First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Stunning and Brave Teen Who Made Bomb-Styled Clock To Teach Us Not To Unjustly Profile Others Asks For $15 Million For T
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 11/23/15 , edited 11/23/15
Lawyers with a high profile client decide to reach for the sky with demanded compensation amounts and threaten to pursue a civil suit if a settlement isn't reached? Truly, the law profession has never seen such dark days as these, where a lawsuit that's been threatened or filed is considered by some to be baseless and frivolous and the amount of compensation demanded is considered excessive. What's worse, counselors are advocating for their clients' interests and trying to put together a case of some sort for them.

Good Lord, what has the world come to?

We need people to sort these sort of situations out. People to determine the merit of counselors' arguments against the requirements of the law. People with a reputation for good judgment and experience. Hey! I know what we can call them! Judges!
16759 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 11/23/15 , edited 11/23/15

lambofgenesis wrote:


nemoskull wrote:

well all know if the kids was white no one would have cared.


Most racist comment ever. People of Middle Eastern descent are classified as Caucasians.


Caucasian.... do you mean Europeans, middle easterners, or Caucasians from the cacausus mountain's?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasus_Mountains
3349 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Ente Isla
Offline
Posted 11/23/15

maxgale wrote:


Except it kinda is.


Because that's the entire reason why he did it.


Because him, or at the very least his father, is a man without morals.


And the characters of those of a certain political persuasion who enable him are certainly called into question, when their smug superiority is proven to be without merit.


Except it isn't. Because his motivation for doing it wouldn't have mattered AT ALL if the incident never occurred.

How they handled the situation reflects on them -- just as how Ahmed used it to his advantage reflects on him. No one was aware of his intent when they chose their course of action or sought to justify the incident. This sudden new information doesn't change the fact of how it was handled before we had that information.

It's as simple as that really.
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 11/23/15

Insanerino wrote:

A clear violation of rights mixed with ethnic profiling? Check.
Extremely bias and questionable news source with a history of inaccurate reporting? Check.
Attempt at 'counter controversy' by trying to make victim into villain, by saying the clock was actually a bomb, and that the event was also staged?

3 strikes and you're out.
I mean it's like obviously making a ridiculous statement.




Where to begin.


Clear violation of rights? What does the law say?




Texas Penal Code, Section 46.08 - Hoax Bombs



CHAPTER 46. WEAPONS

§ 46.08. HOAX BOMBS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly manufactures, sells, purchases, transports, or possesses a hoax bomb with intent to use the hoax bomb to:
(1) make another believe that the hoax bomb is an explosive or incendiary device; or
(2) cause alarm or reaction of any type by an official of a public safety agency or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.



The kid was asked by his first teacher to put the "clock" away as others might believe it to be a bomb. He refused. He intended to cause alarm and guess what, it obviously worked.







Don't like Fox News?


What about Far Left Yahoo news?


http://news.yahoo.com/ahmed-clock-kid-family-demand-15-million-city-200237924.html



What about Left-leaning BBC?


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34904226







Attempt to avoid admitting your were wrong, by not addressing the facts presented but who presented it?




What were you saying about three strikes?
7553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Online
Posted 11/23/15

maxgale wrote:






So?


So WHAT if I called you a xenophobic racist?!


SO WHAT if I'm someone who enables this kid and those far worse than him to get away with their misdeeds because I am unwilling to change my views based on reality?!


What, you're not trying to hold me accountable, are you?! That seems to me to be VERY PROBLEMATIC.




Sorry, but I simply can't bring myself to care. This has no greater significance than any of the other frivolous lawsuits filed daily here.
19120 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/23/15
My comments here:

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-912753/-tourney-chatroom-directory-?pg=2082#52287059

Amusing to see people are challenging Max about legal matters.
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 11/23/15

BlueOni wrote:

Lawyers with a high profile client decide to reach for the sky with demanded compensation amounts and threaten to pursue a civil suit if a settlement isn't reached? Truly, the law profession has never seen such dark days as these, where a lawsuit that's been threatened or filed is considered by some to be baseless and frivolous and the amount of compensation demanded is considered excessive. What's worse, counselors are advocating for their clients' interests and trying to put together a case of some sort for them.

Good Lord, what has the world come to?

We need people to sort these sort of situations out. People to determine the merit of counselors' arguments against the requirements of the law. People with a reputation for good judgment and experience. Hey! I know what we can call them! Judges!




I welcome you joining the ranks of those making note of this frivolous suit, so as to help make the public aware of the folly and greed which belies the ideology of those who would shout down those standing for the rule of Law.



GrandmasterCoolio wrote:


maxgale wrote:


Except it kinda is.


Because that's the entire reason why he did it.


Because him, or at the very least his father, is a man without morals.


And the characters of those of a certain political persuasion who enable him are certainly called into question, when their smug superiority is proven to be without merit.


Except it isn't. Because his motivation for doing it wouldn't have mattered AT ALL if the incident never occurred.

How they handled the situation reflects on them -- just as how Ahmed used it to his advantage reflects on him. No one was aware of his intent when they chose their course of action or sought to justify the incident. This sudden new information doesn't change the fact of how it was handled before we had that information.

It's as simple as that really.






The motivation is clearly to get fame and fortune.



And it was handled according to the law.


Though I do agree, overall, that it is important in how people handle this situation.


And it is quite telling how those of a certain political persuasion are handling being proven wrong.

4972 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20
Offline
Posted 11/23/15 , edited 11/23/15

haikinka wrote:

I made a bomb and took it to school, but everyone was so impressed at how good my "clock" was I decided not to kill them all.


When you try doing the same and get thrown in prison
32290 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / St.Louis - USA
Offline
Posted 11/23/15
He should have cosplayed as Bomberman.

27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 11/23/15

bobland wrote:

My comments here:

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-912753/-tourney-chatroom-directory-?pg=2082#52287059

Amusing to see people are challenging Max about legal matters.








I consider it an opportunity to help educate them about misconceptions they may have surrounding the story, such as the one who thought the kids' rights were being infringed upon, when in reality it was the kid breaking the law.
19120 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/23/15

CKD-Anime wrote:

He should have cosplayed as Bomberman.



One of the earlier anime I watched as a kid. Bomberman Jetters is a pretty good series to watch.
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 11/23/15 , edited 11/23/15

maxgale wrote:

I welcome you joining the ranks of those making note of this frivolous suit, so as to help make the public aware of the folly and greed which belies the ideology of those who would shout down those standing for the rule of Law.


That's not quite what I meant, but it's not totally divorced from it either. What I was getting at is that those who consider the lawsuit frivolous and/or the compensation demanded excessive will (if the suit is filed, the BBC suggested as of three hours ago it hadn't been yet) have their opportunity to see their case made when the city and school district defend themselves. Likewise, those who consider the lawsuit appropriate (and possibly also the amount) will have their opportunity to see their case made by the prosecution. This is how the process works, so I don't really see any cause for outrage simply because a suit was threatened and compensation was demanded. It's not like the city and school district have to settle, and it's not like they won't be allowed to defend themselves. I'm not even sure the courts actually have to take up the case even if it is filed.

Edit: Also, it's far more likely about making a fortune than promoting an ideology. Lawyers are out to make money, and winning high profile cases that claim large compensations tremendously impacts their reputations. You know this.
3349 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Ente Isla
Offline
Posted 11/23/15 , edited 11/23/15

maxgale wrote:

The motivation is clearly to get fame and fortune. :lol:


Didn't say it wasn't. You could take my comments as an attempt at justifying the lawsuit, I suppose, but they weren't intended to do that. All that was meant by them was that how he exploited it is irrelevant to the initial issue regarding the hoax bomb.


And it was handled according to the law.


Though I do agree, overall, that it is important in how people handle this situation.


And it is quite telling how those of a certain political persuasion are handling being proven wrong.




In Tuesday’s Daily, columnist Ian Knight argued that the arrest and suspension of 14-year-old Ahmed Mohamed was not a case of Islamophobia, but instead an example of “zero-tolerance” policy at work. These policies, he claims, “err on the side of caution” when it comes to protecting students — a prima facie cause.

While this argument is novel, it requires that zero-tolerance policies be implemented uniformly (and presumably as strictly as their name implies). To support this premise, the author sourced a number of stories that highlight the intense implementation of zero-tolerance policies. Two examples dealt with elementary school students, one of whom shaped a Pop-Tart like a gun. In the third example, the student, 13-year-old Khalid Caraballo, was suspended for a year without stepping foot on school property. However, proof by induction requires that no counterexamples can be demonstrated. If the claim is that zero tolerance policies are always enforced, it’s a patently false one. I could trot out a list of examples of students, like Peter Mattis, or Logan Weimer, or Indy Brumbraugh, who also made homemade clocks, but were not suspended or arrested. I could tell you of the student who mixed diesel and fertilizer in a test tube to make an actual bomb at a science fair who was not suspended (though his teacher was).

Though Mr. Knight’s argument of actual zero-tolerance falls apart in light of these counterexamples, you, the reader, should find neither set of stories compelling. After all, they are just anecdotes. The question at hand isn’t whether a zero-tolerance policy was enforced successfully — it was — it’s whether it was enforced selectively — empirically, it is.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/10/02/me-kk-understanding-the-nature-of-prejudice-the-truth-of-islamophobia-and-ahmed-mohamed/

EDIT: Also, can we take a moment to admire how this law gives the perpetrators exactly what they want? The law and its execution are what gave Ahmed the chance to exploit in the first place. People want attention, so they're granted exactly what they want under this law. And then? Then, if they can, they can use it to their own gain.

This whole incident, disregarding whether any racial profiling was going on, shows a clear problem in how hoax bombs are addressed and handled under Texan law.
17380 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 11/23/15
I don't know if there's a legal equivalent to a proof by induction, but mathematical induction certainly isn't being used there.
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 11/23/15

BlueOni wrote:


maxgale wrote:

I welcome you joining the ranks of those making note of this frivolous suit, so as to help make the public aware of the folly and greed which belies the ideology of those who would shout down those standing for the rule of Law.


That's not quite what I meant, but it's not totally divorced from it either. What I was getting at is that those who consider the lawsuit frivolous and/or the compensation demanded excessive will (if the suit is filed, the BBC suggested as of three hours ago it hadn't been yet) have their opportunity to see their case made when the city and school district defend themselves. Likewise, those who consider the lawsuit appropriate (and possibly also the amount) will have their opportunity to see their case made by the prosecution. This is how the process works, so I don't really see any cause for outrage simply because a suit was threatened and compensation was demanded. It's not like the city and school district have to settle, and it's not like they won't be allowed to defend themselves. I'm not even sure the courts actually have to take up the case even if it is filed.

Edit: Also, it's far more likely about making a fortune than promoting an ideology. Lawyers are out to make money, and winning high profile cases that claim large compensations tremendously impacts their reputations. You know this.




The outrage is less so much over the court of law but rather about the court of public opinion. Even now, by the responses here, those who were guilty of libel are too cowardly or sure of their righteousness that they cannot admit they were wrong about the facts and wrong about those who were right.


And ouch. Low blow there.


Was referring to those whose political ideology demands that they shout down those advocating common sense and the rule of law if that intrudes upon the "safe space" they desire to turn society into.




GrandmasterCoolio wrote:


maxgale wrote:

The motivation is clearly to get fame and fortune. :lol:


Didn't say it wasn't. You could take my comments as an attempt at justifying the lawsuit, I suppose, but they weren't intended to do that. All that was meant by them was that how he exploited it is irrelevant to the initial issue regarding the hoax bomb.


And it was handled according to the law.


Though I do agree, overall, that it is important in how people handle this situation.


And it is quite telling how those of a certain political persuasion are handling being proven wrong.




In Tuesday’s Daily, columnist Ian Knight argued that the arrest and suspension of 14-year-old Ahmed Mohamed was not a case of Islamophobia, but instead an example of “zero-tolerance” policy at work. These policies, he claims, “err on the side of caution” when it comes to protecting students — a prima facie cause.

While this argument is novel, it requires that zero-tolerance policies be implemented uniformly (and presumably as strictly as their name implies). To support this premise, the author sourced a number of stories that highlight the intense implementation of zero-tolerance policies. Two examples dealt with elementary school students, one of whom shaped a Pop-Tart like a gun. In the third example, the student, 13-year-old Khalid Caraballo, was suspended for a year without stepping foot on school property. However, proof by induction requires that no counterexamples can be demonstrated. If the claim is that zero tolerance policies are always enforced, it’s a patently false one. I could trot out a list of examples of students, like Peter Mattis, or Logan Weimer, or Indy Brumbraugh, who also made homemade clocks, but were not suspended or arrested. I could tell you of the student who mixed diesel and fertilizer in a test tube to make an actual bomb at a science fair who was not suspended (though his teacher was).

Though Mr. Knight’s argument of actual zero-tolerance falls apart in light of these counterexamples, you, the reader, should find neither set of stories compelling. After all, they are just anecdotes. The question at hand isn’t whether a zero-tolerance policy was enforced successfully — it was — it’s whether it was enforced selectively — empirically, it is.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/10/02/me-kk-understanding-the-nature-of-prejudice-the-truth-of-islamophobia-and-ahmed-mohamed/





False equivalencies ahoy!


Pop-tart gun kid did not intend to make anyone believe he had an actual gun and no one could reasonably believe it to be one.


Same with the other kids.


Author of that article is taking a real problem (zero tolerance policies) and trying to use it to shield the "Clock Kid" with it, despite the relevant facts being entirely different.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.