Royal Spa
Toronto Escorts

The Cost of Being Politically Incorrect

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
I found it interesting that he is forced to resign. The frenzy over this on the left is quiet astonishing as well.
At the same time there has been very few calls for that professor in Colorado to resign, sorry i can't even remember his name anymore. Even free speech issues had been quoted in his case, while the very same people won't give the Harvard guy the same consideration.

Sounds to me,that a double standard is being applied.
 

lenharper

Active member
Jan 15, 2004
1,106
0
36
Are you insinuating that he was unshackled becuase it was seen as politically incorrect to lead a shackled back man into a court proceeding?

Seems to me that it was more a fuck up than a case of political correctness in action.

Do you have any facts to back up your argument (ie -- memo's etc that state that this is to be the proceedure when escorting black prisoners) or is it just more foaming at the mouth stuff?
 

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
Sheik said:
americanson,

If you did your research you would find out that Georgia law states that no prisoners are to be escorted into court shackled because it might make the jury think the person is guilty.

You can bet your bottom dollar that this law is now going to be changed.
This is just another syptom on what is wrong with the justice system. We are more concerned about the feelings of the purpetrator that we are concerned about the victim....see airplane bombing verdict.
 

lenharper

Active member
Jan 15, 2004
1,106
0
36
Americanson:

What I was trying to say is that this idea of attaching the label "political correctness" to this incident seems to do little to explain how the deal went down.

It seemed to be a security fuck up more than anything else yet you intimate that somehow the doctrine of political correctness had something to do with it. I don't believe it did. I think it was human error.

But the wierd thing is I got a feeling you don't really believe what you are saying becuase, when challenged as to whether this incident occured because of some sort of policy, you shift gears and suggest that maybe it was some kind of CONSPIRACY between the female guard and the accused. So what was the cause of it -- an adherence to political correctness (which in this case means hiring a black woman)or a planned jailbreak?

Or is thgis just another in a string of nonsensical angry rants.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
americanson said:
…edit…
2) ALL prisoners regardless of race, sex, age etc. should be shackled when taken before a judge. Especially those in cases like this where Nichols with no prior criminal history whatsoever just well raped and assaulted his former girlfriend and is now a triple if not quadruple murderer. Other cases such as Charles Manson say, all the more reason to watch them closely.
…edit…
Couldn't believe I was reading this. Come on, did you proofread son? Are you seriously suggesting that "especially…those in cases like this…with no prior criminal history whatsoever" "should be shackled when taken before a judge". "Especially those"? Do you mean those who do have priors don't get this 'special' treatment? Until you have the trial (that what he's in front of the judge for) you don't know he did anything—"no prior criminal history whatsoever" remember? Gonna be pretty uncomfortable going to court for blowing over 80, or being a first-time found-in if you run things. Besides, wouldn't a sheet of armoured glass do a better job easier than shackles?

What I really want to know is why the Sheriff's department allowed a deputy wearing a gun to escort an unbound prisoner. Was this their first BBQ? What if he took the gun away from him/her? Duh!
 
Last edited:

ice_dog

Member
Jan 13, 2002
667
0
16
The name of that dude in Colorado is Churchill, I think.

So you think this is double standard ? The way I see it, the two cases are consistent - they are both appeasement to the left....lol !



langeweile said:
I found it interesting that he is forced to resign. The frenzy over this on the left is quiet astonishing as well.
At the same time there has been very few calls for that professor in Colorado to resign, sorry i can't even remember his name anymore. Even free speech issues had been quoted in his case, while the very same people won't give the Harvard guy the same consideration.

Sounds to me,that a double standard is being applied.
 

someone

Active member
Jun 7, 2003
4,307
1
36
Earth
langeweile said:
I found it interesting that he is forced to resign.
Can you please post a source on this? I have not read anywhere that Summers has resigned and it was not in the link supplied.
 

Cardinal Fang

Bazinga Bitches
Feb 14, 2002
6,576
467
83
I'm right here
www.vatican.va
From www.anncoulter.com

[font=&quot]FREEZE! I JUST HAD MY NAILS DONE!
March 16, 2005

How many people have to die before the country stops humoring feminists? Last week, a defendant in a rape case, Brian Nichols, wrested a gun from a female deputy in an Atlanta courthouse and went on a murderous rampage. Liberals have proffered every possible explanation for this breakdown in security except the giant elephant in the room — who undoubtedly has an eating disorder and would appreciate a little support vis-a-vis her negative body image.

The New York Times said the problem was not enough government spending on courthouse security ("Budgets Can Affect Safety Inside Many Courthouses"). Yes, it was tax-cuts-for-the-rich that somehow enabled a 200-pound former linebacker to take a gun from a 5-foot-tall grandmother.

Atlanta court officials dispensed with any spending issues the next time Nichols entered the courtroom when he was escorted by 17 guards and two police helicopters. He looked like P. Diddy showing up for a casual dinner party.

I think I have an idea that would save money and lives: Have large men escort violent criminals. Admittedly, this approach would risk another wave of nausea and vomiting by female professors at Harvard. But there are also advantages to not pretending women are as strong as men, such as fewer dead people. Even a female math professor at Harvard should be able to run the numbers on this one.

Of course, it's suspiciously difficult to find any hard data about the performance of female cops. Not as hard as finding the study showing New Jersey state troopers aren't racist, but still pretty hard to find.

Mostly what you find on Lexis-Nexis are news stories quoting police chiefs who have been browbeaten into submission, all uttering the identical mantra after every public safety disaster involving a girl cop. It seems that female officers compensate for a lack of strength with "other" abilities, such as cooperation, empathy and intuition.

There are lots of passing references to "studies" of uncertain provenance, but which always sound uncannily like a press release from the Feminist Majority Foundation. (Or maybe it was The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, which recently released a study claiming that despite Memogate, "Fahrenheit 911," the Richard Clarke show and the jihad against the Swift Boat Veterans, the press is being soft on Bush.)

The anonymous "studies" about female officers invariably demonstrate that women make excellent cops — even better cops than men! One such study cited an episode of "She's the Sheriff," starring Suzanne Somers.

A 1993 news article in the Los Angeles Times, for example, referred to a "study" –- cited by an ACLU attorney — allegedly proving that "female officers are more effective at making arrests without employing force because they are better at de-escalating confrontations with suspects." No, you can't see the study or have the name of the organization that performed it, and why would you ask?

There are roughly 118 million men in this country who would take exception to that notion. I wonder if women officers "de-escalate" by mentioning how much more money their last suspect made.

These aren't unascertainable facts, like Pinch Sulzberger's SAT scores. The U.S. Department of Justice regularly performs comprehensive surveys of state and local law enforcement agencies, collected in volumes called "Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics."

The inestimable economist John Lott Jr. has looked at the actual data. (And I'll give you the citation! John R. Lott Jr., "Does a Helping Hand Put Others at Risk? Affirmative Action, Police Departments and Crime," Economic Inquiry, April 1, 2000.)

It turns out that, far from "de-escalating force" through their superior listening skills, female law enforcement officers vastly are more likely to shoot civilians than their male counterparts. (Especially when perps won't reveal where they bought a particularly darling pair of shoes.)

Unable to use intermediate force, like a bop on the nose, female officers quickly go to fatal force. According to Lott's analysis, each 1 percent increase in the number of white female officers in a police force increases the number of shootings of civilians by 2.7 percent.

Adding males to a police force decreases the number of civilians accidentally shot by police. Adding black males decreases civilian shootings by police even more. By contrast, adding white female officers increases accidental shootings. (And for my Handgun Control Inc. readers: Private citizens are much less likely to accidentally shoot someone than are the police, presumably because they do not have to approach the suspect and make an arrest.)


[/font]
 

Cardinal Fang

Bazinga Bitches
Feb 14, 2002
6,576
467
83
I'm right here
www.vatican.va
continued.....

[font=&quot] In addition to accidentally shooting people, female law enforcement officers are also more likely to be assaulted than male officers — as the whole country saw in Atlanta last week. Lott says: "Increasing the number of female officers by 1 percentage point appears to increase the number of assaults on police by 15 percent to 19 percent."

In addition to the obvious explanations for why female cops are more likely to be assaulted and to accidentally shoot people — such as that our society encourages girls to play with dolls — there is also the fact that women are smaller and weaker than men.

In a study of public safety officers — not even the general population — female officers were found to have 32 percent to 56 percent less upper body strength and 18 percent to 45 percent less lower body strength than male officers — although their outfits were 43 percent more coordinated. (Here's the cite! Frank J. Landy, "Alternatives to Chronological Age in Determining Standards of Suitability for Public Safety Jobs," Technical Report, Vol. 1, Jan. 31, 1992.)

Another study I've devised involves asking a woman to open a jar of pickles.

There is also the telling fact that feminists demand that strength tests be watered down so that women can pass them. Feminists simultaneously demand that no one suggest women are not as strong as men and then turn around and demand that all the strength tests be changed. It's one thing to waste everyone's time by allowing women to try out for police and fire departments under the same tests given to men. It's quite another to demand that the tests be brawned-down so no one ever has to tell female Harvard professors that women aren't as strong as men.

Acknowledging reality wouldn't be all bad for women. For one thing, they won't have to confront violent felons on methamphetamine. So that's good. Also, while a sane world would not employ 5-foot-tall grandmothers as law enforcement officers, a sane world would also not give full body-cavity searches to 5-foot-tall grandmothers at airports.

COPYRIGHT 2005 ANN COULTER[/font]
 

lenharper

Active member
Jan 15, 2004
1,106
0
36
I am not quite so dogmatic as Ms Coulter and I would agree she does raise some interesting points -- physical strength criterea for certain jobs should not be bent to fit the goals of political correctness -- but I think it is really unhealthy to politize every single event.

What happened in Atlanta was a fuck up and a fuck up that could have occurred even if a reasonable fit male guard was accompanying the accussed -- I think to make the leap that this tragedy was a result of a policy is just that -- a leap.

And as a side bar it was the actions, abilities and skill of a female that did help bring this thing to a resolution.

All I am trying to say that when bad things happen it is certainly not always a result of the actions of the devious Liberals or the uncaring Conservatives.
 

islandboy

New member
Nov 14, 2004
227
0
0
In New York state prisoners appearing are always double guarded but, unless things have changed, some judges will not keep them in cuffs. Even if otherwise cuffed, when there is a jury present, what they do is bring any incarcerated defendant into the Court room in cuffs without the jury present and then uncuff them before the jury enters. Two guards and the stuff with cuffs takes more time but provides some safeguard against a defendant coming over the bench to get at the Judge - which I happened to see one time. The defendant's mother also jumped up on the bench adding to the mele.

As far as Summers. So what. There are things to be studied and learned - the sina qua non of doing things better. I read what he said and he did not make sexist conclusions.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
lenharper said:
…edit…
All I am trying to say that when bad things happen it is certainly not always a result of the actions of the devious Liberals or the uncaring Conservatives.
Oooh. I hope you were typing that in a very soft whisper.
 
Toronto Escorts