Rodney King Found Dead

Quote from Tsing Tao:

I actually knew the guy who video taped the Rodney King beating. Knew him rather well, actually. George and his brother Peter, though Peter didn't have anything to do with it.

The most fucked up thing about this entire incident is that Cops are slowly but surely making it illegal for people to film them.....it is now against the law in many cities to film a police officer..... how the hell are people allowing this to happen?
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

Each locale chose to have a street named after MLK. So if we were to follow the suggested model you point to with statues, than each place would have a statue of him as well.

It's no different, in my opinion, than the many "John F. Kennedy" blvds we see all over the place. Should we not have so many of them, too?

Does it really matter? We all talk about wasting time and money on things that really don't matter. This seems like a prime candidate.

I recall the time when Chattanooga TN changed the name of 9th street to MLK blvd. A single black city councilmen kept proposing it and it kept being defeated. This went on for a long time. Eventually the councilmen resorted to the equivalent of a filibuster. The city council finally relented just to get him to shut up.

My point being the majority of that particular location did NOT choose to honor Dr. King. A very small minority did.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

I recall the time when Chattanooga TN changed the name of 9th street to MLK blvd. A single black city councilmen kept proposing it and it kept being defeated. This went on for a long time. Eventually the councilmen resorted to the equivalent of a filibuster. The city council finally relented just to get him to shut up.

My point being the majority of that particular location did NOT choose to honor Dr. King. A very small minority did.

I hear you. But I ask again, how much of it really matters? It's not like they pushed through "Al Sharpton Avenue".
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

I hear you. But I ask again, how much of it really matters? It's not like they pushed through "Al Sharpton Avenue".

"Matters"? In the scheme of things, not much I suppose. I guess to me it's the principle of not buckling to the demands of a few. The principle of keeping history in its proper perspective. The principle of not showering so much unwarranted praise and recognition on one guy while so many others just as deserving get little or none.

Other than that, I hear ya.


:)
 
Quote from nutmeg:

A young nyc mother starved her daughter to death, you know what she said "I'm not perfect".

Judge blasts 'monster mom' before handing out 32 years to life sentence for death of 4-year-old daughter


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...h_before_psjSVuaiXfD0jvsjDh80QL#ixzz1y4v8Y8Vz
Quote from Tsing Tao:

I just read this. We need the death penalty for cases like this.

What was she supposed to do? City says she can't give them sugary drinks, fatty foods and no salt in their food - whatever she presented them was probably bland and inedible. Raising kids in Nanny York is not as easy as you think.

:D
 
Quote from Lucrum:



My point being the majority of that particular location did NOT choose to honor Dr. King. A very small minority did.
We should have respected and accepted the views of the majority , is that what you're saying , Luke?
 
Quote from Max E. Pad:

The most fucked up thing about this entire incident is that Cops are slowly but surely making it illegal for people to film them.....it is now against the law in many cities to film a police officer.....

Federal Courts Rule it is Not Illegal to Film Police

http://technorati.com/technology/article/federal-courts-rule-it-is-not/


Author: Pace Lattin
Published: September 01, 2011 at 5:54 pm
Share5678

"The First Court of Appeals has reached a decision that would allow the general public to video-tape police officers while they are working. This decision comes right after several well-known public cases have come to light involving citizens being arrested for video-taping police.

This specific case in question was Simon Glik vs.The City of Boston (and several police officers), in which a teenage Simon Gilk was arrested after videotaping Boston Police abusing a homeless man. While Mr. Gilk was not interfering with the police, he was arrested on wiretapping charges.

The ACLU had sued on his behalf, even when the charges were dropped, noting that there was a growing epidemic of citizens in the United States being arrested by police for videotaping, even when documenting police brutality and abuse.

The First Court Agreed with the ACLU that this should be legal, and wrote that: "The filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles [of protected First Amendment activity].

Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting the free discussion of governmental affairs.”

With the rise of YouTube and other social sharing services, more and more police have been under scrutiny for their public actions and in response have taken to pressing charges against civilians for videotaping them.

Currently there are several other cases still pending around the Country, including that of Khaliah Fitchette who videotaped Newak Police abusing another passenger and was arrested, while the police erased the cell-phone.

Additionally, the case of Michael Allison has made quite a bit of news. In this case, the Illinois Attorney General is trying to impose a 75 year sentence on Mr. Allison for recording police officers who were harassing him, reportedly for filing a lawsuit against the department previously. Charges are still being pursued, even though several similar cases have been thrown out by the Courts in Illinois."
 
Back
Top