Sage the Lawyer

The meme says to denounce US sanctions. I think this commenter was pointing out that would also mean opposing the sanctions currently on the Russian oligarchs.

It was once a crime for black people to sit at the front of a bus in America. Guess that means Rosa Parks is responsible for the Holocaust.

Thank the gods we had you to point it out.

I get the feeling (I wouldn’t really know, haven’t been there in months) that Reddit is still significantly better. Sure, it’s worse now, but it still has active communities on pretty much any topic imaginable. Lemmy is on its way, but won’t be there for a few years I think.

Hmm. I’m annoyed at my lawyer brain, all I can think about is how this would actually be a very interesting case. At least, based on my understanding of U.S. Torts law, which is not my practice area (but which is bar tested and a required law scool course). Don’t take any of this as real legal advice.

But, there’s a concept known as the eggshell plaintiff rule/doctrine. Basically, it states that if the person you injured is unusually fragile, you’re on the hook for their injuries regardless of whether they’re a typical result of the action you took. So, here, while the typical result of pulling a finger would be a fart, the puller may be on the hook for the entire damages of a lost arm.

However, undercutting that is the defense of consent. The “victim” here clearly consented to the activity which led to the injury, and should have known that the action may likely result in the loss of an arm, based on the lack of tendons/muscles/skin/everything.

I’m gonna have to save this to show at conventions and see how people think this would play out. I’ll totally be the coolest kid in school then. In your face, Mark.

The Civil Rights Act was passed in large part because of it. Is your argument that the Civil Rights Act changed nothing? Because that’s silly. Or were you just not thinking, and trying to score internet points? Because that’s also silly. You’re being silly.

My understanding is that it was created in response to a ton of Musk spam which was primarily positive, when he was first emerging as a popular figure. People got fed up with hearing about him, and started Enough Musk Spam to point out how absolutely terrible he actually is.

Nowadays, there’s much less positive Musk news, so it feels more like a misnomer. But it was started as an attempt to highlight how bad he is. Seems to have worked a bit, tbh.

Hi, I’m a lawyer. While I work in a different area of law and therefore can’t speak too in depth about this with certainty, if their terms are as enforceable as the linked articles seem to indicate, then yes, this is good advice.

As always with the law, things may vary by jurisdiction. If you have specific questions, contact a lawyer in your area.