Yup. Clearly, it's a suggestion that folks vote with their wallets, not a suggestion that the police deliberately withdraw protection.
...and they're succeeding.
"He" is doing so; the rest of the force appears to be rolling their eyes and politely not pointing out his mental illness....
The focus of the article is clearly "ZOMG! More paranoid, crazy cops!" and the fact that his attitude is not shared by the rest of the police force is buried in the article. At best, this article is click bait.
"In any group, there are always a few commenters who will advocate for violence in response to police misconduct and abuse. These are generally not indicative of the group in total"Um... You mean pointing out a single person who is misbehaving, and then trying to paint an entire group as tainted is unfair? Like what you're doing here with officer Berry?
Bashing on parents at the beginning of the post is pretty gratuitous. Nowhere in the actual events at the University do parents take a hand in this farce at all.
What we need is Donald Trump pointing the finger at each of them and saying "you're fired." Starting with police chief and working down to every last officer involved."I was just following orders" stopped being a valid defense about 70 years ago.Then sue each and every one of the bastards for civil rights violations.
...for advertising this application. I'd never heard of it before.
Perpetual "investigation" when you know that you will never have to present an actual case.Sounds like a perfect job for a few associates who create billable hours and worthless paper. A creative law firm wouldn't even need actual associates.
"Method of providing cell phones in a cell phone signal strength chart of multiple cell phones in a communication network."Good lord. Stuff like this is why people get strokes. You hear something stupid, and there's nowhere for the stupid to go.
...when you can't tell if the attempt to ban the book was satire or not.
Microsoft, Google, or even your company's Exchange admin, they all have access to your data.Only their good behavior keeps them from accessing it.If you don't want them to have it, then you have to encrypt it before it gets to them.
By this logic, "slippery when wet" signs are communist. Are you not free to disregard the safety of yourself and others?On another note, "communist" does not mean what he thinks it does.
Can we please put the "distributing small-pox-ladened blankets to shivering women-folk" myth to bed, please?http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1088/did-whites-ever-give-native-americans-blankets- infected-with-smallpox
Ban public schools.
Nice synopsis of the article....
...because someone might turn off the Internet.
I don't necessarily disagree; I'm just saying that it's not an entirely inappropriate response.
Personally, I'm tired of the "ZOMG! Terrorism!" response any time a citizen is concerned about their privacy and freedoms.
If a stranger comes up and asks me if I live locally, I don't answer yes or no, I ask in return, "why do you ask."
When I set up a firewall, I set it up in stealth mode where it doesn't respond at all unless it's traffic I've authorized.
So this response is actually appropriate from the point of view of the NSA.
...but am I paranoid ENOUGH?
Keep calm... and encrypt your transmissions.
More comments from drewdad >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by drewdad.
Submit a story now.