• Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    Just so we’re clear: you’re not going to answer the question about whether it even works?

    Why would you care if it’s legal if you can’t even say that it’s an effective measure? If you don’t even stand by it to that extent, why are you asking?

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        I asked you first. And it’s not a simple yes/no because without the context of anti-carceral activism the answer won’t make any sense, unless you’re trying to force me into a false dichotomy devoid of context, which is not a sign of good faith.

        • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          Dude ffs no I proposed the absurd stance you’re defending first and it’s clear cut.

          The US has laws nationwide that make it illegal to drunk drive. It is a ban. Should we have said ban or not?

          Answer the question or don’t bother responding. Yes or no. Anything less and I’m not reading or responding. Stop the bullshit dancing.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            15 days ago

            I asked you the question first. You won’t answer, you just deflected to a question that you now demand I answer. This is going nowhere.

            If your point is that you proposed something before I asked you something, I had already proposed that bans are ineffective, which you ignored. You’re just trying to control the conversation without listening to my side. I don’t know why I’d bother with that. Someone else tried to at least answer the question, so you’re no longer needed here.