geissi

joined 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

A youth justice system is for dealing with kids and teens who shoplift, or break noise ordinances, or run away from home, or abuse illicit substances, or any number of “boundary exploring” behaviors.

A youth justice system is not the appropriate venue for dealing with “kids” so lacking in moral fiber as to deliberately and maliciously kill another person.

If you're distinguishing by the type of offense instead of by age, you don't have a youth justice system, you have a minor offense justice system.
Distinguishing by the severity of the offense is already part of the justice system.
Youth justice systems explicitly consider the age and maturity of the offender, not just what they did.
Also I'm not sure why a 15-year-old is a kid in one of your examples and a "kid" in the other.

The tolerance we have for “youthful indiscretion” does not and should not extend to this degree of violence. A youth justice system is not an appropriate venue for those determined to be fundamentally irredeemable.

This is not about tolerating behavior, it's about reforming people to become members of society instead of lifelong burdens for the justice system.
Despite the severity of his action, brandishing kids as "irredeemable" not only throws away their entire future but also burdens everyone else with keeping them contained forever.
That profits nobody.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

That is interesting to know but I feel that Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is a bit long and the distinction is not really that meaningful.

Either the research is good or it isn't.
People keep attacking the price simply because it was not sponsored by Nobel himself as if only that direct connection to him transferred some sense of divine truthfulness to the other Nobel prizes that this one lacks.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They prefer EVs over public transport.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Meh, not everyone speaks Arabic and there are probably people who don't know that the Sahara is a desert.

Minor redundancies are a small price to share information with a wider audience.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

And this is when the topic was published by a newspaper.
If memory serves, the fist scientific publications were from the 1880s.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Regulation is just one tool, and a blunt one at that, but individual choices matter and can operate with more nuance for better results.

I'll grant that everything else you said were valid considerations but here I disagree.
We need regulation because relying on individual choice doesn't work.

We wouldn't need regulation for emissions if individuals would always chose emission free products.
We wouldn't need regulation for animal welfare if individuals would always chose cruelty free animal product or become vegan.
We wouldn't need speed limits if individuals would always drive safely.

But people are assholes and idiots. They make choices that hurt the environment, society and often even themselves.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

As I've said before, why not try to reduce both?

And let's be honest: Whenever someone post a sarcastic 'good thing we banned plastic straws' under a topic about CO2 emissions, they're not doing it as a good faith argument that one pollution might avoid the other.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Ask any black soccer player

Not the best example if you want to argue that it's not about skin color, tbh.

“White” has always been more about fitting a certain narrative than a specific shade of skin.

Replace "White" with "Racism" and you're on the money.
Whiteness has always been more important in the US that in Europe. People here have always been surrounded by other "white" nationalities and cultures that they could still be racist against.
Of all the things people say about Roma, them not being classified as white is one I have never heard.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Plastic bags have the lowest carbon footprint

Why do people only ever talk about the carbon footprint when plastic bans are discussed?
Plastic waste is lying around everywhere, microplastics have been found in placentas and brain stems, the great pacific garbage patch is larger than some micro states.

The environment consists of more than just the atmosphere and we should reduce both greenhouse gases and plastic waste.

Also

plastic bags (including small produce bags) can be recycled at the grocery store (two near me do but it’s easy to miss). I also found plastic very easy to reuse.

That may be so but many people do not recycle or reuse their plastic bags. I would assume this measure is aimed more at them then at you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I mean using your real name does not depend on the platform you're using but more on how you're using it.
Pretty sure the majority of reddit users do not post under their real name and you could use a pseudonym on facebook if you wanted to.
Zuckerberg isn't going to check your ID when you sign up.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Your data isn't really more private on the fediverse, is it?
Everything you post is shared with myriad instances.
You might not end up just handing it to some large tech corp but you also give up any remnant of control over it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

Ja, passt schon

view more: next ›