🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

So apparently this is a picture of a "chef's salad" from a local restaurant in Philly. I cant stop laughing at the fact that they call this a salad and its basically just a pile of meat and cheese, you can barely find the little tidbit of green poking out from underneath.

@justin Again, no, they take cases all the time (just as often as the contrary) when they agree with the case...

Why do you think the supreme court takes so many other cases that they wind up rulling in favor of the lower court's decision? If your reasoning made any sense such cases would be rare and they arent.

@justin Huh, they do it all the time (take a case and rule the case valid). It is just as common for them to rule in either direction.

@justin Can't imagine why you would assume that, how do you know they arent taking the case to uphold the lower courts rulling?

@swiley strictly speaking, yes, in practice, no.. interpritation goes a long way. the "Community doctrine" isnt a law that was passed that is being tested, it is existing precedence on the interpretation of the 4th amendment. The very idea is entierly fabricated within the court system and for all intents and purposes has all the effect and efficacy of a law.

The distinction between law and precedence only becomes relevant when you consider the cycle that can exist if the law making body (congress in this case) disagrees with the courts. The courts can add all sorts of "interpritations" like this that have all the same effects any law would so long as the law doesnt directly or explicitly contradict it (well even then they could but arent supposed to). What congress could do, however, is rewrite the 4th ammendment or create new laws that directly clarify the courts interpritation and effectively eliminates the "community doctrine" principle.

So effectively what that means is when laws and the constitution isnt extremely explicit there is usually enough room for the courts to create interpretations that have all the effect of an unjust law. Since amendments to the constitution are a lot harder to achieve than courts making a ruling on the constitution this effectively gives the court system a lot of room to "mold" laws into meaning almost whatever they want them to.

@swiley The fact that its already gotten through as many appeals court as it has (and as of right now is the "law" and upheld by the courts in a large portion of america unless and until SCOTUS overturns it) is scary enough

SCOTUS is just the last desperate attempt to fix this injustice, remember there are many levels of appeals each one have a larger and larger jurisdiction up to that point. So its already law in a huge swatch of the USA as a result.

@blucrunch well no, they lied in order to get into the house, then search it, then take the guns, all of which where no crime has happened or was suspected.. cant imagine that would hold up in court.

@blucrunch The olice can not lie to you to force you to hand over your legally owned handguns though, so I wouldnt say that applies here, not that I'm a lawyer either.

@cjd lets hope youa re right...

@lucifargundam How could you make it impossible without fighting authority?

Well we are absolutely fucked, there foes the fourth and second amendments right out the window.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/02/05/supreme-court-will-decide-whether-police-can-enter-a-home-to-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?

@TonyStark We have the first segregationist as president in living history. A man who started hist whole political career to fight to support segregation... its a disgrace, yea, we have a LONG way to go yet thats for sure.

@derek

> The simple fact that dozens of reporters and users believed that it was a legit account proves that torba did not do a good enough job showing this is a fake account.

No one is responsible for other peoples stupidity. There are literally people who believe the earth is flat. It is not the moral responsibility of **anyone** to waste their time setting stupid people straight. He was pretty generous by correcting it after a day anyway, so its a non-point in pretty much every way you can imagine.

My guess is you just hate GAB and are fixated on that... thing is I hate GAB too, the place is a cease pool. I just dont let my personal feelings get in the way of my judgement.

@muho @judgedread

@derek

I am literally looking at the GAB account we are talking about from my mastodon account right now.. so clearly they federate.

Also your image, just like every other image, clearly labels it as an "archive of twitter" in one way or another... so the screenshot you just send **disproves** your point, doesnt support it, at least not to me.

@muho @judgedread

@muho see the part where I highlighted where it says "@realdonaldtrump", that phrase is colored different because it is a **link**, if you clicked it it took you to his twitter feed.

@muho I highlighed the exact words in your own image (and sent it in my last response to you (it is attached again) specifically where the account (as of a month ago) still stated it was a twitter mirror (with a link to twitter and all). It is circled in red.

So not sure how you can say it didnt say that when it literally said that.

@derek

#1 - was unaware of that, thanks for letting me know

#2 - not sure what you mean by that, it is part of the fediverse, last I checked they federate, just because they are a large instance doesnt make them any less of an instance.

#3 - Doesn't seem at all relevant to me... it is not his or anyones responsibility to correct idiots the moment they start idioting. After "over a day" he went out of his way to add **extra** clarifying text to the account that he really didnt need to in the first place, which is fine by me it was corrected.

So conceding the fact that it was made by gab, it doesn't sound the least bit damning even considering your points. The bottom line is **the account was obviously marked as a mirror of the twitter feed, on the main page. It was literally the **only** text in the description, pointing out it was a mirror. So anything else you can say doesnt change the fact that the account was clearly marked as being a mirror, anything else are just people being too stupid to fact check shit, thats on them.

@muho @judgedread

@derek

Yes I get that, there are lots of idiots out there assuming its really him and arent reading the bio, a lot of those idiots are likely on Gab, some are not, like the Twain media apparently (according to muho's info). I don't disagree with that part. Just saying thats not the bot maintainer's fault, it was clearly stated in their bio, anyone who doesnt bother to take 2 seconds to fact check something and believes bull shit, thats on them and no one else. We use blue check marks all around the fediverse as a running gag, its nothing official, so anyone "fooled" by that hasnt been on the fediverse for more than 30 seconds anyway.

Its just some idiot who set up a mirror bot and reserved Trump's handle and clearly is "offering it up" to him. Looks like he just created the account as encouragement for Trump to take it over and use it to continue tweeting. But there doesnt appear to be an intentional effort to mislead anyone there, just a Trump fanboy and mirror bot, clearly labeled as such.

@muho @judgedread