Well that’s a silly result.

“whatever they’re all just as bad”

They propose different challenges. Nothing to it.

Never would’ve believed “the gays are causing hurricanes” would become the official government stance back when Obama was president.

Oh 2015 how I miss you.

I read that with Google translate.

Uff.

Not gonna lie, not too different from Finland authorities. Maybe the approach is a tiny bit different, but the end result the same.

Try reading my gait when I’m on an escooter/bike/whatever and recognising my face from behind a full face helmet. (I’m just being safe.)

Yeah, I’m just a tad worried, that’s all. I’m not saying it’s a slippery slide.

Just you know. It’s not been a great direction the world’s been going so…

No, I’m not saying that.

It’s just sometimes easy to smudge proper protesters with criminal groups, and historically that has happened a fair bit.

Like people can make a new organisation and try to step away from the criminal one, but also what’s to prevent the criminal element from joining them as well, and then the same justification can be used to ban that group and on and on and on.

So honestly defining the point at which it could be argued to be suppression of political ideas is very hard to pinpoint, imo.

I feel like the saying “an eye for an eye makes the while world blind” fits here.

However, also,

If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse, and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.

— Desmond Tutu

It’s rather misleading, yeah, but also, “technically correct”?

While we are clearly discussing an actual criminal group and not just people protesting for Palestine, the implications from a decision like that are a bit wider.

Civil disobedience is a crucial tool for democracy, but it’s easy for that to be taken too far.

And at this time that Russia is waging a shadow war in Europe, we probably should be little wary of any even paramilitary-esque groups, despite how important it is to protest the genocide in Gaza.

Surely there’s still plenty of legal ways to do that?

If the lie is not demonstrably shown to be a lie by other evidence, it’s assumed to be true. So… enjoy your “freedoms”, I guess.

Yeah. This is why I actually enjoy quite a lot of those first amendment auditors. Not all of them, some of then are just attention seeking arseholes. But for instance one guy who streams his shit and I see sometimes shorts, he wears a bodycam and is simply blessing veterans or something.

Since he just stands in a corner and doesn’t interact with anything or anyone, and is quite the striking fella (big man), there’s little if no bullshit excuses the cops can come up with, and these guys are ready to go to court.

At least in the US you can try to get your rights, especially if you can afford a lawyer. And you can actually get compensation when the police are noted to have broken your rights.

Not here in Finland.

The police are polite and well behaved on the streets, but…

Well I got abused pretty bad and definitely my rights were broken. But I can’t even get anyone to discuss that. In the US I’d have lawyers doing this pro bono just for the payout at the end.

So all cops are bastards, some just in a different way.

“Reasonable articulable suspicion”, is the official way of saying that.

“A good explanation” is very undefined. The police has to have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime, and they have to be able to articulate, ie explain that said reasonable suspicion of having committed a specific crime.

They just make it up all the time though, but most of the cops don’t even seem to know the law. They just do what other cops do. And never have to take responsibility for breaking the law.

Hmm.

Thrash diet probably doesn’t make them too tasty. Someone mentioned badger and now I’m wondering what they’re like, given they can eat hundreds of Earthworms a day.

I wonder if there’s any good eating on them.