Thank you for your understated correction request. But waste too much time here. There's a whole internet crying out for comments from people whose lips move when they type.
Well, the language appears in both places. And has yet to be taken down (from either URL sharing the Terms of Use language) despite ADT's promises.
https://www.adt.com/about-adt/legal/terms-of-use
Short answer is: Yes, we do.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110725/17451715249/how-should-law-enforcement-handle-being-filmed-officer-lyons-provides-perfect-example.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131212/15041325552/canadian-cop-puts-impromptu-clinic-how-to-deal-with-critics-cameras.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161024/08421935871/leaked-recording-austin-police-chief-tears-into-commanders-fatal-shootings-use-excessive-force.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150526/10575331115/body-cam-footage-clears-police-officer-bogus-sexual-assault-allegations.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151123/09292832888/body-cameras-save-another-law-enforcement-officer-bogus-sexual-misconduct-complaint.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170528/11063337468/this-machine-kills-accountability-ongoing-persecution-good-cops.shtml
The longer answer is this:
Police misconduct in the US is epidemic. While the number of officers making headlines for misdeeds is indeed a small percentage of the overall whole, the fact is there is little accountability in most law enforcement agencies.
It's very rare we see law enforcement officers engaged in exemplary behavior. Asking why we don't publish celebrations of competence and basic human decency is a question that answers itself. We expect law enforcement officers to hold themselves to a higher standard. Far too often, it appears they're uninterested in doing so. There's really no reason to lower standards on our end -- especially when our collective signature is on their paychecks -- just to appear more "fair" in our coverage.
I have no objection to publishing more positive stories about law enforcement. The problem is much that's suggested would reduce us to patting officers on the back for not being complete assholes when dealing with their fellow humans.
There are amazing men and women out there in the world of law enforcement. Unfortunately, they're a minority. And, for the most part, they're an extremely un-vocal minority. Accountability begins at the top, but that's no excuse for officers refusing to hold each other accountable when management fails to do so.
This isn't meant as a criticism of you or your concern. I would prefer a nation where stories like these -- ones that often include long histories of unaddressed misconduct -- weren't daily occurrences.
As for your suggestion: do you have some recent instances that come to mind re: police doing amazing things? I am sincere when I say I'd love to see them.
The reference is in there. Check out the links in the first few sentences.
Dammit. Well... happy belated 4/20 day, everyone.
It's closed loop, which means just pre-paid cards. For now. It won't take much to expand it to include others.
Ah. I see. The officer's canister was filled with reputation management hyperbole -- not pepper spray as was originally thought. Thanks for clearing this up, UC Davis!
Well, we do know this: Verizon is a known carrier.
I agree it's a user problem. But I think companies who claim to care about security should at least push users towards changing the default login before the device can be put to use, if not prevent its operation until the default has been changed.
I understand why they might not want to implement this, as future breaches would be almost solely their responsibility, rather than the end user's.
Well, that only makes sense. Otherwise, F5 would be known as the "Reset Statute of Limitations" key.
Just wanted to point out that if you watch the first video without subtitles, you're really missing out.
He could file in forma pauperis, claiming he's too poor to cover the filing fees. But that would conflict with the claims he made in his phone calls, where on top of running a successful [lol] reputation management company, he has several websites getting "millions" of hits every day.
Zarrelli's actual words were "riddled with high-end lawyers," which seems to suggest it's not actually a positive thing.
wat
I love commenters like this that think police should be allowed to break laws in order to enforce the law, not to mention can't be bothered to read the article for context before dropping off their stupid comments.
I'm about 100% sure that wasn't the link I meant to use. I had a LOT of tabs open.
It appears we need a new option: "make worst word[s]."
Re: The quality of the reporting on this one
I'm not going to argue about the "frightening" qualities of the word "fuck." Whatever. Some people are offended, some aren't, and a great majority of offended people don't run to the nearest authority figure to report it being said to them.
That being said, there's nothing dishonest about this framing. If the rep's office hadn't called the school, the student would not have been suspended for "disrespectful language." Without this catalyst, the suspension simply does not happen. So, it did cause the suspension, even if it maintained some weird form of plausible deniability because the staffer didn't instruct the school to beat the student up as well.
The foul mouth cannot be separated from the stating of opinion. "Congress should get off their fucking asses" is the opinion stated, with swear words contained. He did not tell the staffer to go fuck himself or anything that might fit your weird "foul mouth in an inappropriate setting." He made the call from his own phone outside of the school, so there's nothing "inappropriate" about the setting in which he used the offending phrase.