More like being against witch hunts, propaganda, and a misuse of federal funds.
More like being against witch hunts, propaganda, and a misuse of federal funds.
Freedom is a pretty good reason. If guns scare you, move to someplace like Chicago that makes it nearly impossible to posses one legally. It's a safe haven in a country of chaos, or so you're logic would have us think.
It's a little out there, but it's not wrong. Contagions can spread in places where there are a lot of people stuck close together, which is what public transport is during the rush. People aren't generally crammed together in their homes or workplaces. Things can still spread, but not easily.
Plus it doesn't run in the snow and the buses they send to substitute for the trains are so few and so misdirected that people end up waiting hours in line to get where they're going.
Flu shots are based on a guess each year of which flu strains to guard against. They've gotten the guess wrong some years, and people ended up with the flu whether they got the shot or not. If you have a weakened immune system, this is a big problem.
How is Amazon the seller? It's not their merchandise.
Your example isn't really adding any clarity.
Amazon makes it clear who the seller is. Right next to the price it will say "ships from and sold by Amazon". That's clear, right? It may also say "sold by $OtherRetailName and Fulfilled by Amazon". Still clear who the seller is. On the side it may also have "Other Sellers on Amazon". Still clear, right? That's part of what makes Amazon popular. You search for a product and have the option of buying it from a variety of sellers. That's why your example doesn't work. I can't think of something equivalent in the offline world.
There's no hand-waving. It clearly states whom each and every item is sold by. I can sell stuff on Amazon if I want to. In that case I'd be the seller and the fulfillment. Amazon would only do the listing and payment processing. Does that mean I was part of Amazon? No, of course not.
As for the customer not communicating with the 3rd party seller, so what? Why would users want to do that? They chose to purchase the item from a particular seller. Amazon's platform did the grunt work. It's a time saver. In some cases, I buy things on Amazon's site from 3rd parties whom I also sometimes make purchases from on their own sites. Why? Amazon's site is sometimes faster, especially if I'm buying multiple things from different sellers. Sometimes I get cheaper shipping options because the 3rd party has opted into "Prime shipping", but it's not available from their own site. Amazon does provide you the option to contact those sellers, it's up to you if you want to do so. I don't really want to talk to sellers directly, I just want to buy stuff.
That's the whole point, isn't it? The US has people under surveillance but they can't act until a crime has been committed that's worth prosecuting them for. You end up in the situation where an attack happens even though the perpetrators were under surveillance. I'm not sure why you would go after the authorities. They'll come back and say that they weren't high enough on the list to warrant surveillance 24/7. There are a finite number of law enforcers to do that kind of work.
France is trying to be more aggressive by going after people who are watching the recruiting propaganda. It's a tactic. It wouldn't work in the US for a number of reasons, but France isn't the US. This enables the authorities there to go after people sooner before they're on the verge of committing an attack. The guy in this story wasn't just watching videos. He was flying their flag, dressing the part, etc. Those aren't crimes, but taken together, that sure looks like the sign of a mentally ill or brainwashed person. I could see committing that person on the grounds of mental hygiene rather than going through the criminal system. Either that or if the guy is participating in forums known to be run by IS, perhaps that makes it criminal because now he's a member of a known terrorist organization.
The people of France want to be protected against terror attacks. I think we can all understand that. The question is how you accomplish that and if you're willing to accept that any laws like this might someday be used against you. It's clear that what's going on in Europe today isn't working. You have the Brexit. You have other countries considering holding referendums of their own. You have Front Nationale in France in a position to possibly win the Presidency and they've already committed to holding a referendum on the EU if they do win. Open borders failed and now there's a population in the European nations that want to murder their hosts. How do those nations deal with it?
Amazon provides listing services so that your items show up on their site.
Amazon provides payment services so that you don't need to worry about credit card processing.
Amazon provides warehousing and distribution if you don't want to handle that yourself.
Those are all services that the Amazon platform provides. These are all services that have been provided to retailers by other companies for many, many years. Amazon is not the seller. They were never the owner of the merchandise at any point in time. They may have had it in their possession in a warehouse, but that's not any different than UPS having it in their possession while it's on its way to be delivered.
Your brick and mortar example doesn't really work. Amazon makes it clear that you're buying the product from a specific seller and Amazon may be one of those sellers. The customer makes the choice.
As for Amazon taking a cut of the profit, so does MasterCard and Visa, so does UPS, so do warehouses. You may or may not see that as a customer purchasing an item, but those costs exist for retailers. That doesn't mean the credit company, the courier, or the warehouse have some liability with regard to the merchandise once it has been delivered to the customer.
If it's Amazon itself selling them, yes. If it's a different company listing them on Amazon, no. Amazon is a platform. The seller is the one making the sale.
Amazon could be proactive and protect their image by policing it, but that's their option as the owner of the platform.
What happens if you do nothing? What do you do when the families of his future victims find out that he was already known to be on a path to radicalization but they did nothing due to political correctness?
Sales decrease, people lose their jobs, driven to mental health issues..
Amazon isn't the equivalent of "consumer reports". They offer retailers a sales platform and they offer consumers a varied market. That's it. You can check the seller reviews or Google, or if it's an expensive item and you want to make sure the warranty claims are valid, you can contact the manufacturer. Amazon couldn't possibly check every item for sale at every retailer. That's like saying a shopping mall should ensure that every item in every store is marked correctly every day. You'd need an absurdly large workforce and the cost of doing so would negate any savings for the consumer. You could bring the seller to court for making false claims, but that's up to you.
Did the EPA prevent the situation in Flint with their water supply?
Did the EPA prevent the BP disaster in the Gulf?
I remember after the first blended gas was sold seeing nearly everyone's old lawnmowers out with the trash because it ruined their engines to the point where it wasn't worth trying to repair them. Same thing with diesel and some pickup truck engines, the blended diesel was shown to reduce the life of the engine, but no attention was paid to that. I have a hard time believing that junking all that hardware and replacing it is better for the environment than sticking with what we had. It seems likely that electric vehicles will eventually replace fuel powered engines, so why not encourage that transition rather than screwing the formulation of gas even more? Decisions like this undermine the value of the EPA in the minds of many.
Amazon didn't misrepresent anything. They offer an ecommerce platform to other companies. If the seller misrepresented something, your issue is with them. You could also blame your browser or your ISP, they were also involved with delivering the page to your device. It wouldn't be possible for Amazon to check every item from every seller to the extent necessary to accomplish what you're looking for. As for taking payment, again, that's just a service they provide.
I got caught in the warranty trap once but it was with Amazon directly. They stated that the product was covered by warranty for something they sold and shipped, but the manufacturer denied it because Amazon wasn't an approved seller. Amazon refunded the purchase after I pointed out the problem. That's a little different than your example though because it wasn't a 3rd party seller.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso