←back to thread

Chat Control: Incompatible with Fundamental Rights (2022)

(freiheitsrechte.org)
833 points Bluestein | 2 comments | 18 Jun 24 09:34 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mro_name ◴[18 Jun 24 10:16 UTC] No.40715944[source]▶
I wonder how it can be legal to repeatedly undermine constitution and push or vote for later high-court-nullified laws and be allowed to repeat as if nothing was wrong with that. Like drunk driving forever. We ban counter-constitutional activities outside parliament and authorities. Why not inside?

I am much for 3-strikes here.

replies(6): >>40716013 #>>40716069 #>>40716073 #>>40716129 #>>40716284 #>>40717138 #
chopin ◴[18 Jun 24 10:26 UTC] No.40716013[source]▶
0-strike. It should be expected that elected officials respect the constitution.
replies(3): >>40716066 #>>40716080 #>>40716345 #
1. jdasdf ◴[18 Jun 24 11:13 UTC] No.40716345[source]▶
This.

Anyone that voted for a law that is later struck down committed an illegal act, and should be liable for it.

replies(1): >>40716722 #
2. Cthulhu_ ◴[18 Jun 24 11:56 UTC] No.40716722[source]▶
This is a shortsighted kneejerk take to be honest. What about laws you agree with that get rescinded? What if a law that protects your privacy gets struck down, do you think the privacy advocates that made it happen in the first place "committed an illegal act and should be liable for it"?