▲ 1101 ▼ ‘You Will Not Speak on Flock Tonight’: County Commissioner Refuses to Let Residents Opposing Flock Speak at Meeting (www.404media.co) submitted 5 months ago by malloc@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 131 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] subignition@fedia.io -4 points 5 months ago (2 children) Damn, clickbait headline wins [the attention] yet again... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 child) They want them to pass an ordinance blocking their use. They didn't approve it, but they have the authority to stop it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago It seems like there's a problem there. They want an elected body to pass an ordinance against something another independent elected body is already under contract to do. In my simple brain, so be it. Why not do that? In my rational brain, having sat through at least 100 council and commission meetings, it's not that simple and certainly could open the county to legal issues in at least three ways (flock sues county for breach of contract; sheriff sues council for overreach; pro-flock community members sue county for whatever they can think of). To me, this is a time for the people to play politics. Schedule meetings with these council members individually. Invite them to anti-flock parties. Convince them to be on your anti flock side. If you get one, that one can work on the others from the inside. By the way, we already have legislation against flock -- it's called the Fourth Amendment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 child) They want them to pass an ordinance blocking their use. They didn't approve it, but they have the authority to stop it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago It seems like there's a problem there. They want an elected body to pass an ordinance against something another independent elected body is already under contract to do. In my simple brain, so be it. Why not do that? In my rational brain, having sat through at least 100 council and commission meetings, it's not that simple and certainly could open the county to legal issues in at least three ways (flock sues county for breach of contract; sheriff sues council for overreach; pro-flock community members sue county for whatever they can think of). To me, this is a time for the people to play politics. Schedule meetings with these council members individually. Invite them to anti-flock parties. Convince them to be on your anti flock side. If you get one, that one can work on the others from the inside. By the way, we already have legislation against flock -- it's called the Fourth Amendment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago It seems like there's a problem there. They want an elected body to pass an ordinance against something another independent elected body is already under contract to do. In my simple brain, so be it. Why not do that? In my rational brain, having sat through at least 100 council and commission meetings, it's not that simple and certainly could open the county to legal issues in at least three ways (flock sues county for breach of contract; sheriff sues council for overreach; pro-flock community members sue county for whatever they can think of). To me, this is a time for the people to play politics. Schedule meetings with these council members individually. Invite them to anti-flock parties. Convince them to be on your anti flock side. If you get one, that one can work on the others from the inside. By the way, we already have legislation against flock -- it's called the Fourth Amendment. permalink fedilink source parent