GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
9,869 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
15 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
39 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Right Wing Lessons Learned rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Professor of Pain
United States
St. Joseph
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
14 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom D.
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I hope the next lesson is on humor, because this shit is weak.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
S C
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
-326 'white' people get shot by police

*crickets*

-123 'black' people get shot by police

Won't somebody think of the children! He didn't do nothing! Racist bigot cops! White man keeping us down! You are racist if you disagree! O the humanity!

Yawn. This joke is about as strawman as that comic.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since this is a humor thread:

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/fox-obama-see...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


So you are saying what... that the prosecutor called in a grand jury to drop the case for him so he didn't have to do the dirty work himself?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GameCrossing wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


So you are saying what... that the prosecutor called in a grand jury to drop the case for him so he didn't have to do the dirty work himself?


Make a show, do a song and dance, and present his case nice and shoddy with lots of room for dismissal.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.
I would like to see the section of the constitution that says when you become a public servant you give up your rights.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scott3387 wrote:
-326 'white' people get shot by police

*crickets*

-123 'black' people get shot by police

Won't somebody think of the children! He didn't do nothing! Racist bigot cops! White man keeping us down! You are racist if you disagree! O the humanity!

Yawn. This joke is about as strawman as that comic.
This is a case to point.

More black people commit crime (fact)
More black people are ion prison (fact)]
Yet more white people are shot by police.

So I think we need a source for that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.
I would like to see the section of the constitution that says when you become a public servant you give up your rights.




Well done, yes only you can post a satire of a mentality.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


That's not true at all.

http://manhattanda.org/criminal-justice-system-how-it-works?...

Reading up, it's also required by law in Ohio for felonies. It's required in Missouri for felonies to either get an indictment from a grand jury or an associate judge.

Your comment implies the prosecutor can simply prosecute without the process entirely. That's just false.


It does vary state by state, however as you just pointed out the prosecutor in Missouri can skip the Grand Jury process if he chooses. The Grand Jury process stems from the 5th amendment(or rather the requirement for it in the US), meaning it is applicable to federal,gov't. States get to do their own,things. It is still very much a discretionary game on the part of the Prosecutor. Evidenciary rules are different, proceedings are closed, the defense doesn't even present a case. The ham sandwhich guideline is accurate.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


If you're going to take a patronizing line on something you should do some basic research, first.

The main objection to the Grand Juries is that the prosecutors used them to avoid taking either case to trial, treating the defendants as friendly witnesses and those testifying against them as hostile, etc. It's a process objection.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


That's not true at all.

http://manhattanda.org/criminal-justice-system-how-it-works?...

Reading up, it's also required by law in Ohio for felonies. It's required in Missouri for felonies to either get an indictment from a grand jury or an associate judge.

Your comment implies the prosecutor can simply prosecute without the process entirely. That's just false


It does vary state by state, however as you just pointed out the prosecutor in Missouri can skip the Grand Jury process if he chooses. The Grand Jury process stems from the 5th amendment(or rather the requirement for it in the US), meaning it is applicable to federal,gov't. States get to do their own,things. It is still very much a discretionary game on the part of the Prosecutor. Evidenciary rules are different, proceedings are closed, the defense doesn't even present a case. The ham sandwhich guideline is accurate.


No, he can't skip the process. He must get an indictment from either a grand jury or a judge. Your implication that he could have prosecuted without that step is ignorant.


Well since a prosecutor can skip or even ignore the grand jury's ruling and proceed before a judge to a preliminary hearing... what would *you* be comfortable calling it?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bimmy Jim
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't know what "right-wingers" you're talking to, but I don't know any who denies that racism is prevalent in the US.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Walker
United States
Birmingham
Alabama
flag msg tools
"The significance of a person's life is determined by the story they believe themselves to be in." - Wendell Berry "If nothing lies beyond the pale of death, then nothing of value lies before it." - SMBC
badge
Thy mercy, my God, is the theme of my song, the joy of my heart and the boast of my tongue. Thy free grace alone, from the first to the last, has won my affection and bound my soul fast.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


If you're going to take a patronizing line on something you should do some basic research, first.

The main objection to the Grand Juries is that the prosecutors used them to avoid taking either case to trial, treating the defendants as friendly witnesses and those testifying against them as hostile, etc. It's a process objection.


Couldn't the prosecutor just as easily present a weak case at an actual trial?

Grand juries provide an important protection in criminal cases; a few abuses doesn't change that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


That's not true at all.

http://manhattanda.org/criminal-justice-system-how-it-works?...

Reading up, it's also required by law in Ohio for felonies. It's required in Missouri for felonies to either get an indictment from a grand jury or an associate judge.

Your comment implies the prosecutor can simply prosecute without the process entirely. That's just false


It does vary state by state, however as you just pointed out the prosecutor in Missouri can skip the Grand Jury process if he chooses. The Grand Jury process stems from the 5th amendment(or rather the requirement for it in the US), meaning it is applicable to federal,gov't. States get to do their own,things. It is still very much a discretionary game on the part of the Prosecutor. Evidenciary rules are different, proceedings are closed, the defense doesn't even present a case. The ham sandwhich guideline is accurate.


No, he can't skip the process. He must get an indictment from either a grand jury or a judge. Your implication that he could have prosecuted without that step is ignorant.


Well since a prosecutor can skip or even ignore the grand jury's ruling and proceed before a judge to a preliminary hearing... what would *you* be comfortable calling it?


The necessary system being exercised and failing to return an indictment.


When the operator misuses the equipment and it fails, it would behoove you to examine the actions of the operator. Don't blame a toothbrush for a tree not being cut down. Blame the malefactor who used a toothbrush to cut a,tree when he had an axe.

Unless you perhaps believe systems are infallible and can't be misused by people?

People are rightfully angry when a prosecutor uses his position to bring false charges. They should be equally angry if he uses his position to sabotage a case.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BimmyJim wrote:
I don't know what "right-wingers" you're talking to, but I don't know any who denies that racism is prevalent in the US.


If RSP is any indication, many right wingers think that racism remains widespread because all liberals are racists.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff
United States
Linden
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Social Justice Wargamer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scott3387 wrote:
-326 'white' people get shot by police

*crickets*

-123 'black' people get shot by police


There are ~316 million people in the US.

~77% identify as white.
~13% identify as black.

I'm no statistician, but combining your numbers with my numbers says that one white person per every ~746,000 is shot by police, and one black person per ~334,000 is shot by the police.

Is that OK with you?
8 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
twomillionbucks wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


If you're going to take a patronizing line on something you should do some basic research, first.

The main objection to the Grand Juries is that the prosecutors used them to avoid taking either case to trial, treating the defendants as friendly witnesses and those testifying against them as hostile, etc. It's a process objection.


Couldn't the prosecutor just as easily present a weak case at an actual trial?

Grand juries provide an important protection in criminal cases; a few abuses doesn't change that.


I'm not saying that grand juries should be thrown out or done away with. I'm just saying that people are angry when they are abused.

And yes, a prosecutor could just present a weak case -- but that would be public. Grand juries generally aren't.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
BimmyJim wrote:
I don't know what "right-wingers" you're talking to, but I don't know any who denies that racism is prevalent in the US.


If RSP is any indication, many right wingers think that racism remains widespread because all liberals are racists.


And if the cartoon is any indication, liberals think all right-wingers use Tea Party logic.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GameCrossing wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
BimmyJim wrote:
I don't know what "right-wingers" you're talking to, but I don't know any who denies that racism is prevalent in the US.


If RSP is any indication, many right wingers think that racism remains widespread because all liberals are racists.


And if the cartoon is any indication, liberals think all right-wingers use Tea Party logic.



Tom Tomorrow comics speak for liberals like Sean Hannity speaks for conservatives. Same pandering, different flavor.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
djgutierrez77 wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
BimmyJim wrote:
I don't know what "right-wingers" you're talking to, but I don't know any who denies that racism is prevalent in the US.


If RSP is any indication, many right wingers think that racism remains widespread because all liberals are racists.


And if the cartoon is any indication, liberals think all right-wingers use Tea Party logic.



Tom Tomorrow comics speak for liberals like Sean Hannity speaks for conservatives. Same pandering, different flavor.


Makes sense now. Also explains the choice of presenter of the OP.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


That's not true at all.

http://manhattanda.org/criminal-justice-system-how-it-works?...

Reading up, it's also required by law in Ohio for felonies. It's required in Missouri for felonies to either get an indictment from a grand jury or an associate judge.

Your comment implies the prosecutor can simply prosecute without the process entirely. That's just false


It does vary state by state, however as you just pointed out the prosecutor in Missouri can skip the Grand Jury process if he chooses. The Grand Jury process stems from the 5th amendment(or rather the requirement for it in the US), meaning it is applicable to federal,gov't. States get to do their own,things. It is still very much a discretionary game on the part of the Prosecutor. Evidenciary rules are different, proceedings are closed, the defense doesn't even present a case. The ham sandwhich guideline is accurate.


No, he can't skip the process. He must get an indictment from either a grand jury or a judge. Your implication that he could have prosecuted without that step is ignorant.


Well since a prosecutor can skip or even ignore the grand jury's ruling and proceed before a judge to a preliminary hearing... what would *you* be comfortable calling it?


The necessary system being exercised and failing to return an indictment.


When the operator misuses the equipment and it fails, it would behoove you to examine the actions of the operator. Don't blame a toothbrush for a tree not being cut down. Blame the malefactor who used a toothbrush to cut a,tree when he had an axe.

Unless you perhaps believe systems are infallible and can't be misused by people?

People are rightfully angry when a prosecutor uses his position to bring false charges. They should be equally angry if he uses his position to sabotage a case.


Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. But the case sucked either way, so in the end I don't really care.


So you don't care if their was abuse because you agree with the outcome. Fair enough. I can't say I agree with you but at least you're honest about your position.

In case anyone cares and forgot, I don't think a trial jury would have been able to return a guilty verdict either.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Shushnik wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
td6211 wrote:
Tl;dr

I don't like the Grand Jury decision, therefore we should not have Grand Juries. After all, why should cops have the same due process as any common murderer? Surely, they shouldn't. They gave up all normal rights when they became cops.


Unless it is for a Federal Crime, there's no requirement to have a Grand Jury at all. It's entirely at the discretion of the prosecutor.


That's not true at all.

http://manhattanda.org/criminal-justice-system-how-it-works?...

Reading up, it's also required by law in Ohio for felonies. It's required in Missouri for felonies to either get an indictment from a grand jury or an associate judge.

Your comment implies the prosecutor can simply prosecute without the process entirely. That's just false


It does vary state by state, however as you just pointed out the prosecutor in Missouri can skip the Grand Jury process if he chooses. The Grand Jury process stems from the 5th amendment(or rather the requirement for it in the US), meaning it is applicable to federal,gov't. States get to do their own,things. It is still very much a discretionary game on the part of the Prosecutor. Evidenciary rules are different, proceedings are closed, the defense doesn't even present a case. The ham sandwhich guideline is accurate.


No, he can't skip the process. He must get an indictment from either a grand jury or a judge. Your implication that he could have prosecuted without that step is ignorant.


Well since a prosecutor can skip or even ignore the grand jury's ruling and proceed before a judge to a preliminary hearing... what would *you* be comfortable calling it?


The necessary system being exercised and failing to return an indictment.


When the operator misuses the equipment and it fails, it would behoove you to examine the actions of the operator. Don't blame a toothbrush for a tree not being cut down. Blame the malefactor who used a toothbrush to cut a,tree when he had an axe.

Unless you perhaps believe systems are infallible and can't be misused by people?

People are rightfully angry when a prosecutor uses his position to bring false charges. They should be equally angry if he uses his position to sabotage a case.


Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. But the case sucked either way, so in the end I don't really care.


So you don't care if their was abuse because you agree with the outcome. Fair enough. I can't say I agree with you but at least you're honest about your position.

In case anyone cares and forgot, I don't think a trial jury would have been able to return a guilty verdict either.


I'll amend that to say that I don't personally care enough to go much further. I think somebody should, and if there is demonstrable intent to retain a non-indictment I think that the prosecutor should be fired. That would be a high bar to prove, though.


If they can prove that then there are criminal charges I believe, not to mention proving misconduct invites appeals in every case he ever prosecuted.

Proving intent is like you said almost impossible. Showing irregularities with a pattern favoring the accused in either of the two cases in the news should be enough for resignation or termination of the individuals in,question, disbarment is a seperate issue handled by its own system.

Mind you since the only info that will be released is the info the prosecutor decides to release, yeah,fat chance.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.