3 ms·
I dont know how to respond to any of this. The first part does not seem to relate to anything I wrote. Maybe it was intended for someone else? The second bit
by dfc 13y ago
I dont know how to respond to any of this. The first part does not seem to relate to anything I wrote. Maybe it was intended for someone else?
The second bit is just a knee jerk jab at the US and a link to a wikipedia article with very little context.
- abecedarius 13y agoCops break traffic laws all the time, not just when they should. (And other laws too, I suppose less often but more importantly.) These traffic violations are the most visible case of public servants deeming themselves above the law; when you started your comment with them and equated them with the rest, I (apparently) mistook you to be defending them. It's good if I was wrong. The article outlines law enforcement without cops. You asked how this was possible.
- dfc 13y agoIs there a typo on the wikipedia page you linked to? Or did you intend to point to a civilization from 930-1262? A time when there was no gunpowder (in europe), movable type printing press, penicillin, electricity, combustion engines, etc...
- abecedarius 13y agoI gave your rhetorical question a real answer; it's clear you expected none. Now you're responding like an 18th-century royalist might to someone citing the precedent of Athenian democracy. I've had enough of this exchange.