No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
So, you're asking if there is a shoplifter whose small-dollar.spree was stopped by target, who was then arrested by the police, who then refused an initial plea offer from the DA, who was then charged by a grand jury, refused a pre-trial plea offer, went to trial, refused the pre-verdict plea offer, and was then found guilty?
Well, what about someone who hit 60k over 120 visits?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/05/07/target-self-checkout-thief-aziza-graves-convicted/73599144007/
(edit: shortened url.)
Jeez. In that case it wasn’t someone poor just trying to get by, she was running a business. She sold the merchandise.
Does anyone else feel like 3 years is way too lenient? That kind of greedy shit should send the person away for like a decade.
Lol, America has more legal slaves than it did before the civil war and has higher incarceration rate than anywhere and you want to lock someone up for a decade for non-violent property crime where the only victim is a multibillion dollar corporation that she stole less than 100k from.
https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/target Here's records of target having stolen 185 million dollars mostly from the American public, how long do you think anyone was in prison for that? Do you think any penalty there even meaningfully affected any executive or major shareholders life?
OK see maybe you need to go to school and learn how law works. You can't have punishments vary based on the merit of the victim.
Here it's Target, a rich company, somewhere else it's a private citizen being stolen from, or a small family business, or a charity. The punishment as a deterrent needs to be based on the act alone, and not your personal lack of sympathy for the victim.
Sorry but the real world doesn't treat law the way you seem to think.
What the fuck are you talking about? Stealing from a corporation and stealing from people is absolutely not the same. Corporations are not people I can't believe we still have to argue this point.
Also of course the law takes the merit of the victim into account. Half of all homicide victims are black but in 75% of executions for homicide the victim was white. And how many of those do you think were homeless or sex workers? Don't be ridiculous, the law is not applied equally for victims or for defendants. Assaulting a cop, on duty or not is not treated the same as assaulting a BIPOC sex worker. Every goddamn time there's a mass shooting or another cop kills another black person why is the first thing they do to try to find some evidence of dirt on the victims regardless of the relevance to the actual case. You are living in a dream world.
Also... What the hell are you coming at me for about this? I never even argued the ACTUAL SENTENCING was unreasonable?!? (I think it's unjust, but not unreasonable, but I said nothing of that in my comment). I just thought it was batshit insane that you were out for blood for this person and felt they should go away for half a fucking generation for "grand shoplifting"
You are arguing from an emotional perspective, and also bulldozing in a handful of unrelated topics that you clearly need to rant about. I am not saying I necessarily disagree with you on the specifics, but I was commenting purely from a legal reasoning standpoint. That is a very specific and distinctive principle, or I should say, set thereof. I have heard your type of argument a thousand times, and I am not saying you are WRONG, but I am saying you are not speaking in terms of law, but that of emotional reaction.
It's fine, I don't want to argue with you.. My initial comment was one kind of discussion, and you're arguing an entirely different kind.