Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 04:02 PM) It does seem like a reasonable standard to hold a law enforcement officer to in their contract would be that they're not allowed to publicly endorse things that a reasonably large number of people they have jurisdiction over would find personally intimidating. So whether you personally would think it's a threat or not, if you were an african american in that community, I think you'd take a different message from it, and that's the important point, it's another aspect of breaching the community's trust. That said, I doubt most local police contracts are all that well thought out to hit exact standards and legal language. I think that response of his is just typical meat-head, cop speak though. If Brown and Garner were white and there was an uproar over police brutality/killings, the response from cops would be the same. The whole "don't do anything illegal and it won't be a problem" has been a long-time justification for police action/intrusion.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:22 PM) I'm without words... I mean, I don't necessarily disagree with him. He was out coached and the players sucked. They didn't lose because they weren't playing hard or playing to win.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:47 PM) Why not? That's the exact message behind it. Obey or the police will hurt you, possibly even kill you, like they did to Eric Garner. It's not advocating action. It's not promising action. It's providing a "response" to the "I can't breathe" message. That's it. If you think that's a legitimate threat, literally anything can be a threat.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:49 PM) Am I reading this right, so you guys are saying this is ok because of free speech? I'm not even sure whether it's as intimidating as SS says...but free speech = an employer cannot limit your ability to say certain things a condition of employment? I'm sure this violates some kind of police protocol/procedure. If that's fireable, i'm ok with him being fired. But if you're going to argue teachers and professors should be protected from employment actions based on free speech rights, this guy should be afforded the same protections.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:32 PM) Absent context, the shirt makes no sense. The shirt was created with this specific context in mind. The creator of the shirt freely admits it. Precisely the point. Rights of free speech shouldn't be curbed because you find it offensive or you have some take on the words that cause it to be offensive. If it's not offensive on it's face, if it's not creating imminent danger on its face, it's protected.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:30 PM) The words on that shirt are easily perceived as a threat. Obey or be killed. That's what happened to Garner, and that's what this shirt is about. No they're not. It's a commentary in response to other commentary. It is not a threat of actual harm. It's not a promise of future action. No reasonable person would see that shirt and think "that cop is going to kill me or hurt me."

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:24 PM) In one, you have a teacher telling students what he believes (and the science may back up to some extent but maybe not billions) will be the global consequences of climate change. He is not threatening anyone. He is not trying to justify or excuse harm that will come to anyone. He's not saying it's okay to kill the CEO of Exxon to stop this. Whether or not his comments belong in the classroom is a different discussion, especially since we were focused on off-the-job comments. In the other, you have a police officer telling people that their concerns over police brutality up to and including killing a man who presented no threat and just had some cigarettes are merit-less and that if they don't want to be killed or otherwise brutalized by the police, they just need to 'obey the law.' One of these situations is about impersonal and natural forces. Another is about conscious human behavior by authority figures. The problem here is that you're seriously arguing that this shirt is an actual threat. That's laughable.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:19 PM) Eric Garner was murdered by a police officer. "I can't breath" were his last words. In response, people across the country have been using "I can't breath" as a motto against police brutality. When another police officer responds with "Breath Easy, Obey the Law" in this context, it's clearly an implied threat or at least approval of the excessive force that caused Garner's death. The fact that you have to provide context to the speech you find offensive/wrong is a good argument for why it should be protected.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 03:12 PM) If the teacher can be shown to treat students unfairly based on their race, religion, creed, beliefs, whatever, then they're fair game for discipline. It's different when a police officer can be seen as justifying deadly force against anyone who dares disobey. 1) What an overreaction. A threat? Really? It's a response to a movement, at best. It's not advocating police on citizen violence. 2) Why does it matter if its about unfair treatment based on a specific factor? You're saying a cop selling a tshirt is going to ruin relations between cops and citizens. A teacher posing topless or a teacher advocating some cause in his/her private time will have an effect on teacher-student relations. Why isn't that a similar concern that requires action, or at minimum, some kind of discussion about whether it should be allowed? Seems to me this is another example of you being a champion of rights up to the point where you don't agree with the speech.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 01:59 PM) eh I was still 19 when I told my now-wife that I was going to marry, granted it took a few years after that but if it's right it's right.

He seems like big bust potential to me. Didn't he just have an 0-10 game? In high school for a good player that's unheard of.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 10:12 AM) yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 17, 2014 -> 09:46 AM) For all your criticism of Cutler being inaccurate, you can't even click a mouse in the right circle! Ha, fair enough.

Doh, I might have voted single with kid by mistake (supposed to be married with kid)

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 02:43 PM) Is that really how much it costs you guys to go to a movie in Chicago? It costs me less than $10. That's for my wife and I, but yeah, it's usually $35-40. $12-14 a ticket plus another $15-18 for drinks and popcorn.

Government!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 02:11 PM) Just speaking for myself, I'm more likely to watch Random Comic Book Movie on netflix than some generic action flick and I'm not a big comic book movie guy. I mean you're clearly not the only one. These things make a s*** ton of money.

What i'm saying is I would prefer 10 different Generic Terrible Action Movies over 10 movies bases on the Avenger characters, or Iron Man 6 or Fast and Furious 22. At some point, move on, let's find a new character, a new book to adapt, whatever.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 01:51 PM) I'm not going to go through the effort of looking at the major studio releases every years for the past couple of decades, but I think there's some false nostalgia there, jenks. Maybe it wasn't a bunch of "comic book" movies every year, instead it was just Generic Terrible Action Movie. Summer blockbusters followed by the fall/winter Oscar season have been around as long as I can remember. I mean sure, we had Rambo 1-4, Bond movies, Beverly Hills Cop 1-3, Lethal Weapon 1-5(?), etc. etc. But those were the exception not the norm. Now it's the norm.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 12:27 PM) I love comic book movies. They're fun, and sometimes they involve childhood loves. But 20 of them? I just don't get the draw. At some point they just become the same. And while 1-2 might be good, the rest are average to bad. I can't think of a movie franchise, character, story, whatever that I'm interested enough to go see 7-8 times at $40 bucks a pop. I loved me some lord of the rings and the hobbit, but more than 2 is too much. Bond? At least I get a 2-3 year break. I'm ok with reboots after a decade. That's fair. But endless sequels and trilogies? Ugh. Give me something new. I feel like as a kid there were always 1-2 movies out at a time that I wanted to go see. Now I can go weeks without anything at the theaters. That's crazy. And it's because Hollywood is focusing on these huge, big budget movies.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 11:43 AM) I already said blame him. You are sitting around ignoring the ignoramous we have running the franchise and throwing it all on Cutler. I said they all deserve blame but the blame starts at the very top. Did you hear Gruden absolutely bash our team into smithereens. False starts, bad coverages, wrong routes, poor QB footwork, too many men on the field in a fake punt...the list goes on and on. It is a sorry franchise right now. Worse than it has ever been in my lifetime because I think we have the worst people in charge of the organization. I agree 100%. But you were responding to a statement about Cutler alone though, and you said it's mostly the coaching to blame. I don't agree with that. Cutler sucks because he sucks. He's not a good QB. He never has been. We have plenty of evidence for that now. He's a significant part of a huge problem, and I agree the organization has problems all over.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 11:33 AM) Yeah, the guaranteed $$ for Cutler isn't honestly that bad. Buffalo would be an ideal fit for Cutler. That defense is incredible and I could easily see the Bills or the Texans talking themselves into Cutler being worth the risk. The upside, Cutler thrives, making enough plays to let the team make the playoffs. The downside? He's terrible and your teams are basically what they are at the moment anyway. The problem with the Bears moving on from Cutler, in my mind, is does anyone have confidence that this front office brings the right rookie QB in? A bad QB draft pick sets the rebuild back years... I mean realistically they're at that point anyway right? It's going to be 2-3 seasons before they can contend anyway. If the draft pick is a miss, at least you can hopefully be a good team looking for a QB to take them over the top in 2-3 seasons.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 11:11 AM) I think this has a lot more to do with our coaching than Cutler, although Cutler deserves all the heat too. He is not the type of QB who you can put subpar talent around and win. He is the type of guy you put around a very good football team and strong running game with and can win. He is an average to slightly above avg QB, nothing more, and that slightly above average is only very slightly. Just listen to Gruden during the game...we literally are making high school mistakes. Our players clearly aren't buying into the coaching and the philosphy and have evidently tuned out our offensive coaches. Our scheme is awful, our playcalling is unimaginative, and our execution is beyond worthless. Players deserve blame but how you can watch this game and not realize just how bad our coaching is, is beyond me. Only guy I will give any credit to is our defensive coaches as they at least look like they are playing hard and trying. Part of that probably has to do with more rookies playing and fact that more guys have a true sense of pride about them. By the way, Martellus might have made some mistakes but he's clearly trying out there on the offensive side. Is this a joke? Did you watch the 3 interceptions and fumble he had last night? Coaches are to blame for a lot of the offenses failures this year, but you're literally talking about a guy that has gone through 2 head coaches and 4 or 5 OC's. When are you going to start calling a spade a spade?

Stupid teams that will convince themselves that the Bears organization was the problem, not Cutler. My dream is that everyone from Emery, the coaches, Cutler, nearly everyone on defense, etc. are gone. But this is the Bears guys. Kromer will get canned. Tucker will get canned. And that's it. They'll keep singing the praises of the future and potential and progress and Bear Down and Ditka and blah blah and we'll accept our typical .500 or worse, no playoff season as we have for nearly ever season for the last 40 years.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2014 -> 10:08 AM) http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=341 Yeah because Disney movies have NEVER been attacked for that kind of stuff...