RE: https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil/115971195227745876
-
@LukefromDC @jonah As demonstrated by the entire country in the last few weeks/months, the second amendment is worth exactly nothing.
First things first: Trump is defying the Second Amendment because he is defying nearly all of the US Constitution. It is the First, 4th, and 14th Amendments he is shitting on the most, as well as almost all of the separation of powers language in the original document.
Specific to last week in Minneapolis: having a gun is no guarantee of WINNING an armed confrontation, but it means you at least have a chance to fight it.
Short version: this is not about a cop looking for an excuse for murder using having a gun as that excuse. It is about being able to obtain that gun in the first place.
The fact that Trump now opposes the Second Amendment as part of a constitution he repudiates does not make all the guns bought by trans folks, queer folks, people of color, and progressives since 2020 magically disappear.
The Second Amendment was never meant to apply to people of color or other oppressed groups in the US. Before the First Civil War, both arming an enslaved person and teaching them to read were felonies and SCOTUS had no problem with that. It is still considered a felony for an undocumented migrant to have a gun.
What the Second Amendment does mean however is this: the current gun control laws have been ineffective at disarming these social groups as the kind of broad control and muscular enforcement we see with European gun laws has been off the table long enough for the people Trump is fighting to arm themselves without having to turn to underground arms merchants who charge much more.
During the early 1990's in Washington DC, a semiauto AK-47 platform rifle that sold for maybe $400 in a Maryland gun store was reportedly worth at least $2,000 on the streets of DC, about 5x as much. To put it another way, the Second Amendment has lowered the financial cost of arming social sectors Trump has declared war on by 80%.
Whether those arms are effectively used or people are shot down without ever touching their guns has nothing to do with the Second Amendment unless they are ONLY a gun owner. It has everything to do with training. If you are first disarmed by a cop and THEN shot that is murder no matter what you were doing. If you intended to use that gun for defense, losing it to your attackers is a training issue (gun retention).
There is of course also training in disarming opponents, I myself learned how to do that as a child and to this day my automatic reaction to an enemy reaching for a weapon inside ten feet is to jump them before they can draw assuming we are not already grappling. If you are already in a grappling fight of course there is no need to charge, your enemy's gun is already in range. This is what the cops exploited last week in Minneapolis. Since ICE was acting illegally the 2nd Amendment can only speak after the fact.
Trump's regime is of course 100% lawless, so just as the First Amendment doesn't bind them neither does the Second. That however does not make all the guns in the hands of those who are not white cishet Christian conservatives magically vaporize into iron vapor. It's too late for that, and this is one of many factors being credited for ICE's morale cracking.
-
I think some are still missing the point. I’m not saying they’re going to lock up every single person who uses a VPN or watches porn.
Your government’s strategy is to make “crimes” like this as common and easy to commit as possible.
This way, if you ever do something completely legal which they *actually* don’t like, *which can be completely unrelated to VPNs or bypassing age verification,* they can pull up your internet history and easily prosecute you.
Organize a legitimate protest, and the government’s swift response will be to label you a child sex offender because they found you using evil VPN technology.
This is how free speech dies, not from a law that says “free speech is dead now,” but from draconian, authoritarian laws like this that give the government “plausible” reasons to go after anyone, which can’t easily be fought against.
This has always been the playbook to target innocents. In the USA, drug possession laws being created as a pretense for cops to raid and dismantle minority communities, for example. And now this is coming to the digital realm.
@jonah They'll use the law to throw the book at you if they don't like you
-
I think some are still missing the point. I’m not saying they’re going to lock up every single person who uses a VPN or watches porn.
Your government’s strategy is to make “crimes” like this as common and easy to commit as possible.
This way, if you ever do something completely legal which they *actually* don’t like, *which can be completely unrelated to VPNs or bypassing age verification,* they can pull up your internet history and easily prosecute you.
Organize a legitimate protest, and the government’s swift response will be to label you a child sex offender because they found you using evil VPN technology.
This is how free speech dies, not from a law that says “free speech is dead now,” but from draconian, authoritarian laws like this that give the government “plausible” reasons to go after anyone, which can’t easily be fought against.
This has always been the playbook to target innocents. In the USA, drug possession laws being created as a pretense for cops to raid and dismantle minority communities, for example. And now this is coming to the digital realm.
@jonah But VPN is supposed to protect your privacy. How do THEY know if your using one ?
-
@jonah But VPN is supposed to protect your privacy. How do THEY know if your using one ?
@TerryDay they know if you're using one, generally, what they don't know is what you're doing with it. That's why they want to make using a VPN illegal all on its own.
-
P privacyguides@mastodon.neat.computer shared this topic
-
RE: https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil/115971195227745876
Next up will be a VPN ban. Many tech-y people will see that and think “lol yeah well that’s not going to stop *me* from using a VPN”
A VPN ban isn’t really meant stop you from using one. It means when they catch you doing so, they’ll use the fact you’re using this harmless technology itself as a *pretense* to lock you up without needing to do any “hard work” (i.e. an investigator’s job) like actually confirming whether you committed a real crime.
Don’t think you won’t be impacted just because you know how to outsmart an ISP filter! This is not a plan to protect children or stop you from consuming adult media. It is a ploy to eventually eliminate ALL freedom of expression and free access to information in the UK.
And the same goes for Chat Control and encrypted messengers, btw
#UKpol #VPNban #PornHub #ChatControl #Privacy #FreeSpeech #SocialMedia
@jonah you have to remember how monumentally inept the UK government are at understanding anything to do with tech.
They've been pushing for laws for years for isps to hand over keys they don't even have access to.Almost all medium or large companies use vpns in their core infrastructure for inter site comms and remote workers. Can't see them accepting such poorly thought, knee jerk reactions. The bill to replace them would be too great.
-
I think some are still missing the point. I’m not saying they’re going to lock up every single person who uses a VPN or watches porn.
Your government’s strategy is to make “crimes” like this as common and easy to commit as possible.
This way, if you ever do something completely legal which they *actually* don’t like, *which can be completely unrelated to VPNs or bypassing age verification,* they can pull up your internet history and easily prosecute you.
Organize a legitimate protest, and the government’s swift response will be to label you a child sex offender because they found you using evil VPN technology.
This is how free speech dies, not from a law that says “free speech is dead now,” but from draconian, authoritarian laws like this that give the government “plausible” reasons to go after anyone, which can’t easily be fought against.
This has always been the playbook to target innocents. In the USA, drug possession laws being created as a pretense for cops to raid and dismantle minority communities, for example. And now this is coming to the digital realm.
@jonah smh this has always been and always will be the purpose of state governments and 'laws' in general, to let the state go after and do horrid things to random people, actually ..
and its not 'targeting the innocent' "innocent" is whatever the fuck they say it is; they said their "guilty" as you didnt follow their demands, so its magically okay now and completely fine for them to throw you in prison and treat you as subhuman like .. fuck
it was always about them being able to just go after anyone they dont like .. thats the entire fucking point
-
RE: https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil/115971195227745876
Next up will be a VPN ban. Many tech-y people will see that and think “lol yeah well that’s not going to stop *me* from using a VPN”
A VPN ban isn’t really meant stop you from using one. It means when they catch you doing so, they’ll use the fact you’re using this harmless technology itself as a *pretense* to lock you up without needing to do any “hard work” (i.e. an investigator’s job) like actually confirming whether you committed a real crime.
Don’t think you won’t be impacted just because you know how to outsmart an ISP filter! This is not a plan to protect children or stop you from consuming adult media. It is a ploy to eventually eliminate ALL freedom of expression and free access to information in the UK.
And the same goes for Chat Control and encrypted messengers, btw
#UKpol #VPNban #PornHub #ChatControl #Privacy #FreeSpeech #SocialMedia
While I don't doubt that the present, authoritarian-minded crop of ministers of the Crown would love that, the anti-VPN clause recently added to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill does *not* have that effect - it only prohibits businesses from *providing* a VPN without age verification, it doesn't prohibit individuals from *using* a VPN without age verification.
-
@jonah Lots of people use VPNs all day every day. There's this thing called "working from home".
The legislation as it currently stands before the House of Lords specifically exempts cases where the user is using the VPN "in the course of a business".
-
@jonah VPN ban -> Ah, people can install WireGuard on a Hetzner droplet -> mandatory age verification for web hosting, etc., etc., ad infinitum.
Wireguard is desiged to be easy, but easy comes minor risks.
>By default, WireGuard stores your IP address on a VPN server until it reboots
For most people this is no issue, in countries like China, Iran, Russia and a few others, it can be an issue. see:
#UKpol #VPNban #PornHub #ChatControl #Privacy #FreeSpeech #SocialMedia
-
I think some are still missing the point. I’m not saying they’re going to lock up every single person who uses a VPN or watches porn.
Your government’s strategy is to make “crimes” like this as common and easy to commit as possible.
This way, if you ever do something completely legal which they *actually* don’t like, *which can be completely unrelated to VPNs or bypassing age verification,* they can pull up your internet history and easily prosecute you.
Organize a legitimate protest, and the government’s swift response will be to label you a child sex offender because they found you using evil VPN technology.
This is how free speech dies, not from a law that says “free speech is dead now,” but from draconian, authoritarian laws like this that give the government “plausible” reasons to go after anyone, which can’t easily be fought against.
This has always been the playbook to target innocents. In the USA, drug possession laws being created as a pretense for cops to raid and dismantle minority communities, for example. And now this is coming to the digital realm.
@jonah Indeed, it's the Captain Louis Renault system..."I'm shocked! Shocked to discover gambling is going on in here!"
-
First things first: Trump is defying the Second Amendment because he is defying nearly all of the US Constitution. It is the First, 4th, and 14th Amendments he is shitting on the most, as well as almost all of the separation of powers language in the original document.
Specific to last week in Minneapolis: having a gun is no guarantee of WINNING an armed confrontation, but it means you at least have a chance to fight it.
Short version: this is not about a cop looking for an excuse for murder using having a gun as that excuse. It is about being able to obtain that gun in the first place.
The fact that Trump now opposes the Second Amendment as part of a constitution he repudiates does not make all the guns bought by trans folks, queer folks, people of color, and progressives since 2020 magically disappear.
The Second Amendment was never meant to apply to people of color or other oppressed groups in the US. Before the First Civil War, both arming an enslaved person and teaching them to read were felonies and SCOTUS had no problem with that. It is still considered a felony for an undocumented migrant to have a gun.
What the Second Amendment does mean however is this: the current gun control laws have been ineffective at disarming these social groups as the kind of broad control and muscular enforcement we see with European gun laws has been off the table long enough for the people Trump is fighting to arm themselves without having to turn to underground arms merchants who charge much more.
During the early 1990's in Washington DC, a semiauto AK-47 platform rifle that sold for maybe $400 in a Maryland gun store was reportedly worth at least $2,000 on the streets of DC, about 5x as much. To put it another way, the Second Amendment has lowered the financial cost of arming social sectors Trump has declared war on by 80%.
Whether those arms are effectively used or people are shot down without ever touching their guns has nothing to do with the Second Amendment unless they are ONLY a gun owner. It has everything to do with training. If you are first disarmed by a cop and THEN shot that is murder no matter what you were doing. If you intended to use that gun for defense, losing it to your attackers is a training issue (gun retention).
There is of course also training in disarming opponents, I myself learned how to do that as a child and to this day my automatic reaction to an enemy reaching for a weapon inside ten feet is to jump them before they can draw assuming we are not already grappling. If you are already in a grappling fight of course there is no need to charge, your enemy's gun is already in range. This is what the cops exploited last week in Minneapolis. Since ICE was acting illegally the 2nd Amendment can only speak after the fact.
Trump's regime is of course 100% lawless, so just as the First Amendment doesn't bind them neither does the Second. That however does not make all the guns in the hands of those who are not white cishet Christian conservatives magically vaporize into iron vapor. It's too late for that, and this is one of many factors being credited for ICE's morale cracking.
@LukefromDC @jonah Haven't read it yet beyond the first few sentences, but let me correct your assumptions there: I didn't mean Trump trampling on it as he (and his cronies) are doing on T-soc and media.
I meant all the "militia" that always point things out about a good guy with a gun, always blame everything but the proliferation of firearms when a school shooting happens, and always, always mention how it is the Single One Thing Unique To Murrica that allows THEM to stop a rogue government.
-
@LukefromDC @jonah Haven't read it yet beyond the first few sentences, but let me correct your assumptions there: I didn't mean Trump trampling on it as he (and his cronies) are doing on T-soc and media.
I meant all the "militia" that always point things out about a good guy with a gun, always blame everything but the proliferation of firearms when a school shooting happens, and always, always mention how it is the Single One Thing Unique To Murrica that allows THEM to stop a rogue government.
@phl @jonah Those militias err firstly in considering themselves to be the good guys of course.
The "stopping the government" aspect that I see happening is at the one on one and especially the deterrence level. During the 1990's cops in places like Idaho often refused to pull over militia pickup trucks with guns clearly visible in gun racks even when they had "sovereign citizen" homemade license plates on them. They wanted to get home to their families not shoot it out with far-right nutjobs and take a 50-50 risk.
Today, some rural sheriffs departments in the South have said that although they have 287(g) agreements with ICE they are refusing to go door to door hunting migrants simply because there are too many guns. This is also why roadside ambushes are favored over house raids here
-
@LukefromDC @jonah Haven't read it yet beyond the first few sentences, but let me correct your assumptions there: I didn't mean Trump trampling on it as he (and his cronies) are doing on T-soc and media.
I meant all the "militia" that always point things out about a good guy with a gun, always blame everything but the proliferation of firearms when a school shooting happens, and always, always mention how it is the Single One Thing Unique To Murrica that allows THEM to stop a rogue government.
-
RE: https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil/115971195227745876
Next up will be a VPN ban. Many tech-y people will see that and think “lol yeah well that’s not going to stop *me* from using a VPN”
A VPN ban isn’t really meant stop you from using one. It means when they catch you doing so, they’ll use the fact you’re using this harmless technology itself as a *pretense* to lock you up without needing to do any “hard work” (i.e. an investigator’s job) like actually confirming whether you committed a real crime.
Don’t think you won’t be impacted just because you know how to outsmart an ISP filter! This is not a plan to protect children or stop you from consuming adult media. It is a ploy to eventually eliminate ALL freedom of expression and free access to information in the UK.
And the same goes for Chat Control and encrypted messengers, btw
#UKpol #VPNban #PornHub #ChatControl #Privacy #FreeSpeech #SocialMedia
@jonah@mastodon.neat.computer So long as the UK remains without a Right to Silence (and one that accounts for key-disclosure laws being a violation of that right), the likely outcomes are bleak.
On paper, the laws around key-disclosure are so broken that they pretty much allow arresting anyone with a digital device that cannot provide a key to any particular digital data, even when there is no such key in existence.
When I say the UK is a nightmarish police state, this is part of what I mean.
-
RE: https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil/115971195227745876
Next up will be a VPN ban. Many tech-y people will see that and think “lol yeah well that’s not going to stop *me* from using a VPN”
A VPN ban isn’t really meant stop you from using one. It means when they catch you doing so, they’ll use the fact you’re using this harmless technology itself as a *pretense* to lock you up without needing to do any “hard work” (i.e. an investigator’s job) like actually confirming whether you committed a real crime.
Don’t think you won’t be impacted just because you know how to outsmart an ISP filter! This is not a plan to protect children or stop you from consuming adult media. It is a ploy to eventually eliminate ALL freedom of expression and free access to information in the UK.
And the same goes for Chat Control and encrypted messengers, btw
#UKpol #VPNban #PornHub #ChatControl #Privacy #FreeSpeech #SocialMedia
@jonah when I worked for the NHS I was required to use a VPN to log in as I worked remotely, in council offices or people's homes or even "foreign" hospitals. Banning VPN will have massive implications for all public facing services using confidential data, return to paper notes?
-
RE: https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil/115971195227745876
Next up will be a VPN ban. Many tech-y people will see that and think “lol yeah well that’s not going to stop *me* from using a VPN”
A VPN ban isn’t really meant stop you from using one. It means when they catch you doing so, they’ll use the fact you’re using this harmless technology itself as a *pretense* to lock you up without needing to do any “hard work” (i.e. an investigator’s job) like actually confirming whether you committed a real crime.
Don’t think you won’t be impacted just because you know how to outsmart an ISP filter! This is not a plan to protect children or stop you from consuming adult media. It is a ploy to eventually eliminate ALL freedom of expression and free access to information in the UK.
And the same goes for Chat Control and encrypted messengers, btw
#UKpol #VPNban #PornHub #ChatControl #Privacy #FreeSpeech #SocialMedia
@jonah oh banning it absolutely makes it as real a crime as any other. this is how the law works. all law is ultimately just something some people made up and that the rest of society goes along with to some degree.
-
I think some are still missing the point. I’m not saying they’re going to lock up every single person who uses a VPN or watches porn.
Your government’s strategy is to make “crimes” like this as common and easy to commit as possible.
This way, if you ever do something completely legal which they *actually* don’t like, *which can be completely unrelated to VPNs or bypassing age verification,* they can pull up your internet history and easily prosecute you.
Organize a legitimate protest, and the government’s swift response will be to label you a child sex offender because they found you using evil VPN technology.
This is how free speech dies, not from a law that says “free speech is dead now,” but from draconian, authoritarian laws like this that give the government “plausible” reasons to go after anyone, which can’t easily be fought against.
This has always been the playbook to target innocents. In the USA, drug possession laws being created as a pretense for cops to raid and dismantle minority communities, for example. And now this is coming to the digital realm.
@jonah And, in case you want to see broader examples, companies use that approach against employees. Disallow something that everybody does, that everybody is comfortable doing because they see everybody else doing it... and that's convenient grounds for firing employees you don't like.
-
@jonah And, in case you want to see broader examples, companies use that approach against employees. Disallow something that everybody does, that everybody is comfortable doing because they see everybody else doing it... and that's convenient grounds for firing employees you don't like.
@jbqueru don’t think about that often, but it’s true. We don’t live in a rules-based society, we just tell ourselves that we do.
-
@jonah VPN ban -> Ah, people can install WireGuard on a Hetzner droplet -> mandatory age verification for web hosting, etc., etc., ad infinitum.
@aral
Time for people to look at Autonomi:
- one download and you are browsing the Autonomi Dweb in your regular browser giving access to p2p web apps
- other early apps available, mobile on the way
- run nodes on legacy hardware to earn tokens and pay to upload files, videos etcNo gatekeepers or surveillance, privacy max. Just you and a p2p network where payments for uploading reward people (you included) for running the nodes that make it work.
More here: https://toast.happybeing.com
@jonah -
@aral
Time for people to look at Autonomi:
- one download and you are browsing the Autonomi Dweb in your regular browser giving access to p2p web apps
- other early apps available, mobile on the way
- run nodes on legacy hardware to earn tokens and pay to upload files, videos etcNo gatekeepers or surveillance, privacy max. Just you and a p2p network where payments for uploading reward people (you included) for running the nodes that make it work.
More here: https://toast.happybeing.com
@jonah
