• Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    They’d get sued whether they do it or not really. If they don’t they get sued by those that want privacy invasive scanning. If they do, they’re gonna get sued when they inevitably end up landing someone in hot water because they took pictures of their naked child for the doctors.

    Protecting children is important but can’t come at the cost of violating everyone’s privacy and making you guilty unless proven innocent.

    Meanwhile, children just keep getting shot at school and nobody wants to do anything about it, but oh no, we can’t do anything about that because muh gun rights.

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      If people really care about protecting the children, we can always raise taxes on the wealthy/cut military spending to fund new task forces to combat the production and spread of child pornography!

      Heck, the money spent on this lawsuit could be spent catching people producing CSAM instead.

    • 0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      Makes me wonder if the lawsuit is legit or if it’s some But think of the children™ institution using some rando as cover.

      because muh gun rights.

      I think it’s a bit more complicated. These are worth a watch at least once:
      Let’s talk about guns, gun control, school shooting, and “law abiding gun owners” (Part 1)
      Let’s talk about guns, gun control, school shooting, and “law abiding gun owners” (Part 2)
      Let’s talk about guns, gun control, school shooting, and “law abiding gun owners” (Part 3)

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      Meanwhile, children just keep getting shot at school and nobody wants to do anything about it, but oh no, we can’t do anything about that because muh gun rights.

      Children get abused in school and shoot some of the bullies in response, usually. Bullying is the problem, and not that most autistic children don’t have non-radical ways of responding to it. And they do have right to revenge, if no other mechanism delivers justice.

      It’s telling how in all such cases the bullying itself is seen as almost normal, just the response. If a kid is weird enough to shoot up the bullies, then they must have been weird before, and then it’s OK apparently.

      But I agree that this is more important than interference with people’s communications to somehow prevent bad people from communicating.

      Bad people generally try to get into privileged positions btw, or undertake the needed effort to secure their activities. Most ideas of surveillance allow them to do their stuff without interference.

      I think gun rights are fine. Every free human should not be robbed of right to carry arms. Especially looking at videos from that prison in Syria, 4 underground floors, people not remembering their names, children born there … I think one can make some sacrifices to keep one of the failsafe mechanisms against that.