I know you are, but what am I?

Web pages full of delusional, or just take, nonsense have reinforced delusional beliefs for as long as there have been web pages. Including web pages that talk back to you, like forums. Why would these we pages be any different?

There is no belief so crazy that there isn't someone out there who will find amusement values or profit in reinforcing it.

California needs voters who recognize anything other than party affiliation on the ballot.

Good luck with that.

And understandably so, since (aside from collecting that much more data to sell to advertisers) they're the ones being threatened with dire consequences if they don't keep children restricted from the bad old interwebs, a task that is utterly impossible. But if they shift the legal responsibility onto someone else - anyone else, but Microsoft and Apple are good targets, and ultimately, to the government itself, then they are in the clear.

Social media giants pushing for this kind of crap was inevitable when the pearl clutchers and hysterical wannabe autocrats have enough influence to seriously threaten them.

I've run across a few who were pretty indecipherable. Or at least incoherent.

Since it has no connection to the real world, it's nothing more than a pointless attempt to divert attention from the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Irrelevant to the fact that when you say "defund the police" you really mean "don't reduce funding to the police at all, but add other services that the taxpayers have to pay for."

That kind of lie is why normal people don't take lefties seriously. Because you're either drooling stupid, mentally deranged, or simply lying every time your lips move. There is literally nothing you could ever possibly say that any sane person could take seriously.

People (and I use the term loosely) like you are the reason Trump got elected. Really.

It is exceedingly rare for police calls to involve more than one car, and they usually go alone. And if more than one does show up, it's almost certainly something that is already violent, and definitely a police situation, not a social worker situation.

So your scenario is stupid.

Try again, with some connection to real life.

So they need to be there anyway, in addition to someone else? So we're going to take away funding from the police to give to that someone else, but the police still have to do the same work?

Or does "defund the police" actually mean the exact opposite of what you advocate, which is spending more on additional services?

Does that actually make sense to you?

You're assuming that the person you're replying to wants to keep up law and order.

That's pretty optimistic of you.

Who obviously understands this complex stuff better than EU leadership.

So you're saying that EU leadership is actually more demented and stupid than Trump?

So you admit that everything I said was true, then. There's no other conclusion one can reach from the fact that you didn't dispute a bit of it.

At least you know what a loser you are.

Be as sure as you want, it's still 100% subjective. Recording the police might not be interference in general, but doing so while standing close enough to be in the way is. It's not the absolute you've been indoctrinated (and yes, you have, your TDS is obvious) to believe.

But believe whatever you want, since you're obviously too cowardly to go do anything.

If their concern is safety, whether or not they're safer at home is entirely relevant. Perhaps they're saying they don't feel safe in the US out of fear of not saying it at home. Stranger, and more outrageous things have happened in fascist regimes, and the UK isn't the only country heading in that direction of late.

The same business as any other police officer has in arresting (and shooting, if they feel threatened) people who interfere with their duties.

And they get to decide what constitutes interference, not some bored, ignorant, stupid housewife who read something on the internet.

Mostly, they're denied visas in the first place.

And is that greater chance than the chance of the same thing happening at home? After all, the UK arrests 12,000 people a year for hate speech, and they have an increasingly expansive definition of hate speech.

I hear they have nicer prisons, though.