, it is a sober recount of the facts of the situation we’re currently in.

It’s not sober at all, it’s an incredibly recent, heated, emotional take as per usual on these hyper political issues.

The emotional charge is more responsibility for these terrible occurances than policy or enforcement.

These are armed, masked government goons slaughtering civilians in the streets in a widespread terror campaign orchestrated by your criminal warlord president wherein various people labeled “undesirables” by your fascist government are disappeared to concentration camps and “deported” to prisons in other countries they have no connection to.

10/10 exaggeration of the circumstances; and the situations you’re describing are being exasperated by the population illegal obstructing legal law enforcement operations. You’re making it sound like Vlad the Impaler raised Hitler and his Nazi army from the dead and they’re roaming the streets eating liberal babies.

Again, your time to fight the government is in the courts. If you want change, fight them in the courts. If you want violence and conflict then keep up the obstruction.

I may agree with you if over the past 5 years the term “fascist” hadn’t been deluted more than a dive bar’s $0.50 draft beer.

Oh, well next time you’re wrong by someone and dont immediately get justice; you’re absolutely justified jumping to violence… /s

Troll = Doesn’t agree with your policial takes; brilliant.

A convention of states to amend the constitution; explicitly saying that specific state is no longer apart of the U.S., or inserting another legal route of succession into the constitution.

Much easier, and at the same time much more difficult than civil war.

So all the people supporting this guy are changing their tune on Kyle Rittenhouse showing up armed to defend his community, right?

Right?

Oh yeah; I’m feeling all the cognitive disidence downvotes flowing in.

National divorse is in no way a euphemism for civil war. There’s literally a constitutional way of states removing themselves from the Federal Government, that’s what national divorse means.

There’s a third option: people don’t resist and the regime does whatever it wants. we fight them in the court

Glad I could fix that for you.

The obvious flaw is that humans are dynamic and evolving and you may not always be in the majority. Therefore you should be fair to everyone.

John Rawls’s “veil of ignorance” comes to mind.

The idea of the thought experiment is the creation of a society with the designer behind a veil of ignorance, that is, after the society is created they do not know the circumstances that they will have when joining the society.

Idk if there are newer laws, I think there is, but a 1998 law makes it illegal to break a digital lock, very broadly defined, to protect cd’s but applied to all electronics.

Sounds like one of those laws that’s never applied by itself, but instead is always sprinkled in on top of another more well defined and detectable crime. In the case or CDs it would have been against piracy groups who not only cracked CDs, but also distributed.

Without the distribution, that law would have never seen enforcement.

We could also argue that cracking software protections isn’t reprogramming, it’s a precursor to do so and isnt always necessary to reprogram a device. Someone could absolutely pop the computer out of a Samsung smart refrigerator and replace it with a Arduino and reprogram the device, which for personal use is legally bulletproof.

Tell that to every farmer in the US

Every farmer in the U.S. has the right to repair and reprogram their vehicles. They do not however have the right to force John Deer to provide access to their proprietary software.

Not being able to reprogram something, and it being a literal crime, are absolutely different things.

Read some Right to Repair U.S. law. There’s absolutely nothing illegal about reprogramming any device for personal use.

It’s a federal felony now to alter the programming on an electronic you bought as well.

I can’t find any evidence for this; it would also be a nearly unenforceable law if it was actually a thing. What’s going to happen, the device calls home and says help help I’ve been reprogrammed!

Now altering the programming only for re-saling might have some legal issues.

I don’t think it was as direct of a choice as it was a slow sinking into inevitability.

And did any boomer really have a choice for Nixon to NOT close the gold window?

Tastes so good, or at least it did years ago.