66
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago

Sue him.

Spend the money on 300 books.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago

Well he’s going to be facing quite the fine from that library.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, as if they're gonna pay.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Can be taken from his wages, if he has any.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

I had the same thought, but my partner pointed out that he'll probably just start a GoFundMe and a bunch of other jackasses will end up sending him 10x more than what he owes.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago

In the US, can you check out 100 books from a library at the same time? Why?

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

[Not US but] my local library service allows 300 simultaneous book loans, when I asked about why that number was chosen they said it’s so that people are not practically limited in borrowing. Given that typical loan period is 28 days even with 5 renewals you’re still looking at slightly more than 2 books read per day so that seems a reasonable allowance.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

My first thought was car dependency. If it's a 20-minute detour or 45-minute dedicated round trip to stop by the library, you probably don't go that often. I read a lot as a kid, but I only went to the library maybe every other week. I distinctly remember the limit being 99 books (libraries are mostly run by counties here, so there are a lot of different sets of rules). I never ran into it, but I checked out dozens of books a few times.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

My county library was like 8-10, 99-100 is insane...

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, on second thought it might have been a "there are no real rules for this" situation.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It's interesting to note that the man apparently did nothing criminal. This is a civil matter between him and the library, as though the library were a car mechanic or a dentist that he reneged on an agreement with.

I feel like someplace else might have recognized what I think can fairly be called hate speech, destruction of the commons, and terroristic intent (on a very small scale -- destruction of the commons specifically for political effect). Certainly he's not morally superior to someone who throws soup on a painting or glues themselves to the road for climate activism. I think such activists frequently catch pretty grand charges.

this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
66 points (100.0% liked)

Antifascism

710 readers
2 users here now

A community to post acts of antifascism and other left-wing activism. Please message a mod if you would like something posted and we can tag you in the post as well.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS