JokersWild24

No offense, but I think it's more than fair to say that the neighborhood he lived in was an affluent part of Cambridge, which is an affluent town in and of itself. Most are probably in agreement that a mistake was made to arrest a guy in his own house, especially when he and a colleague show ID. Sorry, but what lawful basis do you have to arrest someone in their own home? Please... This shouldn't even be an argument. Gates made over $200K in base salary alone... in 1993. No bonuses, anything like that. He's one of the top professors at Harvard. He was previously named one of Time's 25 Most Influential Americans. I think he can afford to live in a gated community if he wants to. By all means though, let's all say the cop was the voice of good reason though. It's really a pathetic stretch to act like he was in the right, but by all means, carry on. How dare anyone even question his judgement versus the word of two Harvard professors who are showing him ID, right? Contrary to popular belief, making a police officer mad isn't an arrestable offense. I dunno... maybe he could have checked their ID's and moved on because one of them lived there? I mean, I'd think that's how things work, but who knows? Dude wants to get the fat salary to roll around a nice neighborhood and do nothing, but can't handle the people who fund that daring to look at him wrong when he's basically harassing them? Sorry, it doesn't work like that. Don't want to be around entitled people? Don't take their fat salary to patrol a gated community full of rich people. Pretty simple. I'm sure the dude and all the wisdom everyone is importing on him is doing so much better off than Gates now though, so I'm sure he's fine.

Probably would have been more PC to call him "foolish", talk about a "quill in his cap of screwups", "have his temper tantrums, make bad decisions", "had a child like attitude"? Call a Senator a "tool"? Maybe some "hug a thug" policy? How about if I just completely butchered an understanding of the separation of powers in an argument and got haughty when multiple people rightly corrected me? Nah... it's acceptable to do that, but how dare you do the same when someone else doesn't agree with it. I'm cool. Didn't know the history of 'low rent', shoulda just called the guy a clown. My apologies. Oh wait, I'm an elitist for saying the guys from Harvard are smarter than him. I don't have to apologize. That's what us elitists do.

Just wanted to add, I really didn't know that 'low rent' was an older term with some pejorative connotations. That was not my intent at all. I was just trying to make the point that this was probably a country club, gated community that wasn't exactly known for violence, but a guy who probably didn't live there came in guns blazing and you have what you had. Not an indictment of all officers either. I just think that given the whole ordeal, it would have been easy for the guy to realize he made a mistake and walk away with hurt pride instead of making it the storm it turned into. I'd imagine that other people at the university or in the Cambridge community, many of them accomplished minorities themselves, probably weren't encouraged by the incident. When you work in an area with a wealthy tax base that funds you to protect their exclusive neighborhood, it probably isn't a good idea to ruffle the feathers of too many constituents. Like it or not, it's a fact of life that those types of people can fund a new department quicker than the officer could replenish the tax base if it were to begin eroding. Doesn't mean it isn't right or that it isn't petty, but I'm guessing that it's fairly well understood that it comes with the territory when you sign up to cash their township's checks, and that if they really had that much of a problem with it, they could probably part ways amicably and the people who live there could do what they could to find someone who didn't mind.

I've been onto the general sensationalism in the media for awhile now. Give me some credit, even if I am a butthole.

Not really saying that he's going to go to him for advice or anything, just that as two type-A's, they'd probably enjoy playing together. I really think Rondo wants to win above all else. Putting him in a backcourt with a ball-stopper like Monta Ellis probably wasn't a very good idea in hindsight.

Don't normally do this, but I thought it was worth sharing. An acquaintance from Undergrad posted this on Facebook. I know it's probably a shock to some, but the news on the area is a bit sensationalized and shows the worst. It's appealing to the lowest common denominator in so many ways. Know that this probably won't stop much, if any, of the bashing, but the same news clips portraying the ugliest parts of all of this while a majority of the country without really offering anything proactive are the same kinds of things that Kentuckians, myself included, often get upset about when negative stereotypes about our own State are perpetuated in the media. Just food for thought. Anyway, here's what he had posted a couple of days ago, and below is a post from today: "I'm proud that students from the University of Maryland Baltimore and the University of Baltimore came together yesterday to support social justice. I'm heartened that so many are willing to lend their voices to a difficult conversation. As larger marches take place today, we have a responsibility to make sure protests remain peaceful though. Respectable police officers and protestors make up a majority of each group, and neither group can tolerate those in their ranks who use unnecessary violence. Coalitions are difficult to build, and necessary for change. We cannot allow fractious actions to splinter the push for social justice. ‪#‎freddiegray‬ ‪#‎march‬ ‪#‎peacefully‬" Today: For anyone looking to help out Baltimore in the coming days, this is a pretty inclusive list of ways you can do so, and how to get more information on the options listed. For those who school or work may prevent from being as active as they'd like to be, don't forget that even small donations are worthwhile. Please remember your efforts and attention are needed after today, after tomorrow, and after this week! This needs to be a lifelong effort, long after the spotlight has faded. ‪#‎baltimore‬ ‪#‎Bmore‬ ‪#‎prayforbaltimore‬ ‪#‎withyouractions‬" How to help: Donation and volunteer opportunities in the aftermath of riots - Baltimore Sun

With all of the pressing in the collegiate game, that would probably exacerbate a lot of the "brute strength" and officiating concerns that you have with the current product. Lots more grabbing, holding, and hacking with a 20% reduction in getting it across the timeline.

If I'm reading what you are saying correctly, lots of those grey areas are decided by the Judge (and to some extent, each side's attorneys) at pre-trial long before things make it to the jury. Definitely one of those things where there is lots of grey area, but at the same time, it's unlikely that you ever really see two identical cases. According to how you frame the premise, things can change. Just a quick example based on what you've said about a report: you'll be more likely to have legally stopped a car or two that are the only ones there than you would be to stop fifty of them to catch one person. Post #469 in this thread kind of gets at that.

BBC article comparing Fergueson and Baltimore, and it specifically talks about the crowd control and some of the issues mentioned here: Freddie Gray: How Baltimore differs from Ferguson - BBC News The second and third are articles from The Atlantic, a publication based in nearby DC. The second talks about non-violence as compliance and deals with some of the undercurrents that have led to the riots: As Riots Follow Freddie Gray's Death in Baltimore, Calls for Calm Ring Hollow - The Atlantic The third details some of the civilian complaints against Baltimore police over the years and the amount of money that the city's had to pay out to settle those (some well-founded, others probably not so much): Freddie Gray Is Only the Latest Apparent Victim of Baltimore Police Violence - The Atlantic Take these with a grain of salt, as I know nothing about crowd control and apparently source Twitter and other non-professionals. While not condoning rioting, I think that these are a bit higher brow and more rooted in a narrative of long term cause-and-effect as opposed to what I'm perceiving as the popular mantra here, which seems to be "busting heads the Western District way" (to borrow a phrase from Herc). That isn't to say that I'm opposed to "busting heads", only that I think the ideal solution is a possibly a bit less archaic than some are presenting it. Busting too many heads on each side is most likely what's gotten Baltimore to this point, so I'm not really sure that going at that even harder is going to provide a sustainable solution.

Tons of lawsuits have left the city hemorrhaging money, and there have likely been cuts associated with that. Those have probably only served to perpetuate things even further and it's just been a cyclic thing. I think I'd seen a separate article about some of the new blood in office shifting toward policy of more aggressively defending the city against civil suits, and that's probably caused some factions to form as well. Brutality lawsuits continue in Baltimore, site of Freddie Gray death - Baltimore Sun

Well thank you. If thinking that someone who works at Harvard is likely going to be smarter than someone who doesn't, then yes, I'm elitist to the core. Otherwise, someone's intrinsic worth is not what I was going for at all. Regardless, the connotation is probably a nice fit and I would imagine that I'm viewed as such by plenty of people here, so we'll leave it there unless you'd like to tell me anything else.

Apparently not. It's more of a Twitter slam than social commentary. If you want to PM me with what it means, I'm actually interested in knowing and don't want to take away from the thread any more. Sorry for thread-jacking.

How did I degrade an entire profession of hard working people? I called the officer who arrested him "low rent". I said that because he probably didn't seem to behave with the sophistication that most people in the neighborhood likely have. Sorry, I'm not going to sit and say that I think the guy who has been on the beat since at least 1986 and is still there is as intelligent or uses the same judgment as the average homeowner in a neighborhood like the one Harvard professors live in. Everyone can think what you will, but that's the reality that most of us are living in, and I don't see why saying that is so whatever.

Ok, awesome, and I mean that. I'm not calling you low rent. I'm low rent. I grew up in the sticks in Appalachia and have ate frozen pizza for the last two weeks. I've done a lot of good things for people in my profession too. Nothing I'm ashamed of, facts are facts. Being Yale educated definitely means that you are NOT "low rent" unless you are maybe one of the very small percentage of students there who isn't affluent. That's just a fact. The way I used it in the story was probably inflammatory, but I was just making the point that most of us who tried to put ourselves in Gates' shoes would be a little perplexed. When someone who I'm guessing doesn't live there comes to your place (likely in a gated community that hasn't had a burglary in years) and accuses you, as a Harvard professor and one of Time's 25 Most Influential Americans, of breaking in, then it's probably a bit frustrating. I'm sure that as an attorney he knew his rights, and that probably made the guy even madder, even if Gates was right. I just don't see why he wouldn't take the identification of he or his colleague or do something to confirm that they lived there, which I think we can all agree would have been the sensible thing to do. Remember, this wasn't just Gates, it was he and a colleague. If it were just one of them, I'd be more inclined to side with the guy. So he took Gates to jail. It means he was a guy who got to have his minute where he was right and later had to deal with having more than a few eyebrows raised at it. All of that doesn't mean that I'd like to hand over the power to invest or diversify the economy to him or will sit and say he used great judgment. I'm not really sure that Gates was a picture of respect (possibly even at first), but I don't think it's very likely that the officer was either. Stuff happens, and call me elitist or whatever, but I'll give the benefit of the "who used good judgment" doubt to the guy with the credentials standing in his own home, and I don't really know what's so hard to understand about that.

Asking because I really respect your opinion: what would you change and what would you leave as is?

Are we all in agreement that in general, this is probably an advantage for the more talented team?

Yep, Illinois v. Wardlow.

Maybe to you, but to me... well... I guess I've probably been known to once or twice.

Not Guru but the best answer is "it depends". Reasonable suspicion is generally based on a totality of the circumstances (U.S. v. Sokolow). If it's an informant's tip, then you'll probably need an indica of reliability (US v. Hensley; Alabama v. White; Florida v. JL). Once you've got the stop, there's duration and scope of your stop that comes into play. Those are just general and not exhaustive cases and that's not legal advice. The best answer is usually "it depends" though. Sorry if that's not very helpful, but so, so much would depend on circumstances.

For those of us who haven't been keeping up the past few days, what's changed so suddenly that's pushed Kentucky and Kansas back up in the predictions? KSR was naming a source that'd said UK and KU were the front runners. The CATSPYs? Monday Night News and Views | Kentucky Sports Radio

Proposal on the table is aimed at reducing the shot clock. You buying or selling? Personally, I'm a fan.

Let it rip, everyone else is.

Well there's no way I'd believe it if a white guy said it. Latino, ehhhh... maybe. But that's not what we're talking about, so I guess he's extra credible, right? I mean, he's black after all. Am I right??? AmIRight??? Am?... I?... Right???

Probably not the best PR and/or campaign move, but I'm not the one running for re-election either.

C'mon man, you know some of those gang members that I've represented pro bono once they've went straight and got jobs, that's just a front, right? I'm actually recruiting. Bloods, Crips, Aryan Nation, Latin Kings, Bandidos, it doesn't matter, just so long as I get them back into that life. In all seriousness, someone asked a question as to how you knew the people in the pictures were gang members. I was just stating the obvious. I don't know how any of that was importing any kind of belief of my own, but whatever. I think anyone who really knew me would laugh their butt off at the thought of me as some banger. Disagreeing with what I say is fine and I can take it all day, but saying that I'm promoting gang life is the height of absurdity if you really knew me. You can come up with better than that.