such things don't apply. In America we have a multi-tiered justice system. It's pretty well documented. Wealthy and educated people get treatment programs, while poor (and let's face it, black) people get jail. It's because what we're really using our drug policy for is to keep the poors in check. Think of it this way. If your poor chances are you or one of your friends is using drugs to cope with poverty. Now, our drug laws, in particular our asset forfeiture laws are basically guilt by association. Combine that with juries that are inherently conservative (since you generally have to be well off to be able to afford to server on a jury for any length of time).
So when poor people show up in wealthy neighborhoods they not only stick out like a swore thumb, but odds are good the cops can bust them for the drugs at least one of them is carrying. This keeps poor people out of wealthy school districts and parks, and lets the wealthy enjoy their (much, much better) public services.
Basically, our drug policy is central to maintaining our class divide...
weirdly enough, lots of places the treatment programs are so booked up that you can't voluntarily put yourself in one, so you have to get arrested and assigned; but that's only if you're considered "likely to benefit".
I'm tired of the total acceptance of drug taking in the higher echelons of society. The little jokes in the media world about powdering your nose, about the use of Bolivian Marching Powder to help get through deadlines.
These are drugs, no matter how wealthy or powerful you are, and using these drugs helps criminals.
Let's have a little equality.
You only help criminals by criminalizing drugs.
"I got really messed up on LSD yesterday and decided all the people around me were reptile aliens in disguise so I went out and bought a AR 15 to wipe them out, but luckily I forgot it on the subway" "Omigod, that's terrible! Taking LSD!"
So what? That's just anopion, not a logical argument. Also the only reason criminals are involved in illegal drugs is because the drugs are illegal.
Indeed. Like the idea that marijuana is a gateway drug to hard drugs; yeah, because the law essentially requires them to be sold by the same dealerships.
It does not happen when they stay with psychedelics drugs, see ELP, Jethro Tull and the Grateful dead's. Ice cream, opiates and alcohol, and to some extends stimulants are what kill musicians.
Jethro Tull's front man, Ian Anderson, has never done drugs.
Ted Nugent says he has never done drugs either, and if that's true it's very frightening.
One could not practically OD on LSD using any kind of reasonable street dosage. However, it Heroin or alcohol, yes, but there is a huge gap between the effective doses of lethal doses. A lethal dose of LSD would require the equivalent of chugging several hundred beers.
these folks appear to be Underdosing. I hereby declare the acronym, UD. "What happened to Bill? Haven't seen him in years" "Didn't you hear? He UDed on LSD." Hmm, maybe the concept needs more work.
The music industry has a well documented path for those who think this is the solution to higher creativity, higher productivity, and dealing with crunch times.
In fact, it is not hard to find a dozen well known names that have passed due to drug overdose, in the industry that "used" them just to get through the schedules.
And these aren't stupid people. They were good enough to learn how to play instruments better than you or I, train their voices for singing, and in some cases write their own music. They didn't start off with the intent to harm themselves, but the problem is that for most people, addiction follows recreational use. Even if the drug itself is seemingly free of the worst side effects, the person can become dependent and in that dependency can create life long problems for themselves.
And if they can't fix it, with the resources available to them, then what are the odds that a code slinger in CA has a better shot.
just to be a scientific devil's advocate; the music industry and its correlated lifestyle, particularly "the road", takes a really well documented toll on those involved, whether drug users or abstainers. similarly with the various other occupations where drug use and death rates are both high; homeless person, armed robber, drug dealer, etc. while drug users in more stable lifestyles manage to avoid dying young much better, particularly users of the milder drugs. it's probably more accurate to state that drug use is a symptom of a self-destructive personality; and maybe not even necessarily a self-destructive symptom, self-medicating is the parent of medical pharmacology, after all, not the criminal stepchild.
I had a high school friend who was a fan of LSD. Saying it isn't addictive is a lie. He was constantly touting the benefits, which I didn't see in his life. Anything can be mentally addictive if it interferes with life enough, and let's not downplay that the article's premise is a dangerous one.
There's a vague but definite line between doing something repeatedly because you think it benefits you, and being addicted. Now, if he was constantly touting how horrible it was but continued doing it, that would be addictive.
I bought a lawn spreader made by a large nationally known company. A little tiny plastic widget broke, rendering it not quite useless, but requiring much kluge to use. I couldn't find repair parts on their website, so emailed them asking. They replied that certain parts like the wheels or stirrer, big parts all, they would replace for free, but little tiny parts not available; so instead they would refund the price of the whole thing to me. ???
I'm not aware of anybody arguing to keep out legitimate Syrian war refugees. I *am* aware of plenty of people rightfully arguing that we need to figure out how to screen Syrian refugees before letting any more into the country to make sure that we're not paying ISIS members to come to the US. That's a whole nother ballgame.
To begin with, it takes two years at least to process before coming to the US. As Trump will tell you, they can just walk in from Mexico quicker than that. In that 2+ years they are already investigated by the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, Homeland Security, and the State Department (in addition to the usual health screening and personal questioning every immigrant gets). What additional screening do you suggest is going to do the trick, which we are now missing?
Gotta love muslims*. Move to a certain country ostensibly for a better future, then try to change that country and society to be the same as the one left behind.
I know one shouldn't blame the victim, but in many cases the so-called victims of islama"phobia" weren't just innocently walking along minding their own business.... And I for one feel it is very applicable to also take a hard and critical look at the victim's actions that led to them wanting to be labeled victims.
* = I also know I shouldn't stereotype and should have probably written "some muslims". It's just so sad that the daeshbag minority is so visible and vocal, while the silent, conservative, hard-working, intelligent, empathic majority are quietly working along being productive members of the societies they find themselves in.
at what point did the muslim kid "try to change that country and society to be the same as the one left behind."? do kids in muslim countries routinely carry around clocks in pencil cases?
Perhaps sue for a reasonable amount? Maybe a few thousand plus court costs? Perhaps requiring the school officials found culpable be fired? Suing for $15M is just pure greed as all it does is take money away from students.
You're not allowed to sue a school to force it to re-train or replace a bad teacher or administrator.
As far as I know a lawsuit settlement can be just about anything. Do you have references showing that requiring teacher/administrators to be fired is not allowed?
you can't sue for a few thousand. because no lawyer will do so.
Since you are obviously an expert you can probably tell me what explosive look like?
It's a red tube with TNT printed on it, right?
if the thing was the innards of a radio shack clock as everybody says, then there's nothing in there that doesn't look like the innards of a radio shack clock. a battery, a circuit board, a display, a power cord. if you can see an explosive in that, then every cellphone or other electronic gadget is a bomb threat.
Being arrested requires that charges be filed. Ahmed was not arrested and not charged with any crimes, he was detained. Your twenty minutes is plucked out of the air and meaningless. Twenty minutes for a vehicle stop? Okay. Twenty minutes for charges relating to weapons or drugs? No way is that twenty minutes. The legal limit varies, but 24 hours is generally the limit that you can be detained without having charges filed (at which point you are arrested).
Ahmed was hauled off and _DETAINED_ for a reason. YOU may not agree with the reasoning, but that does not mean there was no basis. How people keep modding this lie up when law dictionaries are pretty easy to find is astounding (https://www.law.cornell.edu/). Well, not really.. it suits a narrative.
about those law dictionaries so easy to find, which you do not actually cite...
"An arrest occurs when the police take someone into custody. People are in custody when they aren’t free to leave, whether or not the police take them to the police station or jail, use handcuffs, or even announce that an arrest has occurred. The question is whether the police control the suspect’s movement.
Level of Restraint
The use of force—for example, grabbing and handcuffing—is a common way to complete an arrest." http://www.nolo.com/legal-ency... is this some kind of rightwing thing? they're always citing something without actually giving an actual citation.
The kid and his dad are provocateurs who deliberately baited the school teachers. Dad's sounds like he's been wanting to leave for a long time, probably spent his time dreaming this s**t up. They get nothing and need their visas pulled as undesirable aliens.
muslim kid baiting school, like black tennis pro baiting undercover police by standing outside hotel doing nothing.
Oh come on. The whole thing was fishy to start with. What I and others are saying at this point, is that the kids' father probably concocted the whole thing to troll the school and the cops into 'detaining' or 'arresting' or whatever word you want to use to describe it, for the sole purpose of this end-game, being the ability to sue someone for 'how poorly his son was treated'. If it looks like BS and smells like BS, then it's probably BS. The key factor here is the impending lawsuit. If all they wanted was to be left alone to live in peace they wouldn't bother.
yeah. like ahead of time, you could be absolutely sure that your kid would be arrested for bringing a clock in a box. happens every day. same way the socialists knew that in 2000, america would elect a black guy from hawaii, so they faked obama's nigerian birth to look like hawaii.
If everyone is treated the same way for bringing a toy gun to class then it's not discriminatory
If everyone is treated the same way for fucking around with their electronics project in class then it's not discriminatory.
If everyone is treated the same way for wearing a miniskirt to class then it's not discriminatory.
The onus is on the school district to show that they always act this way.
I venture he would have been treated differently than others if he wore a miniskirt
Assuming there was not communication among the staff that knew it was just a stupid clock to those other people, I can see who it would meet a standard of 'reasonable suspicion' to justify an arrest.
Of course you do. But that's only because almost every person believes that THEIR opinion is a "reasonable" one.
I remember back in the day (I'm old) when a student would bring something distracting to school the teacher would confiscate it and the student collect it at the end of the day.
At worst, a student's parents would be called in.
But students were never arrested for bringing toys to school. That's just stupid.
"Johny, is that a time bomb you are playing with?"
"Yes sir"
"Well bring it up here. You can get it back after school" "But..." "No buts. It's going in my desk and that's final"
The question is "was it a lawful arrest" We know now that more of the story has come out, he had this suspect looking thing. Some people recognized it for what it was and told him to put it away.
He didn't follow their advice and continue to wonder around the school with it, not obeying other instructions, which could be seen as suspicious. Assuming there was not communication among the staff that knew it was just a stupid clock to those other people, I can see who it would meet a standard of 'reasonable suspicion' to justify an arrest. Would it have happened to someone who isn't brown skinned I don't know, but I am not sure that matters. If it does matter maybe the problem is authorities are not cautious enough about what white people are doing near high impact (I won't say value) targets like schools.
"told him to put it away". He put it in his backpack. That's not away enough for you? What do you suggest? If he had put it in his locker, nobody would investigating it beeping and the papers wouldn't be full of "Muslim student hides fake bomb in locker"?
Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested, after being questioned for an hour and a half (how is that even possible?), and was taken to a detention centre, fingerprinted, photographed, and questioned further.
He was not charged. Possibly that's what you meant.
Bringing a hoax bomb to school is illegal. Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Computer, was arrested and spent some hours with law enforcement when he brought a hoax bomb to his high school. A box that ticked, and then ticked faster when it was moved.
As for whether what this kid did was a hoax bomb, any Iraqi / Afghanistan vet can explain to you how the detonators of IEDs are sometimes made from the components of off-the-shelf consumer devices. So, its not unreasonable to see disassembled clock parts in a negative light.
if it's offtheshelf clock parts, what part looks like explosive? what, is he going to short the battery and make it blow up?
"An arrest, on the other hand, involves the police taking someone into custody through a more significant restraint on movement. The quintessential example involves the use of handcuffs and an advisement that the suspect is under arrest." http://www.nolo.com/legal-ency... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPAFMKrUkAABI2a.jpg his movements do seem significantly restrained, by what appear to be handcuffs presumably associated with the police officer in the background
Slashdot Mirror
I don't remember being drunk and unable to function for 16 hours after a pint of beer.
if you can't remember it, you probably should drink less.
"Have you ever tried LSD? "
No, and I never will. Only an idiot would sacrifice their mental health for a few hours of tripping.
anybody posting on slashdot has very little left to lose
I have been on the other LSD.
I can tell you from experience that FWD cars are a lot better to drive if they have a LSD.
If you know that it was really "Kiss the sky" would you like the song less or more?
if i knew that the song was really purple haze i might.
such things don't apply. In America we have a multi-tiered justice system. It's pretty well documented. Wealthy and educated people get treatment programs, while poor (and let's face it, black) people get jail. It's because what we're really using our drug policy for is to keep the poors in check. Think of it this way. If your poor chances are you or one of your friends is using drugs to cope with poverty. Now, our drug laws, in particular our asset forfeiture laws are basically guilt by association. Combine that with juries that are inherently conservative (since you generally have to be well off to be able to afford to server on a jury for any length of time). So when poor people show up in wealthy neighborhoods they not only stick out like a swore thumb, but odds are good the cops can bust them for the drugs at least one of them is carrying. This keeps poor people out of wealthy school districts and parks, and lets the wealthy enjoy their (much, much better) public services. Basically, our drug policy is central to maintaining our class divide...
weirdly enough, lots of places the treatment programs are so booked up that you can't voluntarily put yourself in one, so you have to get arrested and assigned; but that's only if you're considered "likely to benefit".
Indeed.
I'm tired of the total acceptance of drug taking in the higher echelons of society. The little jokes in the media world about powdering your nose, about the use of Bolivian Marching Powder to help get through deadlines.
These are drugs, no matter how wealthy or powerful you are, and using these drugs helps criminals.
Let's have a little equality.
You only help criminals by criminalizing drugs.
"I got really messed up on LSD yesterday and decided all the people around me were reptile aliens in disguise so I went out and bought a AR 15 to wipe them out, but luckily I forgot it on the subway"
"Omigod, that's terrible! Taking LSD!"
So what? That's just anopion, not a logical argument. Also the only reason criminals are involved in illegal drugs is because the drugs are illegal.
Indeed. Like the idea that marijuana is a gateway drug to hard drugs; yeah, because the law essentially requires them to be sold by the same dealerships.
It does not happen when they stay with psychedelics drugs, see ELP, Jethro Tull and the Grateful dead's. Ice cream, opiates and alcohol, and to some extends stimulants are what kill musicians.
Jethro Tull's front man, Ian Anderson, has never done drugs.
Ted Nugent says he has never done drugs either, and if that's true it's very frightening.
One could not practically OD on LSD using any kind of reasonable street dosage. However, it Heroin or alcohol, yes, but there is a huge gap between the effective doses of lethal doses. A lethal dose of LSD would require the equivalent of chugging several hundred beers.
these folks appear to be Underdosing. I hereby declare the acronym, UD. "What happened to Bill? Haven't seen him in years" "Didn't you hear? He UDed on LSD." Hmm, maybe the concept needs more work.
The music industry has a well documented path for those who think this is the solution to higher creativity, higher productivity, and dealing with crunch times. In fact, it is not hard to find a dozen well known names that have passed due to drug overdose, in the industry that "used" them just to get through the schedules.
And these aren't stupid people. They were good enough to learn how to play instruments better than you or I, train their voices for singing, and in some cases write their own music. They didn't start off with the intent to harm themselves, but the problem is that for most people, addiction follows recreational use. Even if the drug itself is seemingly free of the worst side effects, the person can become dependent and in that dependency can create life long problems for themselves.
And if they can't fix it, with the resources available to them, then what are the odds that a code slinger in CA has a better shot.
just to be a scientific devil's advocate; the music industry and its correlated lifestyle, particularly "the road", takes a really well documented toll on those involved, whether drug users or abstainers. similarly with the various other occupations where drug use and death rates are both high; homeless person, armed robber, drug dealer, etc.
while drug users in more stable lifestyles manage to avoid dying young much better, particularly users of the milder drugs.
it's probably more accurate to state that drug use is a symptom of a self-destructive personality; and maybe not even necessarily a self-destructive symptom, self-medicating is the parent of medical pharmacology, after all, not the criminal stepchild.
I had a high school friend who was a fan of LSD. Saying it isn't addictive is a lie. He was constantly touting the benefits, which I didn't see in his life. Anything can be mentally addictive if it interferes with life enough, and let's not downplay that the article's premise is a dangerous one.
There's a vague but definite line between doing something repeatedly because you think it benefits you, and being addicted. Now, if he was constantly touting how horrible it was but continued doing it, that would be addictive.
> YOU REPAIRED COWS!!!
The cow troll is actually getting kinda funny.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/i...
I bought a lawn spreader made by a large nationally known company. A little tiny plastic widget broke, rendering it not quite useless, but requiring much kluge to use. I couldn't find repair parts on their website, so emailed them asking. They replied that certain parts like the wheels or stirrer, big parts all, they would replace for free, but little tiny parts not available; so instead they would refund the price of the whole thing to me. ???
I'm not aware of anybody arguing to keep out legitimate Syrian war refugees. I *am* aware of plenty of people rightfully arguing that we need to figure out how to screen Syrian refugees before letting any more into the country to make sure that we're not paying ISIS members to come to the US. That's a whole nother ballgame.
To begin with, it takes two years at least to process before coming to the US. As Trump will tell you, they can just walk in from Mexico quicker than that.
In that 2+ years they are already investigated by the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, Homeland Security, and the State Department (in addition to the usual health screening and personal questioning every immigrant gets). What additional screening do you suggest is going to do the trick, which we are now missing?
Gotta love muslims*. Move to a certain country ostensibly for a better future, then try to change that country and society to be the same as the one left behind.
I know one shouldn't blame the victim, but in many cases the so-called victims of islama"phobia" weren't just innocently walking along minding their own business.... And I for one feel it is very applicable to also take a hard and critical look at the victim's actions that led to them wanting to be labeled victims.
* = I also know I shouldn't stereotype and should have probably written "some muslims". It's just so sad that the daeshbag minority is so visible and vocal, while the silent, conservative, hard-working, intelligent, empathic majority are quietly working along being productive members of the societies they find themselves in.
at what point did the muslim kid "try to change that country and society to be the same as the one left behind."? do kids in muslim countries routinely carry around clocks in pencil cases?
Perhaps sue for a reasonable amount? Maybe a few thousand plus court costs? Perhaps requiring the school officials found culpable be fired? Suing for $15M is just pure greed as all it does is take money away from students.
You're not allowed to sue a school to force it to re-train or replace a bad teacher or administrator.
As far as I know a lawsuit settlement can be just about anything. Do you have references showing that requiring teacher/administrators to be fired is not allowed?
you can't sue for a few thousand. because no lawyer will do so.
Since you are obviously an expert you can probably tell me what explosive look like? It's a red tube with TNT printed on it, right?
if the thing was the innards of a radio shack clock as everybody says, then there's nothing in there that doesn't look like the innards of a radio shack clock. a battery, a circuit board, a display, a power cord. if you can see an explosive in that, then every cellphone or other electronic gadget is a bomb threat.
Being arrested requires that charges be filed. Ahmed was not arrested and not charged with any crimes, he was detained. Your twenty minutes is plucked out of the air and meaningless. Twenty minutes for a vehicle stop? Okay. Twenty minutes for charges relating to weapons or drugs? No way is that twenty minutes. The legal limit varies, but 24 hours is generally the limit that you can be detained without having charges filed (at which point you are arrested).
Ahmed was hauled off and _DETAINED_ for a reason. YOU may not agree with the reasoning, but that does not mean there was no basis. How people keep modding this lie up when law dictionaries are pretty easy to find is astounding (https://www.law.cornell.edu/). Well, not really.. it suits a narrative.
about those law dictionaries so easy to find, which you do not actually cite...
"An arrest occurs when the police take someone into custody. People are in custody when they aren’t free to leave, whether or not the police take them to the police station or jail, use handcuffs, or even announce that an arrest has occurred. The question is whether the police control the suspect’s movement.
Level of Restraint
The use of force—for example, grabbing and handcuffing—is a common way to complete an arrest." http://www.nolo.com/legal-ency...
is this some kind of rightwing thing? they're always citing something without actually giving an actual citation.
The kid and his dad are provocateurs who deliberately baited the school teachers. Dad's sounds like he's been wanting to leave for a long time, probably spent his time dreaming this s**t up. They get nothing and need their visas pulled as undesirable aliens.
muslim kid baiting school, like black tennis pro baiting undercover police by standing outside hotel doing nothing.
Oh come on. The whole thing was fishy to start with. What I and others are saying at this point, is that the kids' father probably concocted the whole thing to troll the school and the cops into 'detaining' or 'arresting' or whatever word you want to use to describe it, for the sole purpose of this end-game, being the ability to sue someone for 'how poorly his son was treated'. If it looks like BS and smells like BS, then it's probably BS. The key factor here is the impending lawsuit. If all they wanted was to be left alone to live in peace they wouldn't bother.
yeah. like ahead of time, you could be absolutely sure that your kid would be arrested for bringing a clock in a box. happens every day. same way the socialists knew that in 2000, america would elect a black guy from hawaii, so they faked obama's nigerian birth to look like hawaii.
Isn't that the very nature of it?
If everyone is treated the same way for bringing a toy gun to class then it's not discriminatory If everyone is treated the same way for fucking around with their electronics project in class then it's not discriminatory. If everyone is treated the same way for wearing a miniskirt to class then it's not discriminatory.
The onus is on the school district to show that they always act this way.
I venture he would have been treated differently than others if he wore a miniskirt
Of course you do. But that's only because almost every person believes that THEIR opinion is a "reasonable" one.
I remember back in the day (I'm old) when a student would bring something distracting to school the teacher would confiscate it and the student collect it at the end of the day.
At worst, a student's parents would be called in.
But students were never arrested for bringing toys to school. That's just stupid.
"Johny, is that a time bomb you are playing with?"
"Yes sir"
"Well bring it up here. You can get it back after school"
"But..."
"No buts. It's going in my desk and that's final"
The question is "was it a lawful arrest" We know now that more of the story has come out, he had this suspect looking thing. Some people recognized it for what it was and told him to put it away.
He didn't follow their advice and continue to wonder around the school with it, not obeying other instructions, which could be seen as suspicious. Assuming there was not communication among the staff that knew it was just a stupid clock to those other people, I can see who it would meet a standard of 'reasonable suspicion' to justify an arrest. Would it have happened to someone who isn't brown skinned I don't know, but I am not sure that matters. If it does matter maybe the problem is authorities are not cautious enough about what white people are doing near high impact (I won't say value) targets like schools.
"told him to put it away". He put it in his backpack. That's not away enough for you? What do you suggest? If he had put it in his locker, nobody would investigating it beeping and the papers wouldn't be full of "Muslim student hides fake bomb in locker"?
... the kid was not arrested ...
Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested, after being questioned for an hour and a half (how is that even possible?), and was taken to a detention centre, fingerprinted, photographed, and questioned further.
He was not charged. Possibly that's what you meant.
Bringing a hoax bomb to school is illegal. Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Computer, was arrested and spent some hours with law enforcement when he brought a hoax bomb to his high school. A box that ticked, and then ticked faster when it was moved. As for whether what this kid did was a hoax bomb, any Iraqi / Afghanistan vet can explain to you how the detonators of IEDs are sometimes made from the components of off-the-shelf consumer devices. So, its not unreasonable to see disassembled clock parts in a negative light.
if it's offtheshelf clock parts, what part looks like explosive? what, is he going to short the battery and make it blow up?
Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested
Actually, he was *NOT* arrested. He was detained.
"An arrest, on the other hand, involves the police taking someone into custody through a more significant restraint on movement. The quintessential example involves the use of handcuffs and an advisement that the suspect is under arrest."
http://www.nolo.com/legal-ency...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPAFMKrUkAABI2a.jpg
his movements do seem significantly restrained, by what appear to be handcuffs presumably associated with the police officer in the background