You're not even keeping your use of the word "consistent" consistent You're talking about application of the same law being consistent over time, not laws themselves all being "consistent" with some overarching principle you think they logically imply
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Sigismond_bis and
There is nothing "inconsistent" about making a law that says "It's illegal to mow your lawn on Thursdays but not any other day of the week" You can say it's *arbitrary*, but so the fuck what The whole point of a law is to add more granularity to what you're allowed to do
3 replies 2 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Sigismond_bis and
You're saying I can't ban propagation of one specific kind of "private information" without banning *all* sharing of *all* information that *someone* could define as "private" That's fucking stupid I absolutely can -- that's the whole point of making laws
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Eristae and
I don't know about USA but over here some things are considered private - including who you fuck
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Sigismond_bis @Eristae and
I don't know where you live and I don't care
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Sigismond_bis and
Scott lives in the US, and in the US it's always completely legal to tell people what someone's last name is, even if they don't want you to Sorry
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
-
Replying to @Sigismond_bis @arthur_affect and
yes. that's kinda the whole reason you guys charge into battle recently.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @_amtiskaw @arthur_affect and
No I did not, I just find it inconsistent
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Sigismond_bis @_amtiskaw and
Like I just said, it's not "inconsistent" at all, at best you can call it "arbitrary" (if you're a dipshit)
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes
Some things are illegal, and other things that are similar to those things are not If that's "inconsistent" then the very existence of laws of any kind is an inconsistency
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Sigismond_bis and
[obligatory remark about the simultaneous fetishization and ignorance of logic among rationalochud reply guys]
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @perdricof @arthur_affect and
facts don't care about your feelings, only mine
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.