@IanDSmith in general the vague intent to kick off social unrest doesn't match legal definitions of terrorism.
Terrorism generally requires a strategy to use violence to coerce personal goals, for example legislative action.
It's sounding like Luigi killed the CEO to try to pressure changes to the healthcare system. Very different from simply trying to start a race war.
@europesays The durbin report doesn't understand the separation of powers at the heart of the US government design, though. It accuses them of breaking laws that are themselves unconstitutional.
They aren't valid laws as they would undermine the concept of having an independent judiciary.
Yeah, Democrats love to throw mud at these Supreme Court justices, but it's not healthy for society, it undermines understanding of the government and respect for the rule of law.
@IanDSmith Well because he's not a mere school shooter. He's a terrorist. It's a very different crime that he committed.
@TerryHancock One important part of this fad is not relying on whatever random website to have its own solid security.
It makes for fewer points of failure.
@freezenet I mean, Luigi is seen as an evil villain by reasonable people.
And also, reasonable people understand that insurance only covers some things because otherwise insurance prices would be out of reach for more and more people because it would just be too expensive to provide.
@byteseu Well no. That's not how the US government works. It's not a parliamentary system.
The president runs the executive branch regardless of party. Meanwhile our elected representatives run their own chambers in Congress. Again, regardless of party.
I think far too often Europeans will tend to view the US government through parliamentary lenses that just don't apply to the very different style of government.
@europesays If current events like this are a mystery to you, then you don't understand current events like this.
This is how politics works.
@jcmacomber What? No.
The justices are losing the trust of the American people at the hands of reporters writing sensationalized, muck-wracking stories that get clicks.
Apparent conflicts of interest? How apparent? Well as a parent as the reporters can possibly write, as they sell ads.
We need to be real clear about how this is working. It's very antisocial, and the reporters need to be called out for the damage they're doing to society.
@kenwhite.bsky.social just goes to emphasize that we should press reporters to provide citations to such public information.
There is no reason in the world that any report about a court case doesn't provide a quick and easy link to the case itself.
But the norm, unfortunately, is for them to provide their interpretation without any link for you to follow up for more.
@TheOldGuy The problem is that it fails to fulfill that guarantee.
So it's an expensive failure that detracts from governmental resources.
@selfcare It's not, though.
Lorde is wrong and it's worth calling that out.
@immibis No, it's not particularly strange, because words have meanings.
Yeah, terrorism is terrorism and other things are other things.
@baltakatei you don't know that there are space companies besides SpaceX?
There are quite a few of them...
@Savvyhomestead sounds like you might be confusing the judicial system with the other branch of government, the prosecutors.
@dougiec3 No, that's not how the record works Republicans were rejecting the spending bill before Elon got involved, so let's be clear: Elon tried to ride the coattails of this thing, and far too many people are buying into elon's story that he was actually important here.
We should say no, dude, this wasn't about you, you're just not that important.
@bespacific No, that's not how that works
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)