | bawolff 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | At the same time, i would presume if his arrest was this irregular and illegal he would be taking it to actual court instead ofthe court of public opinion. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway27448 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Are these exclusive opportunities? I'm not familiar with danish law. | | |
| ▲ | bawolff 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not exclusive, but in general its a bad idea to post on social media if you plan to take it up in court, as its very easy to accidentally say something that shoots yourself in the foot. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
