15
   

FREEDOM IS RESTORED: 1st AMENDMENT WINS!

 
 
Irishk
 
  2  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:33 pm
That is not their name LOL.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:34 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
Okay, fine. 'Entire purpose' was a bit much. You win.

But it is one of the main purposes. And this is my point:

Quote:
Besides, your examples mostly point out a need for better law enforcement, or perhaps even better law-making


Yes. Better laws would hold those who work for corporations responsible for their nefarious acts. The current setup allows people to get away with pretty much anything and face no punishment at all.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:36 pm
@Irishk,
Irishk wrote:

That is not their name LOL.


Au contraire. That most certainly is their name.

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/01/24/roger_stone/

Cycloptichorn
Irishk
 
  2  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:41 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Irishk wrote:

That is not their name LOL.


Au contraire. That most certainly is their name.

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/01/24/roger_stone/


No, it isn't.

http://www.citizensunited.org/index.aspx

The link in your salon.com piece isn't even valid.
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:48 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Better late than never. Good on you. If you try reading my original post with an open mind, you may find it a bit more insightful too.
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:50 pm
@Irishk,
Well done Irishman. I was feeling rather blindsided there. Leave it to Salon to pull a fast one like that. From their own misleading article:
Quote:
The Washington Times also reported that another, similarly named anti-Hillary organization, Citizens United, has sent a cease-and-desist letter for name infringement.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:51 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
OCCOM BILL wrote:

Better late than never. Good on you. If you try reading my original post with an open mind, you may find it a bit more insightful too.


How about your response re: the inability to hold people responsible within corporations for the crimes they commit? Do you think that the laws should be beefed up, so that individuals within corporations who are found to have made nefarious decisions are held responsible for their actions?

Cycloptichorn
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:57 pm
@Irishk,
Hahahahaha

"Au contraire" indeed!!! Smile Smile LOL LOL
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 06:59 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

Hahahahaha

"Au contraire" indeed!!! Smile Smile LOL LOL



At some point, you'll get it together and respond to one of my posts directly; but I would recommend actually researching the topic in question before doing so. It's easy to sit on the sidelines and laugh, much harder to be a knowledgeable participant. But you already knew that, didn't you?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 07:01 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Better late than never. Good on you. If you try reading my original post with an open mind, you may find it a bit more insightful too.


How about your response re: the inability to hold people responsible within corporations for the crimes they commit? Do you think that the laws should be beefed up, so that individuals within corporations who are found to have made nefarious decisions are held responsible for their actions?
I suspect this is more of a selective enforcement issue than a lack of law... but on your general premise; absolutely. Legal structures don't kill people; people do... and they should damn well be punished for it. Reckless endangerment, conduct regardless of life, depraved indifference (or whatever it's called in your jurisdiction) is likely available but largely unused. Write a petition; I'll sign it.

Gotta run.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Feb, 2010 07:02 pm
@Irishk,
Irishk wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Irishk wrote:

That is not their name LOL.


Au contraire. That most certainly is their name.

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/01/24/roger_stone/


No, it isn't.

http://www.citizensunited.org/index.aspx

The link in your salon.com piece isn't even valid.


Sorry, I wasn't aware that they were two different groups. The names most certainly are similar Laughing

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/09/2019 at 07:59:47