How can they be criminals if they have no trial?
I think “criminal” can just mean someone who has committed a crime while not having been in a trial convicted of it
Don’t spread that idea, that’s how we got here.
The law is that a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. (Yes, yes I know “for now” and the rule of law has ended you pedants let me have my modicum of hope.)
For decades people have been “convicting” others in the court of public opinion which has caused the general public to think they know better than a judge and jury while only having information from hearsay, rumors, and the news. That leads them to disregard court findings and believe people to be guilty who are not and people to be innocent who are not. So people who they don’t like are going to prison in El Salvador and people they do like are president.
It’s not an idea, that’s just how the word works. It can have different and more specific meanings in different context but generally a criminal is someone who has committed a crime.
Sort of, a criminal is someone who has been found guilty of committing a crime.
The way we prove that guilt, from the perspective of the US, is through the courts. Until the guilt is proven through the courts they are not a criminal but the accused of an alleged crime. Really seems like far to many people like to glaze over that part and just jump straight to an accused being guilty without due process.
It doesn’t say have been found guilty, it says is guilty. Someone who has committed a crime is guilty of it, whether or not it has been proven in court.
justly chargeable with or responsible for a usually grave breach of conduct or a crime
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/guilty
“Innocent until proven guilty” is a legal principle. Like I tried to explain, there’s different context where in a court you could say that they can’t consider someone guilty (and a criminal for that particular thing) until proven so, but you can still be a criminal outside of specific legal language for being guilty, meaning having committed a crime.
Guilt also means different things, it can mean you have actually committed it (factual guilt seems to be the term for it) and legal guilt is the one proven and assigned in court.
I mean wouldn’t someone that’s here legally be able to prove it with a green card? Isn’t it like a physical thing like our American passport for example? That’s what I would think.
ICE arrested a guy the other day, at his citizenship hearing. They don’t care.
Another one from the other day, ICE also arrested a guy for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, they were after someone specific, and just grabbed a guy because he was brown skinned.
Failing to produce a green card automatically makes you an illegal resident?
That’s not what I’m saying ? I’m asking, if You are a legal resident you would have a green card right? So wouldn’t they just be able to show that they have a green card to prove that they have legal residency? It’s a question. What I’m saying is by showing that you have a green card it proves that you are a legal resident. For example of someone tried to tell me that I wasn’t an American citizen I could just show them my passport and that ends that. And wouldn’t anyone that’s here legally have a green card? Or could they still be here legally before obtaining a green card?
There should be a second sticker being covered under white that reads “rich”.
Pizzacake is such a shit comic.
I’m pretty new to Lemmy and not familiar with Pizzacake, even though I was on Reddit for years (never really went to r/all, just my curated feed). They seem pretty divisive here. Can you fill me in on them? Is it just the artwork, or is there some back story I don’t know about?
I personally don’t like the style. If i remember, many of the content just didn’t make sense, more of a personal viewpoint. Anyone that made any critique/complaint was quickly met with attitude from OP/artist.
I left reddit because it is far too common to see this dog shit comic on or near the front page
Big pile of dog shit.