Most of the stuff here is when it involves obviously illegal stuff like fraud, crimes, etc. if organizing campaigns of disruption are illegal, then shouldn’t BLM be charged?
They actually should be but atm its not entirely clear who the bad actor is in that situation.
Its probably not BLM in total, its the shadow money behind it that the DOJ is on the trail of.
That aside the difference is minimal. There is no situation where this community will be interested in even fudging the law by a little bit. Because the minute you feel like the law can be bent, the next minute, someone else will convince you it can be broken.
We have laws for a reason, suggesting that they can be ignored situationally is the path to chaos.
I'd say it's morally ambigious at worst, and just a little clean at best. But I mean, you got this hill soldier, so I'll move on.
And did you really just cite RICO to us to try and dissuade us? Lol. Legally QUESTIONABLE AT BEST. What previous listed act do you think would qualify us for a racketeering charge? Faggot.
None, we don't need that hunk of shit site.
But making them cry is fun...
We're not going to brigade Reddit, we don't need to. Reddit is killing itself.
Asking people to brigade Reddit is legally actionable and thus no one from here is interested because we actually abide by the law around here.
Which law exactly? If you are talking about reddit’s Rules, we aren’t reddit
Organizing active campaigns of disruption. Otherwise known as "racketeering".
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961
18 U.S. Code § 1961
Most of the stuff here is when it involves obviously illegal stuff like fraud, crimes, etc. if organizing campaigns of disruption are illegal, then shouldn’t BLM be charged?
They actually should be but atm its not entirely clear who the bad actor is in that situation.
Its probably not BLM in total, its the shadow money behind it that the DOJ is on the trail of.
That aside the difference is minimal. There is no situation where this community will be interested in even fudging the law by a little bit. Because the minute you feel like the law can be bent, the next minute, someone else will convince you it can be broken.
We have laws for a reason, suggesting that they can be ignored situationally is the path to chaos.
Because he cited fucking RICO to us like we're a bunch of international pedophiles.
I'd say it's morally ambigious at worst, and just a little clean at best. But I mean, you got this hill soldier, so I'll move on.
And did you really just cite RICO to us to try and dissuade us? Lol. Legally QUESTIONABLE AT BEST. What previous listed act do you think would qualify us for a racketeering charge? Faggot.
I can't even remember the number of upvotes on the top-rated one, but I know it was massive.
If we all invaded politics we could cause mass chaos
That hunker is going down on its own.
2020 Primary Season was boring ….
The_JEB!!