• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle

  • Yyyyyyup. Baby back ribs, my absolute favourite.

    First time I ever had racks outside of home, was at a local restaurant called Kelly O’Bryans. I was in my mid-20s at the time. Decided to “Irish size” the order to two racks, not aware that they were already running a special that doubled the racks. Entire party stared in shock when four f**king racks came out balanced on a single platter. And I ate them all. Including all of the pachos (cross-cut fries with a house dip sauce).

    Second time was when Montanas came to town a few years later. At the time they were still doing six bones a refill, instead of the current 3-4. Had the whole initial rack (something they also stopped doing, only half a rack to start these days) and then did 12 refills. So seven full racks of ribs. I still have that receipt somewhere filed away in my bookkeeping.



  • Sometimes criminals also shoot back at the police that come after them with guns.

    In the heat of the moment, the only difference between a vigilante and a cop is the level of training, the assigned equipment, and the choice for the cop to follow well-established procedural rules. It’s only when you zoom out do you see the legal system supporting the cop. But when zoomed in and examining the individual incidents, nothing says the cop can’t come away with added lead, either.


  • Vigelanty justice only works when target deserved like the dead CEO, otherwise it just crime.

    You clearly see the world in black-and-white, when it really is made up of shades of grey.

    Which means that since you haven’t already gotten the point, all the crayons and construction paper in the world isn’t going to help.


  • rekabis@lemmy.catoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The point I was making… Is that the article brought a red herring fact that has nothing to do with anything

    Why did they bring it up?

    It was not a red herring in the least, and it struck to the very core of my own criticisms: while some vigilantes may be very stringent about their own investigations and targets, others may not.

    In this example, these vigilantes artificially engineered a target where none was likely to ever exist. They drew the target in using the profile of a perfectly legal 18yo woman, but then turned around and claimed that the target was actually chasing the profile of an 17yo - and illegally young - girl, when he was in fact not doing so.

    This was a very clear situation of entrapment by false pretenses.



  • rekabis@lemmy.catoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t have a problem with actual pedophiles that are caught in these dragnets.

    My problem arises from the lack of rigorous and well-documented investigation into the target before shite starts popping off. As the article pointed out, there is nothing wrong with a 22yo dating an 18yo. And the problem here is a sense of vindictiveness trying to manufacture targets where not all targets are guilty of pedophilia.

    So: you want to take a pipe wrench to warm over a pedophile? Make sure there is oodles of evidence that clearly and unambiguously makes the person a pedophile, and sure as shite I will look the other way. But the problem is that there is no self-reinforcing framework in place within the vigilante system to ensure and enforce this threshold of evidence. And without this system, innocent people are going to get hurt or killed.