I’m curious to know why you think a person has to be a lunatic to consider the professor’s behavior criminal and inexcusable.
I don’t think it was the most heinous act ever committed by a human being. No real, lasting harm was done to the girl with the sign, and i’m sure she’ll get over it pretty quickly. Nor was something of any great value stolen. The sign itself is probably worth a few bucks in material, and maybe a bit more in labor. No big deal, in terms of economic loss.
But, as the police report says, she broke the law. Do i think she deserves to get thrown in jail? No, not really. But how would you feel if protestors in the fight for gay marriage, or in support of abortion rights, had their signs ripped out of their hands by angry, yelling, belligerent homophobes or pro-lifers? I know i’d be pretty pissed about it.
In the context of the situation, the professor’s actions were, IMO, completely inappropriate. All she had to do, in order not to be further upset or insulted by the image of aborted fetuses, was keep walking. That’s it. Instead, she chose a physical confrontation with someone who was merely exercising her freedom of expression. The fact that her expression was retarded and ridiculous doesn’t change the fact that she is entitled to her beliefs about abortion, and is entitled to express those beliefs using words and pictures.
*Moi? * More projection by a psycho. Take another look at the Stupid Gun News thread and see who has the most verbiage in there, all of it desperate psychotic handwaving at that.
You’re missing the part where I asked you what would have happened if they did have guns, this being a real situation. The fact that you can’t make yourself face that question directly and honestly, or even at all, says what it needs to about you - none of it indicating even mental health, much less a sense of adult responsibility.
I’d go so far as to say the professor, in addition to interfering with someone’s civil rights, is also guilty of bullying behavior given the relatively tender age of her victim. She’s certainly not the kind of woman I’d want teaching my young adults.
As far as maligning the young girl, remember that at sixteen you can be very passionate about things that you later change your mind about. At least she is doing something that she perceives to be constructive.
Is there a neologism yet for that moment when a particular poster finally stands out from the herd in your mind? This thread is pretty much that moment where Magellan stops being just some voice in the crowd and becomes a voice I notice not to notice.
That said, the professor in question, accepted the story at face value, is a dingus.
Because I couldn’t figure out what the phrasing you responded to was supposed to mean and so I concluded a high possibility it was an error, while the intended meaning of your sentence was clear and the use seemed intentional. So is it acceptable English usage? I’m just trying to learn here.
When this has come up before, the line between trolling and just venting or flaming was stated to be whether the person appears to believe what they are saying. By a strict reading of that rule, nearly any antagonistic post in this forum could be considered trolling. This forum is full of posts that are clearly made with the intent of making the other person angry. But they are also made with the intent of giving the poster’s actual opinion. Hence they are not “solely to get a rise out of people.”
The same statement said that the standard was looser outside the Pit.
I’ve never heard it used that way, but it does fit this definition I found for the verb conflict, particularly definition two. I’ve only heard it used passively, meaning “being in conflict with,” or as an actual adjective that means “in conflict with each other or something else.” And the conflict referred to is usually definition 5 or 7 of the noun “conflict” in the previous definition, not an actual confrontation.
For me, I think her behavior is criminal. I think it’s inexcusable. I think Damuri’s call for putting her in prison for three years makes him a lunatic.
And given that the DA isn’t charging her with robbery, I think I’m likelier to have the right of the law than Damuri does.
So tell me why you it takes a lunatic to want to charge someone with robbery when they commit robbery?
You think this falls into some hole that the drafters of the law didn’t anticipate? The standard definition of robbery is centuries old, it was never predicated on value. All it required was the use of force (or threat of force) to steal something from another person. It could be a tic tac and it would still meet all the elements of the centuries old definition of robbery. Why, after all these centuries, do you think they didn’t add a value requirement and mostly focused on the use of force? It doesn’t have to be “put them in the hospital” force, it can merely be the threat of force.
What is so special about this case (other than the pregnancy, which I think created special circumstances) that makes you think we should just let her go with a tap on the wrist?
Aside from the pregnancy, why don’t you think that this woman deserves to get thrown in jail despite committing robbery? I’m just trying to understand this resistance everyone seems to have to punishing this woman. What makes it OK to let her go and to send a guy that does the exact same thing to a 16 year old girl (but with her purse or cell phone) to jail for at least two years (or at least charging them with the robbery)? The only difference I can see is the status of the person committing the crime and the article that was stolen.
Well, if you insist on bringing gun issues into other threads where you disagree with me… if they had guns then I don’t think much if anything would have been different. I don’t see anything in the video that indicates that you can even draw a gun, never mind use one.
Its pretty clear in almost every gun thread you are involved in that you are a mental lightweight and but for the fact that your politics just happen to put you on the right side of most issues, you would never be right about anything except by coincidence. You don’t have an inquisitive mind, nor are you intellectually honest. I know that you are under the impression that gun owners solve all their problems with guns but that’s just not what happens and by this point in the ongoing debate, you should know that. I’m sorry that there are some issues where standard liberal positions are wrong, but hey noone’s perfect.
Just stick with issues like civil rights and economic populism and you should safely be correct most of the time but if you veer into gun policy debates of energy policy debates, you are just going keep looking stupid if you have a bumper sticker’s understanding of the issues.
You’re the one who escalated the thing. But why stop at a wallet or a cell phone? Let’s make it grand piano full of gold bricks or running off with Mount Rushmore.
Recreational outrage is so damned limp when it’s a homemade sign.
Well, the lunatic in question seems to think that this specific case comprised an action deserving of five years in prison, when the DA of the county where the incident occurred, and who presumably has some notion of what happened, apparently does not. I’m trying to imagine another case in the US where a person who stole a sign referencing a political issue went to jail for five years. I think a lot of people would classify such an action as the act of a despotic government.
From now on, we’re going to lobby for multi-year sentences for theft of political signs, is that it?
Well, when you see the logical results of your parties rhetoric and don’tike the result, maybe you ought to think about it a bit. This goes for conservatives as well as liberals. Both sides regularly paint the opposition as evil and deserving of no respect.
The result of this is to elevate policy disagreements into character assassination and makes rational discussion of issues all but impossible. People run around insulting people instead of trying to understand each other and find common ground.
The proper and logical response would be to call out those on your side when they act like assholes. They don’t help your cause.
But instead of doing that, people like Elvisl1ves and the women who stole the sign get a pass for their ignorance and stupidity because, even though they are raging idiots, they believe the ‘right’ thing.
And the disagreements turn into hate. And people like me (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) end up deciding that both sides suck.
Step up, call the assholes on your side assholes. Say "You know what? I disagree with you on this issur. However that person behaved in a totally inappropriate manner.'. Then pile on the person behaving like an asshole and let them know that their behaviour isn’t helping and won’t be tolerated.
Of course, the likelyhood of that happening is quite low, especially on this board. People seem to be more interested in demonizing the other side while feeling morally superior rather than fighting ignorance.
Fair enough. I missed his demand for three years in prison. That’s fucking stupid.
I don’t have resistance to punishing her. I think i’ve already said that she deserves a fine, and perhaps some sort of community service or probation.
My main objection to throwing her in jail is that, in the context of the broader priorities of the legal system, what she did doesn’t warrant jail time. People all over the United States, every single day, receive fines and/or community service and/or probation for far worse things than she did.
I think she was an idiot, and i think that she deserves some sort of punishment, but i also believe that it’s worth maintaining some sense of proportion. The thing she stole was worth a few bucks, and the confrontation caused no serious harm to the victim. If we put everyone who committed an offense this serious in jail for three years, the number of people behind bars would make California’s current horrendous prison overcrowding seem trivial by comparison.
I think this analogy misses both a minor and an important distinction. Political signs that you sase on front lawns, etc., have very little value. They’re run off by the hundreds or thousands and cost next to nothing. The sign that Professor Douchbag stole clearly took much more care and time and would take more time to duplicate than one of the front lawn ones.
The more important difference is that when a sign is stolen off a front lawn, there is usually no one around. This sign was stolen from the people who were at the booth or whatever they had. Either it was wrested from their grasp, or it was stolen like a thief steals a phone, wallet or purse while someone is eating and runs away with it with the victims following screaming for the police.
So, I think the analogy to an unmanned campaign sign is grossly inapt.
Thanks. I appreciate the answer. That there are people siding with the OP and many others willing to hash out the issue also argues against the post being trolling, I suppose.
I’ve lost the thread. I’m saying 5 years in prison for stealing a sign and getting in a pushing contest with an activist is wildly disproportionate. If the Tea Partiers did this with a Code Pink sign I’d say… they should be arrested and charged. It wouldn’t occur to me to throw them in prison for 5 years. Furthermore, this sort of thing isn’t exactly unusual.
I still don’t know what you’re talking about. Universities don’t want wackos preaching Jesus in front of the library. So they tell them to go to the free speech zone. If you want to have a demonstration in NYC, you are typically expected to get a permit from the cops. Free speech is subject to local guidelines involving time, place and circumstance.
Yeah, it’s a problem. Nice rant, btw.
Relevant from the POV of the cops? No, not relevant. (Sorry I didn’t make that clear.)
Relevant from the POV of the school authorities? Yes, relevant IMO, subject to your qualifications. That said, if this is a first offense, I’d be inclined to treat it as a first offense.
I’ve been seeing this my whole life and I feel like I’m missing some cultural touchstone when I see people complaining about “liberal tolerance” and hypocrisy thereof. To me, it’s a total non-sequitur.
Since when do libs claim to or actually tolerate anything? I can’t ever remember a lib saying anyone should be tolerant of conservative ideas. Like other humans, they reject all ideas they don’t agree with and work to minimize them as much as possible. The closest example I can think of is the espousing of racial and sexual tolerance (though they usually coin it as acceptance, not tolerance), but I have no idea what that has to do with the OP. And plenty of libs are racist and sexist. Or hate religion. Or are culture warriors. The most vicious takedowns I’ve ever seen of Islam have been from libs.
I can stretch it as maybe in a college there should be a tolerance of all ideas, but that’s more of a general principle, not a lib view.
Another example would be special snowflakes who ask you to tolerate their fucked up behavior, but that’s not a political thing. More of an entitled brat thing.
…Right. So, 3-year (?) mandatory minimum sentence. For stealing a tic tac under the threat of force. And you wonder why we think you’re fucking crazy. :rolleyes:
More projection by a psycho. Take another look at the Stupid Gun News thread and see who has the most verbiage in there, all of it desperate psychotic handwaving at that.