this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
29 points (100.0% liked)

Chaotic Good

1025 readers
1 users here now

A place to post examples of chaotic good actions.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It's a crime in Dallas to help homeless people?

[–] UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's what Jesus would want, didn't you know?

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Supply-side Jesus is the worst Jesus.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's generally not allowed to create an ad hoc aid group. It's bullshit.

The "reasoning" is the are no permits/ food safety licenses, etc.

But obviously that's bullshit given the alternatives.

[–] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

We live in a world where I can see someone doing this in an effort to poison a bunch of homeless people. Of course that's not what is happening here but it's been at yhe back of my mind lately.

[–] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

You know you're on the wrong side of history when you make it illegal to give to those most in need.

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And have to be visibly armed to stop the cops from harassing you for doing so.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

And people are banning books.

[–] Routhinator@startrek.website 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

And claiming to be a devout Christian while making these laws is ludicrous.

[–] danafest@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

Armed to deter cops actually sounds like a viable plan in Texas after what we saw at Uvalde

[–] praxis_jack@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Gotta love how it's illegal to help your community

[–] EmpeRohrOn@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Are you ok over there? Do you need something? Like healthcare and a social state?

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Every single protest should have an armed contingent in America. That is the only way cops will take you seriously, but make sure you dot the i's and cross the t's, because your permits better be current.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This gives the cops license to start slaughtering protestors. They're allowed to kill if they have a reason to fear for their safety.

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Nope. Cops are bullies and cowards by nature. They love to swing their dicks around unarmed, peaceful protesters.

Any sign of any possible resistance or discomfort and they'll suddenly turn into pillars of restraint and caution.

IE look at all the armed Nazi protests, or uvlade or any other of the myriad of examples.

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

As a 2A liberal, I LOVE this. Black Panthers did it right, don't change what works!

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Fun fact: California's anti-gun culture was born out of racism and fear of the Black Panthers.

Ronald fucking Reagan started the anti-gun movement to disarm black people

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

You love it? You don't look at this and think "This can't possibly be how a reasonable society works"?

[–] Themadbeagle@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Of course most of us don't love it. A lot of us live in places where, due to concepts like gerrymandering, we have no political choice, so people have to resort to stuff like this. We love that people are fighting back, not that it has to be this way.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 2 years ago

When it stops being illegal to help vulnerable people, I'll stop cheering for folks who open carry firearms to deter cops that might otherwise try to stop them.

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not everyone agrees the cops should do whatever they want and sorting it out in court later is the way

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's like saying the tolerant can't be intolerant of the intolerant, when in fact they have to be.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

And it becomes even more viable when you consider that Popper’s idea is actually based off of a social contract.

Essentially, tolerance is based on a social contract to be tolerant to each other. If someone is being intolerant, they are explicitly and intentionally removing themselves from the contract. Ergo, they no longer fall under protections, and people can then be intolerant of their intolerance.

[–] aliteral@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How people don't understand this concept is incredible to me.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago
  • Regular Ignorance
  • Wilful Ignorance
  • Bad Faith

Pick One, possibly two.

There will of course be some who haven't considered this perspective and some who disagree.

I'd put money, however, on the vast majority arguing in favour of tolerating intolerance are the people this concept is talking about.

The actively intolerant using the tolerance of others to enact further intolerance.

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Does being armed actually deter cops in Texas? In my home country being armed is more likely to alert cops

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Cops only punch down

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A dozen armed people attract cops.

A couple hundred armed people repel cops.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

A single armed guy in a Texas school will attract cops at a medium distance but repel them at a short distance.