Y2HH

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 11, 2015 -> 08:42 AM) Heres the problem...lets say theres a pattern that shows up....that theyre five times more likely to arrest or testify in a trial against minority defendants than white/caucasian. Lets say the police force in general is three times more likely....so in their cases, theres an increase of 67%. Who's to determine the bar/standard/benchmark that crosses the line into fireable offense territory? Does it matter if the policed community is 12.5% African American or 33% or 50%? Theres a clear pattern of racial profiling across the country...but when does it veer into a civil rights violation/abuse of power? When it's disproportionate to the average of other officers on the same beat. Who's to set the benchmark for anything for that matter? We do it, so we can do it here, too.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 01:20 PM) That is a stretch to believe these guys could remain objective and do their jobs. They could but if I were a betting man, I'd bet the house they couldn't. I wouldn't bet on it, either...but I'd prefer to let the conclusions of the investigation tell the tale versus guessing because I saw a few ignorant text messages which encompass a two minute snippet of their lives, while not knowing a single thing these guys did the other X number of years they've been alive. Could it be they're completely ignorant racists? Absolutly. And if that's the case, make an example out of them as a warning to all others. I have no issue with this. Could it be a few of them got caught up trying to 'fit in' with the rest of the group, had a very poor lapse in judgement and took part in the ignorance? Yes. And if this is the case, perhaps some other form of punishment, short of ruining their lives is in order. If they're fired, their lives are absolutely destroyed. They won't find other jobs, they will be shamed endlessly, etc., so if we are to take that route, forgive me for wanting to be absolutely sure they (and their bystander families) deserve it. All I can say is if any of you ever f*** up, you'll be praying you get someone like me to be your judge/jury, because holy hell.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 06:26 PM) I would have agreed with you until I watched the 2011-2014 Chicago White Sox. I saw 3 teams that were complacent, happy, and not worked hard in spring training and I saw 3 teams that disappointed and were uncompetitive. I also saw one team that came out firing on all cylinders from day 1, with some of the best fundamentals I've ever seen from a ballclub, and that team was only kept from a division title by the fact that their kids and veterans broke down from exhaustion at the end of the year. Most of the same players from 2011 fixed problems in 2012 and then the same players from 2012 fell apart in 2013 and looked like a clown show. Maybe the one who set the standard too high is Robin Ventura 2012, but this is the 3rd year in a row I've looked at the team starting out week 1 and said "What the hell did we do different in 2012 and why aren't we doing that again?" I endorse this.

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 08:34 AM) Expect this of me? I barely post in here but you think you know about me? Ok. Cops shouldn't go to jail but losing their jobs is more than reasonable. Once again, the cops shouldn't go to jail OR lose their jobs if the investigation shows that they didn't treat anyone differently while on the job, despite these text messages. This should be very easy to prove based on arrest records, violations, complaints against them, etc. In such a case, perhaps another form of punishment is in order, short of ruining their lives over being stupid. Call me crazy, but I kind of like giving people second or even third chances when it comes to them being stupid or out of touch so long as it didn't harm anyone. Perhaps some sort of counseling or community service? HOWEVER, IF the investigation shows these texts were more than a group of guys being stupid, and they treated people of color while the job much the same as depicted in these texts, then and only then do I agree they should lose their jobs. As for your first question...yes, I expect this of you, because you've repeatedly tried/convicted and/or fired people without allowing due process or the proper investigation to occur, and interestingly enough, you're doing it again right now. OR, I may very well be confusing you with someone else on here, and if that's the case, I apologize. The second question is quite loaded...you don't need to know everything about a person to "know them" based on some posts here. For example, you know me well enough to know I'm an asshole, and you can tell as much based on my posts. EDIT: I've been stupid plenty of times in my life, especially when I was younger...I've said stupid things and I've done stupid things...but I was given the chance to grow up and wise up, without having my life ruined due to those stupid things. Hell, I've said plenty of stupid things right here on this message board...and depending on the reader, they could easily come to the conclusion I'm a number of terrible things...none of which are true, but I wouldn't blame them for coming to such a conclusion based on the information they have. I just wouldn't want to be convicted of any of it without them actually knowing more about me than what they read in a few posts that could easily be taken out of context.

QUOTE (LDF @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 08:51 AM) i am coming in on the tail end of this conversation, so pls do not get upset. cops should never go to jail???? He didn't say that, he's talking about this specific circumstance.

:headbang :headbang

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 07:56 AM) They absolutely deserve every bit of due process their contract affords them, and I hope their union does its duty in properly defending its members. There's plenty in there that's not "jokes" at all, and even if they are "jokes," they're still incredibly racist jokes only s***bag racists would find funny. I hope these guys are socially ostracized for being the s***bags that they are--there's pretty much zero context that could ever explain those sorts of "jokes" and the other texts that aren't even attempts at jokes but just straight-up racism away. eta: for example, that first quoted text. He talks about how he's watching the two black kids at his kids' school "like a hawk" simply because they're black. That's a direct reflection of his attitude towards black people and how he approaches his work (assumed criminality/likely criminality), and it's not even an attempt at a joke. It's just a plain statement. Well, that's exactly why I said investigate them as individuals. Their arrest records and department histories will surely tell the tale that needs to be told. And for those specific officers, you take action, because there is no room for that nonsense in society. However, I don't like the idea of convicting people over what could be very stupid judgement IF it's shown that these (or maybe only one of them), never allowed any such bulls*** to interfear with their on the job decisions. You're a smart guy, and when it comes to things like this, there are times good people get caught up "trying to fit in", and in doing so, they say some downright stupid things, things they otherwise would never say. Is that stupid? Yes. Should it ruin your life? Not in my opinion.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 07:40 AM) It's pretty much psychologically impossible to be that big of a piece of s*** racist and not have it reflected in your everyday work. Well, good thing that will be easy to prove considering their jobs. Now, would you and others here give these officers the same rights you would want, such as due process, a proper investigation, and a trial before convicting them and ruining their lives over what could amount to nothing more than stupid, juvenile, not so funny jokes? Thanks.

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 10, 2015 -> 06:09 AM) http://gawker.com/the-horrible-bigoted-tex...cisc-1692183203 The texts are pretty much the cops using race to harrass and watch people. They gone! This is quite the stretch, but whatever, I expect this of you. IMO, these private texts should be used as grounds to investigate whether these police officers ever allowed race to enter into their on the job decisions. This is something you could easily compile based on their past arrest record, history of department violations (if any) such as excessive force, harassment, etc., and if so, were these violations only against people of color? If the investigation concludes that's the case, you take action on them as individuals, but if NOT, f*** it all, but it's their constitutional right to send these texts, whether you or anyone else here likes it or not. Especially when taking into consideration these are private, NON-department issued cell phones. It's NOT a crime to have stupid thoughts or to tell stupid jokes, unless of course it's more than that -- and their work records will easily tell the tale. Hell, if thought crime was convictionable offense, I can say with great certainty I'd be in prison for life.

QUOTE (TitoMB @ Apr 9, 2015 -> 03:32 PM) have ANY of our pitchers looked right? legit question. i only saw the opener, but no one seems to be doing well. This was my observation as well. So far, not a good start, or spring -- that said, long season...no need to panic.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Apr 9, 2015 -> 03:24 PM) What is encouraging other than maybe Avi? Abreu?

There have been some really dumb comments in this thread... ...and shut the f*** up about Hawk already, we get it, and all of you talking s*** have already done so so many times its f***ing nauseating now.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 8, 2015 -> 11:14 AM) The officer must have felt "threatened" by a 50 year old man who just got taser'd and runs a 13 second 40. That's 3 seconds better than your 40.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 7, 2015 -> 11:17 PM) You just can't shoot a traffic violator in the back as he's running away. I know nothing about that cop, but he's going to jail for murder. If he's a normal, upstanding citizen, I feel sorry for him. I realize Milkman laughs at me, but why can't these bad cops just shoot a guy in the leg or the foot or the hand? What's with the shooting to kill in all these instances? s***, the minute the lawbreaker realizes the cops are shooting at him, he's probably going to stop running anyway unless he is suicidal. You watch too much tv. Unlike as shown in the walking dead, these shots are next to impossible no matter how well trained you are, especially in the heat of the moment.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Apr 7, 2015 -> 11:01 PM) I can't believe the people of Chicago gave Rahm another 4 years. I can when there was no real alternative.

QUOTE (shipps @ Apr 6, 2015 -> 03:01 PM) 74. Tragic. 0-162

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Apr 3, 2015 -> 12:05 PM) Offering a service to everyone but gay people (even if its not all of your services) is still refusing service. As I went over, it's not quite the same thing to refuse service to someone that comes to you, versus them asking you to come to them and you saying no. I think that's a persons absolute right, whether you agree with their reasons or not.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 3, 2015 -> 09:08 AM) So if a gay couple agreed to pick up their cake at the bakery, rather than have it delivered to the venue, you would oppose the business refusing them service? Yes, that's something I'd oppose because the public provides the access to your store in the first place, via roads, transportation, etc.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 3, 2015 -> 08:40 AM) To clarify: your distinction is whether or not the business person has to travel to a location other than their store? Yes. To clarify: You may not be able to choose who uses the public roads, sidewalks and transportation systems to get to your establishment and eat there, but you sure as hell should be able to refuse to provide a service where YOU have to do the traveling, setup, etc., to anyone you want for any reason you want, whether those reasons are "socially" acceptable or not. I'm NOT saying this is a choice I'd make, or even agree with. As stated, I was playing devils advocate.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 3, 2015 -> 07:48 AM) I dont really like these comparisons, as well as KKK, Black Panthers, or any other group that is a hate group hiding behind a religion. People who are gay arent pushing an agenda of hate. In fact, refusing to cater a wedding is going against the idea of love. I understand people are uncomfortable with homosexuality, and they use the bible as the reason for it. I loathe that people (including the owner of Memories) say that it is a decision. It simply isnt, this is who they are. Westboro baptist, KKK, those people make a decision to hate. I can understand how someone wouldnt want feel comfortable catering an event designed to promote hatred. The point is you'd refuse service to them because you don't agree with them. That's your opinion that Scientology pushes hate, I'd guess Scientologists would disagree. It can be anything...maybe you had a really terrible experience with your local Plumbers Union and they want you to cater their annual ball...doesn't matter. The point is/was, they aren't refusing to serve gay people in their restaurant, they're refusing to cater to EXTERNAL parties they happen to disagree with.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Apr 2, 2015 -> 08:13 PM) I don't know that I feel all that sorry for the pizza makers here. They could have been opposed to marriage equality all they want. They still made the choice to publicly state ON TV that gay people would be denied service at their establishment because religion. They deserve all the negative reviews and outrage that they get. If that shuts them down, its just desserts frankly. You can say what you want, and you can believe what you want without government interference. That doesn't mean there are no consequences. They don't deserve threats. They don't deserve being attacked physically. That's different. There were some jerks who did that to these fine bigoted pizza makers, and they are terrible people too. You didn't read the article. They never said they would deny service at their establishment, they said they'd refuse to cater their services to parties/weddings. I'll play devils advocate here, but that's the same as refusing to cater to a Westburo Baptist Church event, or a Scientology event. It's NOT, however, the same as refusing to serve Tom Cruise a slice of pizza if he were to show up at your establishment.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Mar 31, 2015 -> 05:53 PM) Of course fans have every right to boo whoever the hell they want. Perhaps saying it's ridiculous is a bit of an overstatement....I'm just saying, at this point, where does it end? He's been growing in the ring every week (He's mainly looked bad because of feuds with Show and Kane) and his growth is getting ignored because "Boooooo that's not the way we wanted the story to go boooooo"... Yes, but that's wrestling and always will be. If they want the booing to end, give them a reason to cheer...and maybe that begins with NOT putting him in the ring with Big Slow and Non-Kane all the time. Trust me, if he continues to adapt, learn and grow...it'll happen for him. But it's not going to happen so long as the WWE creative team remains largely more miss than hit. And to that, I'll point to one of my previous posts that there is simply too much WWE programming and creative is doing what they can, but they're stretched BEYOND thin.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Mar 31, 2015 -> 03:22 PM) Still booing Reigns is ridiculous, he's been entertaining in the ring when he hasn't had to face the likes of Show and Kane. His dive over the ropes last night was fantastic, so athletic, so explosive.....But because the smarks have already decided they hate him he's gonna struggle to get really get over. The New Day sucks chants also bother me. I don't care for Woods, but I loves me some Kofi and Big E and I hate that they can't get over. If the fans choose to boo someone, it's not ridiculous, it's their collective opinions. A chant the fans don't want to break out will never break out. The fan interaction of pro wrestling is part of the beauty of it...otherwise it's just another stage play. It's WWE's job, at this point, to figure out why the fans are booing Reigns, and fix it creatively.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 31, 2015 -> 03:48 PM) Reigns has 0 character depth. Until that changes he'll be booed. He still needs to get better in the ring too but it's character first and foremost that is stopping him from getting over. That gif doesn't show him get a blood capsule. The ref is feeling for a response to make sure he's not hurt. His mouth bleeds all the time and wwe didn't suddenly start using blood capsules. They didn'tmute the mics because of Reigns either. It was likely because they were chanting about sucking dick towards the divas. New Days gimmick is astoundingly bad. They need a heel turn pronto. I simply thought the gif someone posted was funny...wasn't meant to be taken seriously. Only blood allowed these days in WWE is hard way, of course, as with most rules...they're are ways to bend them.