zlacker

[return to "Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah"]
1. csours+kk[view] [source] 2025-09-10 20:48:54
>>david9+(OP)
History books can tell you facts that happened, but they can never truly tell you how it feels.

I feel we're riding a knife's edge and there's a hurricane brewing in the gulf of absurdity.

====

Incidentally, I feel like this is why it is so hard to actually learn from history. You can read about the 1918 'Spanish' Flu, but you think "we're smarter now". etc.

◧◩
2. ttoino+Rq[view] [source] 2025-09-10 21:16:22
>>csours+kk

  You can read about the 1918 'Spanish' Flu, but you think "we're smarter now". etc.
Interesting how this quote can be interpreted in fully opposite ways depending on what "side" you were on during covid
◧◩◪
3. ndsipa+uU[view] [source] 2025-09-10 23:40:51
>>ttoino+Rq
> depending on what "side" you were on during covid

It's bizarre that there should be "sides" for how to deal with a public health issue. I can understand differing approaches, but it's the extreme polarisation that flabbergasts me.

◧◩◪◨
4. watwut+kC1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 06:18:41
>>ndsipa+uU
It was simple. People without ethical limits seen their opening to weaponize fear and discomfort ... and succeeded.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. ttoino+mJ1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 07:33:08
>>watwut+kC1
Your sentence can also be applied to both ‘sides’
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. ndsipa+0P1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 08:29:25
>>ttoino+mJ1
I don't think that applies if one of the sides is using rational arguments and statistics. However, during the initial COVID outbreak, there was a lack of knowledge and statistics about it, so there was some element of guesswork involved (e.g. face masks may be effective as they help with some other infectious diseases, so let's try wearing them to see if that helps).
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. benmmu+Qd2[view] [source] 2025-09-11 12:26:20
>>ndsipa+0P1
There is a difference between 'lets try something out' and we will use the force of law to compel you to do something. A lot of people seem worried about over use of law enforcement but really its not a general problem with law enforcement but rather a problem with what laws are being enforced. They are happy to have law enforcement cracking down on people flouting a mask mandate but less happy when law enforcement is going after shop lifters.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. ndsipa+th2[view] [source] 2025-09-11 12:52:31
>>benmmu+Qd2
Yes, there's often a lot of discussion about law enforcement priorities.

In general, law enforcement is used to prevent harmful behaviour that disrupts society, so preventing theft is typically high up on the list. I think the people decrying shop lifters being targetted are highlighting the hypocrisy of societies that celebrate people who can steal huge amounts of money (e.g. not paying for work/services provided due to them being a large organisation) and yet demonise people who are struggling to survive and end up stealing food.

I was somewhat on the fence about mask mandates (I'm in the UK by the way) as I didn't think the evidence for masks being effective was particularly strong, but I had no issue with wearing a mask in public as it seemed like a sensible precaution that wouldn't cause me any harm. Then, we had social distancing laws introduced which were fairly draconian, but most people tried to observe them. The real kicker was when Boris Johnson and his cronies were caught not following the laws that he himself had introduced.

[go to top]