Seems pretty thoughtful to me. Of course, I would understand if you chose to stop in the middle of those rioting protesters. Perhaps you could whip out your progressive credentials and they would not attack you or your family. From what I saw on the TV, It does seem they would be inclined to listen to reason.
Me, I drive on.
I dunno. If I am trying to drive somewhere with my family and the road is blocked with people holding clubs in their hands, I would not try to run them over. I would not stop, either.
If you are out rioting in the middle of the road where you do not belong, you take your chances.
I think that is true in the social sense, whether that is true in the legal sense, I do know know.
My thinking is that if this were a public school, the case would have a better chance. But then as a non-lawyer, my opinion may be worth exactly what you paid for it.
Its going to be an interesting court decision, to be sure.
I think it might be fairly tough for Mr. Sanderson and his parents to convince a jury that the young man was so traumatized and suffered so severely for not being able to bring his chosen sweetie to the prom that he suffered a million dollar's worth.
On the other hand, CBHS is a private school, not a public one, and operates under a separate set of rules. They can discriminate on the basis of sexual behavior all they want, especially true if the behavior in question is proscribed by their governing body. Kids attend at the pleasure of the administration and are bound by their rules.
I suppose the argument will be that there are certain discriminations that are so powerful that they override the administration's prerogatives, and I can imagine those do exist. But it is hard for me to see that bringing a date of your choice to a dance is one of them.
Personally, I can't quite imagine why the fuss was made by CBHS in the first place. I can't believe many, if any, of the student body cared one way or the other who young Mr. Sanderson brought as a date.
"I'm with CL here. I believe what black people tell me in regards to police relations, by and large. Of course, sometimes people lie and make shit up. But then, so do police, and they know, generally, they can get away with it.'
No argument from me.
My perceptions are the same as yours, that relations are pretty poor. The police and the black community do have some serious trust issues, and neither side is blameless. I also think you are right that the police can tend to get away with bullshit while the average black person cannot. Unless they have the funds to hire good lawyers, in which case race does not matter that much. CL and had a great conversation last week about the effect of TV and smart phone cameras. I will bet that in the Tulsa case now in the news, without those TV cameras, the gentleman killed would have been accused of "lunging" at the policewoman or some such. Works the other way too, of course.
I am quite capable of expressing my own beliefs without your help, thanks.
But since you chose to comment, it should have been clear to you that my issue with the Council passing any ordnance on marijuana possession is not strict enforcement against one portion of the population or the other, nor whether the new ordinance would promote more racial justice.
I have no idea whether the police choose to use their powers of discretion toward any race more than another. My guess is that if the possession laws are more often enforced against young black men, it is probably a function of those young black men coming into contact with law enforcement more often than another group. As opposed to the laws being more strictly enforced against them. But that is merely my guess, based on an assumption that police officers do not like having to appear in court any more than the rest of us.
The only problem I have with the Councils action is that they do not have the authority to change state law, and if they persist, there will be blowback with consequences.
All Comments »
By Chris Shaw & Chris McCoy
download this issue
click here to see more »