Hacker News Reader

Comment by 8fGTBjZxBcHq | Hacker News Reader

Wait you think people in jails should just not exist? Do you want to uh elaborate on that a little?

EDIT: yes I got it thank you to everyone who explained. I'm not a native english speaker and misunderstood the phrasing.

View on HN

I believe they were trying to say: "No fly lists should be reserved for people who are in jail ... and therefore the no fly list should not exist (since the people who shouldn't fly can't fly because they're in jail)".

But their statement was open to misinterpretation, and it's possible that I might be the misinterpreter.

I'm not the person you're replying to but I read their comment as saying the No-Fly List shouldn't exist. As in, if someone is deserving of government restrictions on their movement then they should be in prison, otherwise they should be permitted to move freely.

I do think prisons should not exist, although I'm not sure that's what was being said originally.

Here's an audio interview with Ruth Wilson Gilmore elaborating. https://theintercept.com/2020/06/10/ruth-wilson-gilmore-make...

No, I said /meant the No-Fly list should not exist, at least of US persons. If you are too dangerous to fly, you should be either in jail or mental hospital.

Ohhh I see ok. Thanks for explaining that makes a lot more sense.

Definitely not the obvious interpretation. Parallel structure of “should ... ie should ...” strongly suggests that the poster meant people in jail should not exist

Reply on news.ycombinator.com