There is no hypocrisy. You get flagged because of your reputation as a cop apologist who will excuse any malfeasance by the police, up to and including the murder of an unarmed man. Your comment still showed up and it will still be readable after it gets flagged; that isn’t censorship, no matter how much you want to be a victim.
Charley Kirk was killed because someone didn’t like his opinion. Jimmy Kimmel was taken off the air because someone didn’t like what he said. I tried to humanize police officers like my son, daughter, son-in-law and daughter-in-law and you didn’t like that, so you did your best to make sure those posts weren’t read. I'm sure mine's not the only opinion you've tried to suppress. I see the hypocrisy and intolerance in the fact that this blog allows YOU to flag or hide comments that YOU don't like. Maybe this blog would be more popular if it actually allowed unfettered free speech.
I don't like what Kimmel said, but I will defend to the death his right to say it.
However, I doubt my post will remain visible here for long because some Leftwing zealot with the ability to hide my comment will do just that. Do you see the hypocrisy?
It seems that by the time Democrats wake up they’ll already be in torture chambers inside concentration camps.
The Democrats should continue to pursue defunding the police and opening the borders for everyone. This is stolen land so locks should be banned. What is wrong with you guys?
Democrats vote for rational laws and then fail to enforce them because that would be mean. It is far better to not have the law than not enforce it.
It turns out that when you don’t act like a discriminatory jerk, people aren’t so keen to reduce your funding or cull your numbers. I know, what a mind-blower. Try not to keel over from the shock.
I'm sure there are some cops like you describe, but I think it would only require one for you to paint all cops with that brush.
Funny how the defund the police movement was replaced by "we need more cops" movement. It is much harder to establish law and order than it is to maintain law and order. When the cops took a giant step back from proactive policing the power vacuum was immediately exploited resulting in billions of dollars lost and 10s of thousands of victims.
Why not? That’s literally the principle of deterrence you’ve argued for so ferociously, which you also somehow think cops are above.
If you insist on proving my point, go ahead and charge doctors and nurses who kill about 700 people per day with murder. See how quickly the medical field comes to a screeching halt.
Contrary to what you think, cops still are becoming cops even though there’s the threat of disciplinary punishment for mistakes. In the same way that doctors and nurses still become doctors and nurses despite the threat of malpractice (your consistent belief that nobody ever gets punished for this notwithstanding).
The policies expressed in this forum suggest "decimating police" for their incompetency. These aren't my policies; you need only read the previous posts on this page to find them. I understand they are hyperbolic in nature but I'm the only one questioning them and providing an answer as to what would happen if those policies were implemented. Fact is doctors, nurses and police are told that "if you follow your training, you will be protected" but that protection is impacted by political will. When that political will turns from protecting to targeting then people will cease to do the job--plain and simple.
No one here besides you is bitching about doctors and nurses.
Comparing police officers to doctors and nurses should provide pause and perspective. Especially when doctors and nurses have a poorer record.
No one’s stopping you from begging politicians to put doctors and nurses in prison, or death row.
You don’t, because you don’t have the balls to put your money where your mouth is.
I don't because I'm not a Bolshevik. No one in their right mind would become a doctor or nurse for fear one error would get them executed or land them in prison yet that is this forums approach to improving law enforcement. I'm merely suggesting if you want to try that approach, you should try it on the far more deadly profession of medicine first.
Two different groups with two very missions and clients.
One is dealing with supposedly saving the lives of ill or critically hurt people while working in a for profit environment.
The other rarely deals with ill people and are markedly incompetent at helping or protecting same due to always being in fear for their lives or getting enraged when not obeyed.
Both respond to life and death situations but only one is required (if necessary) to put themselves in danger responding to a life and death situation. Despite often spilt second decisions of police officers whose own life and safety may be threatened, you are far more likely to be killed or injured by a doctor or nurse than by a police officer. Even not listening to a doctor can be more dangerous than not listening to a cop.
Given all that, how many doctors and nurses do we need to kill or imprison to improve the profession?
Police in the US make approximately 20 thousand arrests per day and whether justly or unjustly they end up causing approximately 3 deaths per day. Because of that you guys want to kill one in ten of them which would be about 85000 police officers. Seems a bit extreme to me but you think that would improve law enforcement.
There is another profession that kills approximately 700 people per day through their mistakes. I don’t mean they tried their best and failed, I mean they made a mistake that took the life of someone that would be alive but now is dead. Given the size of both groups (14.7m vs 8.5m), if they were as competent as police officers, they would only kill about 5.5 people per day. So, the question is ---how many doctors and nurses should we kill to improve the medical profession?
Come on Tim. Don’t you ever get tired of ragging on cops? I know it is your retirement plan, but wouldn’t it expand your readership if you also took on a far more incompetent group and bitched about them for a while.
Then go and whine about the medical system.
But you won’t, because you won’t put your money where your mouth is.
You sound as demented as Biden. The point is, throwing doctors and nurses in jail over their mistakes won't make better nurses and doctors, it will only make fewer of them. Same for police officers.
Which is EXACTLY what we’re trying to point out. But I’m not the dip shit making the claim that words can’t have a different derogatory meanings if the also mean something else.
Well then there is no argument. We all believe in dehumanizing metaphors.
Pig is an animal but it is also a metaphor to dehumanize a police officer. It has no racial connotation.
Apple is a fruit but it is also a racist metaphor to dehumanize a Native American similar to the terms Oreo, Karen, banana, etc.
Apple, coconut, banana – racial slurs disguised as fruits – Victoria Times Colonist
https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/charla-huber-apple-coconut-banana-ndash-from-innocent-fruit-to-racial-insult-7094872
Go read your articles and people might take you seriously. But after posting a bunch of links to articles that directly contradicts your very claims….you can’t possibly believe anyone thinks you’re anything but incompetent or a liar.
I answered this comment earlier, but “Stephen the book burner” hid it.
What I wrote was
I will confess that I have googled is [noun] racist to find something that hasn’t been linked to racism. As yet I haven’t found it. Maybe never will so I generally take the best headline and paste the link.
At the time I stated that even the sky was accused of being racist or at least linked to racism. When I googled is the Sky racist it came back with about a thousand hits that centered around Sky news being racist.
This one The Sky is Racist?. The NAACP officially condemned the sky… | by Mark Johnson | Medium
contained
”The NAACP, on the heels of its attack on Bed Bath and Beyond for selling black-colored Jack O’ Lanterns, officially condemned the sky on Tuesday night for dressing in blackface.”
which seemed to be about as ridiculous as most claims linking rocks, dogs, apples, etc. to racism. It turned out to be a satirical article. What I could have used is these non-satirical articles
This Is How Racist Your Air Is – Mother Jones
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/04/air-pollution-racial-disparities/
Even the Air is Racist. Environmental racism is harming Black… | by Jeffrey Kass | ZORA (medium.com)
https://zora.medium.com/even-the-air-is-racist-58dc34af94d4
For apple I could have used these articles
Apple, coconut, banana – racial slurs disguised as fruits - Victoria Times Colonist
https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/charla-huber-apple-coconut-banana-ndash-from-innocent-fruit-to-racial-insult-7094872
Overthinking It: Using Food As A Racial Metaphor : Code Switch : NPR
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/09/12/348008432/overthinking-it-using-food-as-a-racial-metaphor
No, I don’t think apples are racist, but the Woke have now linked not only apples to racism but everything else.
This is what I got when I asked if dinosaurs were racist.
Pachycephalosaurus: Jurassic World’s ‘racist’ dinosaur | Jurassic World | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/film/shortcuts/2015/jun/24/jurassic-world-dinosaur-accused-of-racism
Now even dinosaurs are a micro-aggression.
APLRs would be ideal for BOLO and Amber alerts. Tracking fleeing felons. Provide evidence. Eliminate high speed chases. Find stolen cars and license plates. Reduce the number of patrol officers while still maintaining safety.
I know originally DNA only proved OJ had blood, but how do you feel about it now? Fingerprints?
You didn’t mean to say that? You should see if there’s a second keyboard plugged into your computer. Someone else is typing stuff that makes you look like a lazy, disingenuous boot-licking troll in the comments.
You sound like Stephen. Before we get into an encyclopedic back and forth, why don’t you bottom line it for me.
Do facts matter?
Do procedures matter?
Do intentions matter?
Do screwups matter?
Does it matter who screwed up?
Or
It is the government’s fault—no questions asked.
Don’t let me put words in your mouth but let's get to the condensed view.
You checked after you made the assumption. Also, what you discovered didn’t mean what you think it means.
What did I assume?
No, you don’t understand. Calls between an attorney and client are private by their nature. The protected nature of the call is determined by the participants, not by the method or medium.
Since lawyers are not allowed to contact their clients except through a video call or a visitation, then how did the phone call get recorded? Sounds like someone screwed up or cheated. Which is it?
You’re making claims of fact. I’m saying you need to provide evidence or else your claims can be dismissed promptly and what non-existent respect we have for your opinion can continue its negative vector.
That claim would be?
I can provide you with caselaw. I can provide you with law citations. You can provide me with bullshit.
Ok, lets see it.
I’m not questioning anything. If GTL as an agent of the corrections department provided attorney-client privileged communications to law enforcement, then law enforcement has violated constitutional rights.
I know you are not questioning anything, I am. You must have a GTL account to contact an inmate over the phone and attorneys are only allowed to contact their clients through scheduled video calls or visitation. So how did that phone call get monitored? Did the attorney lie about being an attorney so he could talk to his client on the phone? Did the government eavesdrop on a video call? Should someone be disbarred, fired, arrested, or sued?
You assume they haven’t.
I don’t want to assume anything. Please have one of your clerks track down similar cases against GTL and report back.
You’re wondering while also asserting statements of fact that you’ve admitted you have no basis to claim.
You have me so rattled. What facts have I presented that I have no basis to claim?
And then as a paltry attempt to shore up weak arguments, you’ve cited websites that don’t affect the issue at hand.
Do you mean the websites with instructions on how to contact inmates? Or the part warning everyone that their phone calls will be monitored?
That’s still not true. If the attorney or client messed up somehow, the content of the calls would still be privileged. Once an agent of the government/law enforcement became aware that a recording was of a privileged phone call, they would be required to stop listening and destroy the recording or at least remove their access to it and notify appropriate parties that constitutionally-protected recordings were being made.
And if that moment didn’t occur until the prosecutor provided the defense attorney with the discovery evidence?
You didn’t let the evidence and the judge determine anything when you made assertions of fact without sufficient information.
Am I going to jail? I certainly didn’t mean to assert facts. I thought I was looking for information. Do you have any information? Have you tried many cases like this before?
So you’re saying you don’t know, therefore you drew a conclusion based on insufficient knowledge.
No. I checked for myself, that is how I found out that GTL was responsible for monitoring calls to inmates.
Some calls are still subject to constitutional protections by their very nature.
Those calls were to be made through an unmonitored, scheduled video call involving coordination between the prison and the attorney.
These are the unconstitutional acts being asserted in the case.
Yes, courts are where you assert things.
[citation needed] And by citation, I’m asking for the caselaw or the legislation, not a third party website or corrections department policy notification.
Since I’m not a lawyer and I’m assuming you’re not a lawyer how about we let the courts decide? Even as bias as Tim is, he didn’t issue a verdict, he merely said it “has the potential to be another class-action lawsuit.” Even though the last class action lawsuit involved a data leak and this one (so far) only involves one man.
That page covers how an attorney visits a client or schedules a video visitation. It’s neither a law that those are the only two possibilities nor is the department of corrections able to make up a policy that violates the constitutional rights of the accused.
So you are questioning whether GTL procedures violate the Constitution, not whether they were followed. That is a different case, but you would think that lawyers using GTL 24/7 for years would have complained earlier.
That doesn’t affect the unconstitutionality of the act. Again, you’re wrong regardless of how you argue it must be okay.
I’m not arguing that listening in on an attorney client phone call is ok, I’m wondering how it happened.
If the attorney screwed up, then that is on him.
If Mr. Kidwai screwed up, then that is on him.
If GTL screwed up, then that is on them.
If the detective screwed up, then that is on him or her.
If the prosecutors screwed up, then that is on them.
Whoever screwed up or whatever malfeasance there was determines the solution and the penalties. Not all murders are murder. Let’s let the evidence and the judge determine that.
Since you know so much about ‘procedures’ and ‘training’ and all…or are you arguing from a position of ignorance again?
Apparently if you want a private attorney client conversation, you must either schedule a video conversation or an actual visitation. It is the attorney’s responsibility to know that.
Attorney Visit - Hudson County (hcnj.us)
https://www.hcnj.us/corrections/attorney-visit/
You are not the community!
Defend to the death
I don't like what Kimmel said, but I will defend to the death his right to say it. However, I doubt my post will remain visible here for long because some Leftwing zealot with the ability to hide my comment will do just that. Do you see the hypocrisy?
typo
In my previous post I left off a 0. Should have been 850,000 police officers you wished to kill.
The beatings will continue till morale improves.
Police in the US make approximately 20 thousand arrests per day and whether justly or unjustly they end up causing approximately 3 deaths per day. Because of that you guys want to kill one in ten of them which would be about 85000 police officers. Seems a bit extreme to me but you think that would improve law enforcement. There is another profession that kills approximately 700 people per day through their mistakes. I don’t mean they tried their best and failed, I mean they made a mistake that took the life of someone that would be alive but now is dead. Given the size of both groups (14.7m vs 8.5m), if they were as competent as police officers, they would only kill about 5.5 people per day. So, the question is ---how many doctors and nurses should we kill to improve the medical profession? Come on Tim. Don’t you ever get tired of ragging on cops? I know it is your retirement plan, but wouldn’t it expand your readership if you also took on a far more incompetent group and bitched about them for a while.
Answer to an anonymous chickenshit whinner
Not in elementary schools
I’m against all book bans but let’s not test the limits of the first amendment by using children 11 and younger as the battleground.
Now even dinosaurs are a micro-aggression.
The myth of fingerprints
APLRs would be ideal for BOLO and Amber alerts. Tracking fleeing felons. Provide evidence. Eliminate high speed chases. Find stolen cars and license plates. Reduce the number of patrol officers while still maintaining safety. I know originally DNA only proved OJ had blood, but how do you feel about it now? Fingerprints?
- Do facts matter?
- Do procedures matter?
- Do intentions matter?
- Do screwups matter?
- Does it matter who screwed up?
Or It is the government’s fault—no questions asked. Don’t let me put words in your mouth but let's get to the condensed view.I'll play