|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway?
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that is the reason. And to prepare their families for the public outrage that will happen.
|
On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway?
When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison).
|
The horrific scale of Hurricane Irma’s trail of devastation across Florida has becoming evident as the remnants of the most powerful storm in Atlantic history limped north into Georgia, turned towards Alabama, and was downgraded to a tropical depression.
Daylight on Monday exposed the extent of the damage in the hardest-hit areas of the Florida Keys and the south-west coast, whipped by the worst of Irma’s 130mph winds and deadly seawater surge during the storm’s double landfall.
10 deaths were reported across the US, with six fatalities in Florida, three in Georgia and one in South Carolina as a result of the storm. In Haiti, the country’s civil protection agency reported its first death, bringing the Caribbean death toll to 37.
Florida governor Rick Scott reported a scene of devastation in the Keys, the low-lying island chain to the south of the mainland, after an aerial tour at lunchtime.
“The water is not working, the sewer is not working, and there’s no electricity, so it’s very tough,” he told reporters. He said he had seen boats carried into homes, mobile home parks destroyed and major damage to even the sturdiest buildings.
“My heart goes out to the people on the Keys. I mean, it’s devastation. I just hope everybody survived. It’s horrible, what we saw.”
Scott said it could be weeks or months before parts of the Keys are habitable again. “We’ve got to get our first responders to the Keys, we’ve got to get the water going again, we’ve got to get the power going again. It’s going to take a lot of time. Especially for the Keys, it’s going to be a long road,” he said.
Earlier, officials in Monroe County warned of a potential “humanitarian crisis” in the Keys with military crews on standby with body bags for possible fatalities among those who failed to heed a mandatory evacuation order.
The Key West city commisioner, Sam Kaufman, issued a report on Monday night that food, water and fuel were at “critically low” levels and 200 power poles had been downed.
Communications across the Keys were cut off for much of Monday, meaning the extent of the damage will become clearer from 7am Tuesday, when residents will be allowed back into Monroe County in the upper Keys.
In Jacksonville, Florida, there was historic flooding on Monday with rescue crews racing to reach homeowners stranded in neighbourhoods submerged by thigh-high water.
Charleston, South Carolina, was also swamped by storm surge. Police reported dozens of roads were impassable and the Post and Courier newspaper showed photographs of residents in boats paddling down roads in kayaks.
Elsewhere in Florida, other severe flooding occurred in Orlando, and Everglades City, a small crab fishing town of about 2,000 people that was completely awash when the storm surge occurred on Sunday. On Monday, water marks up to about 5ft were visible on the walls of houses. City Hall, remarkably grand for a tiny community, was an island, encircled by a lapping pool.
In Marco Island on the west coast, where Irma made its second Florida landfall on Sunday, and in Naples to the north, authorities were assessing the impact of Irma’s storm surge, although Scott said it appeared the damage was not so significant there.
The hurricane’s reach stretched across Florida. More than 7 million people were without power, 2 million of them in communities around the cities of Miami, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. Reports of property damage and beach erosion were widespread and pictures emerge of yachts smashed to pieces in wrecked marinas.
More than 6 million people, evacuated from their homes as Irma bore down on the state on Saturday as a deadly category 5 monster, anxiously awaited news about when they could return.
Source
|
On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison).
Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevant details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached.
EDIT: I'm on a phone so took a little time to get the wiki-link, but here it is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice
There were quite a few issues with the handling of the case, but to act like the officer should've gone to jail without providing any context is dishonest.
|
On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevabt details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached.
I agree that there's a difference between perpetrator and victims but fail to see the relevance of the details you bring up.
|
On September 12 2017 20:28 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevabt details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached. I agree that there's a difference between perpetrator and victims but fail to see the relevance of the details you bring up.
No relevance towards the issue of releasing the name. Extremely relevant towards determining whether or not the cop should have gone to jail (as GH implied).
|
On September 12 2017 20:30 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 20:28 Nebuchad wrote:On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevabt details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached. I agree that there's a difference between perpetrator and victims but fail to see the relevance of the details you bring up. No relevance towards the issue of releasing the name. Extremely relevant towards determining whether or not the cop should have gone to jail (as GH implied).
I understood that's what you were saying and I still fail to see the relevance. The toy gun thing isn't relevant when Ohio is open carry and he doesn't really have time to act threatening when he's dead within two seconds of you getting out of your police car. That was one of the more clear cut ones.
|
|
|
On September 12 2017 20:34 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 20:30 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2017 20:28 Nebuchad wrote:On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevabt details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached. I agree that there's a difference between perpetrator and victims but fail to see the relevance of the details you bring up. No relevance towards the issue of releasing the name. Extremely relevant towards determining whether or not the cop should have gone to jail (as GH implied). I understood that's what you were saying and I still fail to see the relevance. The toy gun thing isn't relevant when Ohio is open carry and he doesn't really have time to act threatening when he's dead within two seconds of you getting out of your police car. That was one of the more clear cut ones.
I'm not going to have this entire discussion again. I disagree with you (as did the grand jury).
|
Woah there, context please.
|
On September 12 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +I think a better rejoinder might have been that I don't care about LGBT rights because I didn't participate in that discussion. More accurate would be that I completely missed that discussion. I get up some mornings and discover that there's ten new pages on this thread and don't have the time to catch up with the thread. You're probably right about there being nothing left to discuss. Should i quote you or do you remember what you said after people didn't immediately jump on this, mainly because they were discussing something else? Show nested quote +How about "What do you think could be changed in American society such that teens don't think it's acceptable to hurt other people for entertainment?" Teach them consequences. It literally is that easy. I learned the concept of consequences early, and i've never forgotten. I also have never gone to jail, or did anything majorly criminal or violent (yeah, i used public transports without ticket, that kinda stuff). I know many people here will disagree, but a good justified beating does help. If you associate doing "shit" with "having pain", that's a good thing. If you have no grasp of the concept of consequences, well. I guess you hang people for fun.
Haven't studies shown that beating etc. does more harm than good?
And don't justice systems that focus less on punishment (so beating) but more on reintegration etc. have a way lower reoffender rate?
|
On September 12 2017 20:38 Arvendilin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:I think a better rejoinder might have been that I don't care about LGBT rights because I didn't participate in that discussion. More accurate would be that I completely missed that discussion. I get up some mornings and discover that there's ten new pages on this thread and don't have the time to catch up with the thread. You're probably right about there being nothing left to discuss. Should i quote you or do you remember what you said after people didn't immediately jump on this, mainly because they were discussing something else? How about "What do you think could be changed in American society such that teens don't think it's acceptable to hurt other people for entertainment?" Teach them consequences. It literally is that easy. I learned the concept of consequences early, and i've never forgotten. I also have never gone to jail, or did anything majorly criminal or violent (yeah, i used public transports without ticket, that kinda stuff). I know many people here will disagree, but a good justified beating does help. If you associate doing "shit" with "having pain", that's a good thing. If you have no grasp of the concept of consequences, well. I guess you hang people for fun. Haven't studies shown that beating etc. does more harm than good? And don't justice systems that focus less on punishment (so beating) but more on reintegration etc. have a way lower reoffender rate?
Yes and yes.
|
On September 12 2017 20:38 Arvendilin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 14:01 m4ini wrote:I think a better rejoinder might have been that I don't care about LGBT rights because I didn't participate in that discussion. More accurate would be that I completely missed that discussion. I get up some mornings and discover that there's ten new pages on this thread and don't have the time to catch up with the thread. You're probably right about there being nothing left to discuss. Should i quote you or do you remember what you said after people didn't immediately jump on this, mainly because they were discussing something else? How about "What do you think could be changed in American society such that teens don't think it's acceptable to hurt other people for entertainment?" Teach them consequences. It literally is that easy. I learned the concept of consequences early, and i've never forgotten. I also have never gone to jail, or did anything majorly criminal or violent (yeah, i used public transports without ticket, that kinda stuff). I know many people here will disagree, but a good justified beating does help. If you associate doing "shit" with "having pain", that's a good thing. If you have no grasp of the concept of consequences, well. I guess you hang people for fun. Haven't studies shown that beating etc. does more harm than good? And don't justice systems that focus less on punishment (so beating) but more on reintegration etc. have a way lower reoffender rate?
Which is not applicable to the US' system becuase lower return to criminal activities would actually be a shot in the own foot of the for profit prisons. (admittedly a more sarcastic than factual spin on reality, only 28% are acutally incarcerated in private prisons as of 2015 according to pewresearch)
|
On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevant details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached. EDIT: I'm on a phone so took a little time to get the wiki-link, but here it is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_RiceThere were quite a few issues with the handling of the case, but to act like the officer should've gone to jail without providing any context is dishonest.
Fair enough, though at the time police maintained the position that he was the perpetrator, not the victim.
Probably should have just went with Teen charged in death of child; police identify teen and victim
I can assure you the outrage is real+ Show Spoiler + “To be a Negro in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a rage almost all the time.”
I think people are familiar with the story, but some may not remember a 12 y.o. was shot to death and NO ONE committed a crime. But I think his (realistic) BB gun is important too, probably more important context than police charging in like complete idiots and gunning him down immediately and then lying about it.
|
|
|
The officer who killed Rice also lied on his Cleveland Police app and omitted that he was previously deemed unfit to serve by a nearby suburbs force.
|
On September 12 2017 20:37 Gahlo wrote:Woah there, context please.
Ted Cruz liked a tweet from a porn account on twitter. Hardcore porn video so not going to link it.
|
On September 12 2017 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevant details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached. EDIT: I'm on a phone so took a little time to get the wiki-link, but here it is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_RiceThere were quite a few issues with the handling of the case, but to act like the officer should've gone to jail without providing any context is dishonest. Fair enough, though at the time police maintained the position that he was the perpetrator, not the victim. Probably should have just went with Teen charged in death of child; police identify teen and victimI can assure you the outrage is real + Show Spoiler + “To be a Negro in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a rage almost all the time.”
I think people are familiar with the story, but some may not remember a 12 y.o. was shot to death and NO ONE committed a crime. But I think his (realistic) BB gun is important too, probably more important context than police charging in like complete idiots and gunning him down immediately and then lying about it.
I like the smear attempt. If you ever wonder why some of us struggle with taking you in any way serious this would be a fine example of why.
You posted it like the case was black/white. That the cop should've been in jail no questions asked. I provided context for why the case was not black/white and I provided a link to the wiki page which succinctly sums up all the details (including the cops acting like idiots) with a qualifier that there were plenty of things that were mishandled. Now you try and portray it as if I'm neglecting context. Be honest or fuck off. I have zero patience with you.
|
acting like the grand jury decision is the end all be all of the case( mbecause cops never get off unfairly) and being openly hostile also doesn't come across as completely honest on your behalf.
|
On September 12 2017 21:17 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2017 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 20:23 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2017 20:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 12 2017 19:24 Gahlo wrote:On September 12 2017 19:02 Simberto wrote:On September 12 2017 15:27 Falling wrote:
You are probably right. There is a bunch of research on this, too. Basically the consensus is that the style of raising your children that produces the best results (Less criminal, better at school, more successful in live, generally more happy) is the authoritative style. (This is not the same as authoritarian!). The general idea is "firm, but loving". There are clear rules and consequences to violating those rules, but those consequences are always dealt out in a loving manner. The parents have high expectations of their child, but they are fair. Consistency is important. Punishments are never handed out in anger, but always understood to be a fair consequence of the childs behavior. And obviously no physical punishments. Regarding the topic of the lynching guys, i agree that there is a large difference in how black teens are portrayed when compared to white teens, and that is a problem. However, I also don't believe in mob justice. Releasing the names of underage criminals is simply not something that should be done, ever. There obviously need to be consequences for this kind of behavior, but those should be done by the justice system, not by a mob of random people. Of course, that would require a fair justice system, which the US doesn't really seem to have. Not to defend these guys, because that shit is clearly fucked, but isn't it a default stance of the media to not release names of people under 18 anyway? When they want to. 12 y.o. Tamir Rice was shot to death by police and the Medical examiner/media identified him (before the cop who shot him, and never went to prison). Tamir was the fatality, not the perpetrator. Important difference. Further, if you want to bring up old cases again to act outraged about, please have the decency to provide relevant details of the cases. Tamir had an airsoft gun which lacked the orange tip and was thus virtually indistinguishable from a real weapon at a distance which he reached for when he was approached. EDIT: I'm on a phone so took a little time to get the wiki-link, but here it is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_RiceThere were quite a few issues with the handling of the case, but to act like the officer should've gone to jail without providing any context is dishonest. Fair enough, though at the time police maintained the position that he was the perpetrator, not the victim. Probably should have just went with Teen charged in death of child; police identify teen and victimI can assure you the outrage is real + Show Spoiler + “To be a Negro in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a rage almost all the time.”
I think people are familiar with the story, but some may not remember a 12 y.o. was shot to death and NO ONE committed a crime. But I think his (realistic) BB gun is important too, probably more important context than police charging in like complete idiots and gunning him down immediately and then lying about it. I like the smear attempt. If you ever wonder why some of us struggle with taking you in any way serious this would be a fine example of why. You posted it like the case was black/white. That the cop should've been in jail no questions asked. I provided context for why the case was not black/white and I provided a link to the wiki page which succinctly sums up all the details (including the cops acting like idiots) with a qualifier that there were plenty of things that were mishandled. Now you try and portray it as if I'm neglecting context. Be honest or fuck off. I have zero patience with you.
For some of us it still is pretty black and white, the officers acted (what should be but isn't considered in a legal sense for various reasons) negligently to a criminal degree. But I know, having basic tactical comprehension when dealing with a reportedly armed suspect isn't something we should be able expect police to be capable of.
On September 12 2017 21:27 brian wrote:
acting like the grand jury decision is the end all be all of the case( mbecause cops never get off unfairly) and being openly hostile also doesn't come across as completely honest on your behalf.
It's really all about not putting the wiki link lol.
ghostcom was really trying to provide context like this, and there's nothing dishonest about appealing to the grand jury finding so long as you link the info that says on page 5 that there basically wasn't even going to be a grand jury and this:
Three expert witnesses who testified before the grand jury criticized the prosecutors' behavior during the grand jury. Roger Clark, a retired LASD officer with expertise in police shootings, said that prosecutors at the hearing treated him with hostility and "disdain" for concluding that Loehmann and Garmback had acted recklessly; he also described the prosecutors' as using theatrics, like none he'd ever seen in previous grand jury proceedings, which he believed were intended to lead the grand jurors to the conclusion that the prosecutors wanted them to reach. Jeffrey Noble, another retired police officer and expert in use-of-force cases (who had himself used deadly force on the job), said he was attacked by prosecutors for saying that the officers never should have escalated the situation by rushing Rice, adding, "I’ve definitely never seen two prosecutors play defense attorney so well."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
