Michael Schellenberger

Rank 37 of 47
|
Score -71
12/18/2024, 2:32:39 PM
X
In reply to:
GrilledCheeze
@grilledmfcheeze
·
278d
@shellenberger If there's no sense of danger then why would I be immediately arrested if I few a tiny consumer drone over an NFL game without permission?
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
278d
Biden says there’s no “sense of danger” in the repeated invasions of the air space above homes and military bases by unidentified drones. That’s a ridiculous and terrifying lie. Of course there is. Protecting our air space has been one of America’s highest priorities for 80 years
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
279d
The DOD-FBI-DHS-FAA say they thoroughly investigated all ~6,000 drone reports, but there’s no way they could have. They’re lying because, apparently, they don’t want to talk about why they can’t control the airspace above either our military bases or our residential areas.

The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the safety and regulation of airspace, particularly concerning drones. It questions government statements and actions, suggesting a lack of transparency and control over airspace security.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement raises concerns about public safety, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It questions government transparency, which can be seen as respecting the public's right to information, but it should avoid implying dishonesty without evidence.
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in criticism of government actions, which is constructive if based on facts, but should avoid personal attacks or unfounded accusations.