this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

Chaotic Good

532 readers
1 users here now

A place to post examples of chaotic good actions.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It's a crime in Dallas to help homeless people?

[–] UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's what Jesus would want, didn't you know?

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Supply-side Jesus is the worst Jesus.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's generally not allowed to create an ad hoc aid group. It's bullshit.

The "reasoning" is the are no permits/ food safety licenses, etc.

But obviously that's bullshit given the alternatives.

[–] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

We live in a world where I can see someone doing this in an effort to poison a bunch of homeless people. Of course that's not what is happening here but it's been at yhe back of my mind lately.

[–] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

You know you're on the wrong side of history when you make it illegal to give to those most in need.

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And have to be visibly armed to stop the cops from harassing you for doing so.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

And people are banning books.

[–] EmpeRohrOn@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Are you ok over there? Do you need something? Like healthcare and a social state?

[–] danafest@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Armed to deter cops actually sounds like a viable plan in Texas after what we saw at Uvalde

[–] wildcardology@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Damn, giving food and clothes is a crime.

[–] Sendpicsofsandwiches@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's food serving legislation being taken too far. The clothes I think are fine, but since they're not inspected by the health department like a restaurant the government can technically shut it down which is complete bullshit.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

No, the Good Samaritan Act says free food doesn't have to be inspected as long as it's given "in good faith apparently wholesome food or apparently fit grocery products to a nonprofit organization for ultimate distribution to needy individuals"

https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2020/08/13/good-samaritan-act-provides-liability-protection-food-donations

All fifty states and the District of Columbia have additional food donation statues that limit food donor’s liability—these currently vary widely, such as by who (i.e., donors, nonprofit organizations), and what foods and food products are covered.

state laws may provide greater protection against liability, but not less

[–] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 1 points 4 months ago

TIL. Thanks.

[–] Perhapsjustsniffit@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I've been following some of these folks on social media who do this every couple of weeks. It's crazy. The police were arresting them for giving away food. So they went through the courts and won the right to feed homeless people. Crazy right. The even crazier part is the cops sit across the street every single time they give out free food and hygiene items and harass them, take photos and other ACAB sort of shit. 4-6 cruisers at a time. Insane.

[–] radicalautonomy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I had^1^ a friend in middle school who shared my name. We'd hang out together all the time and play Super Mario Bros 3 and ride our bikes all over and shit. Dude was chill. Then he went into the army, came out, and become a cop in Dallas PD.

^1^Had.

Its only crazy if you don't want to look at why they're doing it square in the eye. Please don't get me wrong, I wouldn't judge anyone doing it, presuming it does apply a little you yourself. I could be wrong of course. The truth is very, very ugly and not something anyone would want to be true.

Despite their claims, the problem was never the cost to the government of feeding the homeless, as can be seen. The reason the police do this is that wage slaves won't be forced back into the worst, most poorly paid jobs we can find if they're not facing death by starvation.

It was the same in the UK, back when they made feeding the homeless illegal and the penalty being being homeless OR without a job for 3 days was being sent to the workhouse where you might well be worked to death.

Its the same thing, centuries apart.

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As a 2A liberal, I LOVE this. Black Panthers did it right, don't change what works!

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

You love it? You don't look at this and think "This can't possibly be how a reasonable society works"?

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 4 months ago

When it stops being illegal to help vulnerable people, I'll stop cheering for folks who open carry firearms to deter cops that might otherwise try to stop them.

[–] Themadbeagle@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Of course most of us don't love it. A lot of us live in places where, due to concepts like gerrymandering, we have no political choice, so people have to resort to stuff like this. We love that people are fighting back, not that it has to be this way.

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Not everyone agrees the cops should do whatever they want and sorting it out in court later is the way

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's like saying the tolerant can't be intolerant of the intolerant, when in fact they have to be.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

And it becomes even more viable when you consider that Popper’s idea is actually based off of a social contract.

Essentially, tolerance is based on a social contract to be tolerant to each other. If someone is being intolerant, they are explicitly and intentionally removing themselves from the contract. Ergo, they no longer fall under protections, and people can then be intolerant of their intolerance.

[–] aliteral@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How people don't understand this concept is incredible to me.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago
  • Regular Ignorance
  • Wilful Ignorance
  • Bad Faith

Pick One, possibly two.

There will of course be some who haven't considered this perspective and some who disagree.

I'd put money, however, on the vast majority arguing in favour of tolerating intolerance are the people this concept is talking about.

The actively intolerant using the tolerance of others to enact further intolerance.

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Does being armed actually deter cops in Texas? In my home country being armed is more likely to alert cops

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yes, it deters the cops. You have to understand that many or most cops are paranoid, cowards, and bullies. They aren't going around enforcing laws because they think that they need to uphold justice. Rather, they're going around power tripping. And it's not such a great power trip if you have to worry about getting shot because people think that you're dirty.

Of course this is not true for all cops all the time, but it's certainly true for many cops most of the time.

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Cops only punch down

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

A dozen armed people attract cops.

A couple hundred armed people repel cops.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

A single armed guy in a Texas school will attract cops at a medium distance but repel them at a short distance.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Every single protest should have an armed contingent in America. That is the only way cops will take you seriously, but make sure you dot the i's and cross the t's, because your permits better be current.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This gives the cops license to start slaughtering protestors. They're allowed to kill if they have a reason to fear for their safety.

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Nope. Cops are bullies and cowards by nature. They love to swing their dicks around unarmed, peaceful protesters.

Any sign of any possible resistance or discomfort and they'll suddenly turn into pillars of restraint and caution.

IE look at all the armed Nazi protests, or uvlade or any other of the myriad of examples.