• 9 Posts
  • 670 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle













  • limelight79@lemm.eetomemes@lemmy.worldOverflow
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 days ago

    I just ignore questions that I’m not interested in answering.

    The other day, someone asked in the Linux community here on Lemmy why people don’t like Ubuntu. It seems someone asks this question every few months. I thought, “I’ve answered several times, I’m done answering it, let someone else take care of it.” Last I saw it had over 100 comments, so I feel the issue is resolved.


  • It’s not really even that. It’s when jurors believe the law should not apply in that specific instance for some reason.

    For example, you might be opposed to the laws against drug possession in small amounts. You could vote “not guilty” if you were on a jury where someone was on trial for violating that law, even if it’s 100% clear the defendant did, in fact, break the law. That would be nullification.

    I think I see where the admins are coming from in the sense of using nullification as a way to get off from a crime in planning (but, let’s face it, the odds that are EXTREMELY slim), but they already covered planning crimes as being against the policy. Why bother calling out the nullification part?