|magnesium - 2015-03-29 |
The only thing surprising about this, honestly, is that he actually got in trouble for it.
|snothouse - 2015-03-29 |
|oddeye - 2015-03-29 |
a convicted con gets a taste of their former life in jail and the world is up in arms, boohoo. This is only making news because the probe-ation officer was black and you supremists have already convicted him without trial.
PoETV now stands for secret Police of Everything Truthful & Virturous
... which is oddly named, because the characters only rarely wear orange.
You really earned your handle with that post, oddeye, because only someone with an odd eye would write something like that!
"Black and white stripes is the new black and white arrow pattern" doesn't have the same ring to it I guess.
The only words I would not stand behind in my previous statement are "boohoo" and maybe change "you" to "everyone" Other than that:
1. People do get abused in jail, it isn't right in any circumstances.
2. People are up in arms about it.
3. Cases where the suspect/offender is black do get more coverage.
4. Assumption of innocence is very conviently applied only when it suits people. Black people are disproportionately pressumed to be at fault by white American culture as a whole.
Cons/Ex-cons are particulary vulnerable to abuse by someone in power over them and it happens with alarming frequency. In an ideal world ALL such cases would be reported and covered by the media.
Sanest Man Alive is clearly advocating the opposite to these points and is part of the pro-rape culture poisoning progression. For shame.
It's actually more like 'Drab Tan Jumpsuits is the New Black and White Stripes', or even 'Drab Tan Jumpsuits is the New Black', because the phrase "New Black" refers not to a type of prison uniform, but rather to the popular fashion-cliche, "x is the New Black", which in turn is an allusion to the main character's previous yuppie lifestyle, as well as to the show's (somewhat but not entirely subverted) chick-show-chic.
Anyway, you raise some good points about the presumption of innocence. However, it bears pointing out that, in THIS case, the man has evidently been tried and convicted, based on solid video evidence. A man is innocent until proven guilty - and this man HAS been proven guilty, so surely now we are entitled to be a little racist?
P.S. "because the probe-ation officer was black and __everyone__ supremists have already convicted him without trial" ???
Sanest Man Alive
I'm advocating the point that you should shut the fuck up forever. I don't know how you missed that, but I thought it was pretty clear.
Even when it coincides with mine, I don't care what your fucking stance on anything is because you're such a cunt about everything.
Miss Henson's 6th grade class
I'm gonna take a bold moral stance here and say that it's wrong to rape someone, even if that person has done some time. Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed today, or something, oddeye?
You're so edgy oddeye.
You sure understand campus politics.
Damn, oddeye. You just got The Great Hippo'd.
What do you have to say for yourself?
Yeah, I admit that I was way off base with what I said. Black and whire stripped prison P.J.s are the new black would not have worked as well IMO. and would have been closer to the original intended statement of orange being the new black.
Also, it's edgy to take the stance that no one should get raped or unfairly treated like a criminal? How does that work?
Sanest Man Alive would rather NOT agree with someone saying to end all rape because he doesn't like the way it was said. Sanest CHILD Alive more like.
Everything you wrote in your original post was edgy, you piece of shit, despite your pathetic backpedaling.
Christ, I don't remember you being this much of a cunt.
how is it back pedaling when it's exactly what I wrote?
Again, I'm going to have to reitirate: this man was convicted by a jury of his peers. He is "guilty". We are not "unfairly" treating him like a criminal, because in the eyes of the law, he IS a criminal!
I suppose, like many prisoners, it is conceivable that he may have been wrongly convicted. But the burden of proof now rests on *you*, Oddeye; if you think there's been a miscarriage of justice, you now have to demonstrate that there's good reason to question the validity of his conviction. We don't have to defend our so-called "unfair" assumptions about this guy.
fairs fair, it was my understanding based on google searches that he was not convicted and if he has been convicted then I amend my previous statement regarding the assumption of innocence to be not applicabble in this specific case. I also do so with appologies to all that were offended.
I still stand bely that statement in general and all of statements in my second post and if crybabies want to wish me to be sexually abused for speaking the truth then so be it. I will gladly be that martyr.
|dairyqueenlatifah - 2015-03-29 |
I'm more surprised by the fact that this has been made public and he's been arrested for it than the fact that he actually did it.
I get the feeling that his boss doesn't like him.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|