Can you name one time in History where it was a good thing to ban or burn books?

Legion said:
christiefan915 said:
Maybe because it didn't meet the legal definition of gross negligence.

gross negligence
n. carelessness which is in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, and is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another's property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property. If gross negligence is found by the trier of fact (judge or jury), it can result in the award of punitive damages on top of general and special damages.

https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=838
Click to expand...
So you say.
Click to expand...

The legal definition in the link says it does, dumbass. You should try reading the links, Legion. It makes you look fucking stupid when you don't.

Like you looked fucking stupid on the SF tent thread when you claimed the tents were paid for by Federal taxes or your idiotic Anonymous threads:

Legion said:
Everyone who pays federal taxes is paying for them, angry boi.

The majority of the costs will be reimbursed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. [/SIZE][/B]https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/S-F-pays-61-000-a-year-for-one-tent-to-house-16001074.php [/marquee]
Click to expand...
 
Butch Uncle said:
The legal definition in the link says it does, dumbass.
Click to expand...

The "legal definition in the link" isn't germane to this issue, angry boi.

Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook/
 
Many other did exactly what Hilary did with a server


For some fucking reason it was only treated as a crime when she did it


Hum weird
 
evince said:
Nope

She was not corrupt
Click to expand...

As corrupt as Trump. She was just much, much smarter about it. Much smarter than Bill too.

2ayigf.jpg
 
anonymoose said:
Modern day book burning. Huck Finn was required reading for me in the ninth grade.:(
That was a great book!
Click to expand...

Did you read the first paragraph? The librarians didn't want that book in their library in Concord, Mass. in 1885.
 
Damocles said:
I can't think of one time where I would support this kind of thing. I get that a publisher can decide what to publish, and that this isn't government action. I am not conflating these things. I am just thinking that removing books from the public sphere has proven to not be a positive action when we look back through history.
Click to expand...

So who's banning books?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top