this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2025
145 points (99.3% liked)

Privacy

879 readers
102 users here now

Protect your privacy in the digital world

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be nice, civil and no bigotry/prejudice.
  2. No tankies/alt-right fascists. The former can be tolerated but the latter are banned.
  3. Stay on topic.
  4. Don't promote proprietary software.
  5. No crypto, blockchain, etc.
  6. No Xitter links. (only allowed when can't fact check any other way, use xcancel)
  7. If in doubt, read rule 1

Related communities:

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NocturnalMorning 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes, yes I am. Fuck you ICE, go sit in a donut shop and eat where you belong.

[–] Remember_the_tooth 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Respectfully, I must disagree. Bad cops should NOT get donuts.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So you believe no cops deserve doughnuts?

[–] Remember_the_tooth 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

DEFENSE ATTORNEY'S OPENING STATEMENT

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,

Today, we find ourselves at the heart of a controversy over words—mere words—that my client, a private citizen, expressed in a moment of personal opinion. The prosecution would have you believe that by saying, “No cops deserve donuts,” my client committed some grievous offense. But I ask you—since when did expressing a view about breakfast pastries become a crime?

Let’s analyze this statement logically. Nowhere did my client call for harm, advocate for violence, or incite any illegal action. They did not say police officers should be denied their legal right to purchase donuts, nor did they interfere with any officer’s access to baked goods. At worst, this is an unpopular opinion about who is deserving of a treat—nothing more, nothing less.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution explicitly protects free speech, including statements that may be controversial, divisive, or even offensive to some. Are we to live in a society where expressing a strong opinion about food allocation becomes a legal matter? If my client had said, “No lawyers deserve coffee,” would we be standing in this courtroom today? I think not.

The prosecution may argue that this statement was meant as an insult, but let’s be honest—police officers, like all of us, are no strangers to criticism. Their service, though invaluable, does not place them above public commentary. Furthermore, let us not ignore the playful, perhaps even tongue-in-cheek, nature of this statement. Are we to criminalize sarcasm? Ban humor? Outlaw pastry preferences?

Ladies and gentlemen, my client did not deny officers their rights. They did not prevent a single donut transaction. They did not issue a call to arms against glazed or jelly-filled pastries. They simply shared a personal viewpoint—one that, while perhaps controversial in certain coffee shops, is well within their legal rights.

At the end of the day, I trust you to make the right decision: to uphold the principles of free speech, reject this absurd overreach, and find my client not guilty of the so-called “crime” of having an opinion.

Thank you.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

This took 3000% more effort than strictly necessary and I value every drop of it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

That was beautiful. Thanks for a fun read.

[–] NocturnalMorning 2 points 1 week ago

Opinions are like butts