Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 24, 2014 -> 02:46 PM) It doesn't sound to me like the scene was threatening. Again, it sounds like the kid was more an irritant than a threat. Nobody was fleeing or anything because of this toy gun. If anybody was really worried they'd be heading out of there. But you don't know that and the concerned citizen didn't know that, hence why he called the cops. Being "ok" with it and not wanting to make the tragedy worse by ruining the officers life even more (the guilt and PTSD for this will be life long probably) are two different things. No one thinks a 12 year old being killed is "ok." And when you get shot and killed for waltzing up to someone who is waiving a gun in the air we can all be "ok" with the fact that Darwin won again. This is the really annoying commentary permeating the country in response to these shootings. You and others have this mentality that cops are mythical figures that can do the right thing 100% of the time. Cops are people. People make mistakes in judgment in emergency situations. People fear for their safety. Cops in particular are targets of violence. Why cops have to risk their lives even more than they already do to make someone on the internet using hindsight feel better is beyond me. If a cop walks into a situation with a potential gun toting person, young or old, and that person doesn't comply with orders and becomes a threat to the safety of the officers or others, the decision of the person in that situation - not the person sitting on his computer reading articles about what happened - should prevail. Yes, there should be a review. Yes, there should be some bar that a cop has to meet before using deadly force. But absent something practically egregious, you don't second guess that decision because no one can replicate that moment. None of this "but maybe there was time to try X and Y, and why didn't they at least try this or that."

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 24, 2014 -> 02:37 PM) I really don't get this mentality. We have an officer shooting someone to death and multiple witnesses saying the person was surrendering. How is a grand jury just something done to "appease the masses" and not a completely legitimate inquiry into the killing of Michael Brown? No I'm saying if he were actually charged. Obviously the grand jury is a very important and necessary step. But to me, assuming that the evidence that has been supposedly leaked is true, there's no way charges should be brought. And just to correct what you said there, we have a criminal who attacked a cop that got shot. Not just "someone."

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 23, 2014 -> 02:20 PM) So a 12 year old kid has a gun at the park and is "scaring" some people with it. An onlooker calls the cops instead of walking over and grabbing the toy gun off the picnic table and seeing what is going on with the kid. Cops are called. According to the cop he sees the gun on the table, then the kid ultimately picks it up, has it in his belt. Cops tell him to drop it. He doesn't and they kill the kid. Things IMO that went wrong that cost a 12 year old his life. ... a.) The busy body onlooker should have walked over and grabbed the toy gun when it was on the table. Was there really an eminent danger here? Nobody was leaving the park during all this time the kid was scaring people because they probably were sure the gun was a toy. b.) Does protocal really call for shooting and killing the kid when he won't respond? There are no alternatives? More details will probably come out or might not, but just because a 12 year old kid is a brat and "scaring" people by having a toy in the park doesn't mean he needs to die. I'm sure when I was a kid, bratty neighborhood kids did inappropriate stuff that didn't result in the cops killing you. Details aren't all out and probably will never be, but this sounds like an unnecessary death. The guy who called the cops is the first person I think erred in this case. So we can't investigate things ourselves? We always got to call the cops who over-react? http://news.yahoo.com/boy-fake-gun-dies-sh...-170034176.html What part of "person with a gun" and "scaring others" would make a sane, rational person just waltz on over to see what is going on? Assuming all the facts are true, I see nothing but a tragedy all around here. You've got a concerned citizen doing their job, a cop doing their job, and a kid being a dumb kid.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 24, 2014 -> 02:18 PM) A trial would be nothing more than a politically-motivated show. Unless there is some very strong evidence out there that hasn't been made public, there is no chance of a conviction. This is all being done to appease the masses. While unfortunate, I think that's necessary here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 12:52 PM) Really, no it hasn't been. That Grand Jury has leaked like a sieve. I like how that Time article about leaks cites another article in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/18/us/ferguson-case-officer-is-said-to-cite-struggle.html?_r=1), which uses information provided by the government: So the government is real pissed about all that information being leaked. Well, at least the information they didn't want leaked.

Cleveland may just not be a good team. I can't believe how dumb Irving is at bball after spending a year at Duke. Thompson never passes. And Waiters is a combo of both. Lebron will have to carry this team yet again.

I know it's crap competition, but Illinois can score in bunches. Nice to see them blown out teams again.

Rose, Gasol and Hinrich all out. Whelp, that'll be a terrible game to watch.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 12:01 AM) They are different genres, but Far Cry is getting far better reviews. The online stuff for both isn't working right (Ubisoft is saying all their recent releases are overloading their servers). But it really should be first person shooter vs. third person action/adventure. I went with Dragon Age. By the time I finish it, FC4 will be $30 bucks.

Oh Niko. I think you're going to be a fun one to watch.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:52 PM) perhaps there's no point in having a jailable dress code! edit: it seems like this judge has a real hard-on for authority, not for being judicial. that's not the type of person we should invest this sort of power in. Have you been in a courtroom before?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:52 PM) throwing people in jail because you don't like their attire isn't really going to improve efficiency, but it is going to f*** people over and breed (justified) distrust of the justice system. Actually it does. When judges are lax and don't command the room, people talk, it's difficult to hear and the cases don't move through efficiently. When the judge is a tight ass, as much as I hate that, s*** gets done. Be it fear, respect, whatever, the result is better. I've seen this happen in many different courtrooms all over northern Illinois. Most lawyers would agree. And I don't really see how it breed's distrust. I'm sure she's got signs all over her courtroom and outside of her courtroom with that rule. She announces it before her call begins. She give ample notice and people choose not to listen. You're basically arguing that people breaking a rule and getting in trouble for it thereafter don't trust the justice system. That's crap.

I can't believe the station isn't pulling the plug. They're blasting their employer on live radio.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:37 PM) Usually dont they split the movie into two parts in order to preserve the story, and NOT cut out anything? Pretty sure that was why Deathly Hallows and Mockingjay did it I'm sure that's how they justify it to people, but the studios want the money. The Hobbit is a perfect example. I think those movies suffer by being stretched out to 6 hours instead of 2-2.5. If they wanted to preserve the story they could make it 10 hours but that doesn't make it a worthwhile movie-going experience.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:17 PM) We are talking about low level crimes such as tickets. And you are throwing them in jail for two days, sight unseen. IF you want to go off on a self-righteous lecture, fine. BUt this is stupid. And nobody should agree with it. It's very dumb. You are jailing people for wearing their pants too low. Any judge that does it should definitely not be re-elected, except how the hell are people supposed to know this happens. It's the same as any procedural rule you're supposed to follow in court that is subject to contempt orders - showing up late, not providing responsive answers, talking on your cell phone, etc. If you don't follow the rule and the judge ignores it, there's no point in having the rule.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:05 PM) Hurting their own chances is one thing. Literally being thrown in jail for an unofficial dress code violation is another. What purpose does that serve? Who does that actually help? I'm willing to be the people in her courtroom look nicer and act nicer than in other courtrooms. She's clearly a "no nonsense" judge and that will be known by anyone who works in her courtroom/goes into her courtroom. For a judge dealing with low level crap, that's immensely helpful in working through her docket efficiently.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 10:48 AM) Offending the delicate judge's sensibilities shouldn't be a jailable offense in any sane world. It's extreme, but judges do extreme s*** all the time. Lawyers have been held in contempt for simply looking at their phone in court. BTW, she's not the only one: http://newsone.com/2002005/alabama-judge-j...or-saggy-pants/ I'm still fine with it. You should see how people dress in court. It's hilarious. They might as well be going to work on the corner. They're so dumb they don't realize that sort of image hurts their chance of being successful in court.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 11:34 AM) What's the big deal about splitting up a movie into two parts? Because they generally suck. It's not necessary. They sacrifice the story for $$$$$$$

Good for her. God forbid these people have a sense of decorum in a courtroom.

I'm in the same boat. They need to be watched together. I'm tired of giving my money to go see a movie that shouldn't have been made in the first place.

Cock magic.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 09:40 PM) True except the part where they pick a hospital based on insurance. Paramedics don't ask for insurance cards - they treat and street, or pick up and go to the ER, and drop you off at the ER they are assigned to by a central triage dispatch (in a multi-hospital environment) or just the nearest one with the right level of trauma care available for the injury or illness at hand. This I know is the way it is done. The EMS who picked you up (local Fire or EMS, or whatever it is) will get info later from the hospital and/or information they have (like your name and address), to send a bill and/or bill insurance, sometimes via the hospital's systems. The hospital then does exactly what you described. They certainly aren't going out of their way to take you to a hospital known for un-insureds, but there's a reason a lot of west side folks end up at Stroger over UIC or Rush, hospitals a stones throw away with better equipment/doctors/services. And you're right, they're assigned, but I think there's assumptions being made when the dispatch center gets an address. edit: I shouldn't phrase it like i know this as absolute fact. However, i've prosecuted and defended hundreds of PI cases and it always seems that a particular brand of person is getting treatment at Stroger over the other hospitals. I don't think that's mere coincidence.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 08:49 AM) So Tracy Morgans lawyer admitted that he suffered a traumatic brain injury in his limo accident last year, and there is a chance that he doesnt fully recover from it to come back to the Tracy Morgan that we all remember. Terrible news The Tracy Morgan that acted like he had suffered from a traumatic brain injury and resembled 12 year old?

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 11:35 PM) Going to pick up Far Cry 4 right now. Hope to get a couple hours in tonight. I'm debating between this and the new Dragon Age game. Though the Dragon Age game takes like 80 hours to beat, and with my gaming availability, it'll take me 6 months to play that much.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 10:13 AM) Given the fact that there currently is minimal content for 4K, I don't really see what the rush is. No need to buy this year, wait until the content is there and the prices are less. And by that time 8k or 16k TV's will be out.