Reply With Quote
Cops need to be better than what? And which cops?
It, meaning discrimination. It's not nearly so hard to show in high-profile cases as you're suggesting.
That happened six months ago. And they're still thinking about it? Where's your evidence to suggest that your interpretation of events is true and that they aren't just tabling this because they know clock boy has no case to stand on?The Department of Justice is still investigating on whether there is enough concrete evidence to move for prosecution.
Do you understand how DOJ investigations work? Or our legal system in general?
Um, ad homenims aren't based on being false. In fact, most ad homenims are true. The fallacious part is that you can't attack someone's points merely be trying to discredit them personally. Like if I made a defense stat that showed Danny Green was the best defender on the Spurs, dismissing it simply because I'm a known Green homer is an ad homenim. I have indeed called you and mainly your arguments pseudo-intellectual or tone-deaf, but that has never been the basis of my counter-argument. As you point out, I've been writing detailed responses showing why I disagree. You can obviously not find those compelling, but that doesn't make what I said an ad homenim.Right, because me being pseudo intellectual is just you stating the facts!
It's neither, though it would be the first one if I had to pick.You're an arrogant prick. That's a fact, no ad hominem.
Cops need to be better than what? And which cops?
I don't think I could have asked the question any clearer. I even put the word "court" in quotes and avoided using a wall of text for you to lessen any risk of confusion.
Let's try again.
You claimed "courts seem very eager to prove it"
I asked "what court is out to prove it?"
I'm asking for a specific court you're referring to. "court"
Lol wut. Cite your reference, professor.
And your use of ad hominem here is textbook.
Cops need to be better than the general movie watching populace.
All cops responding to bomb calls.
If it was obviously not a bomb, and clock boy never pretended it was a bomb, why did clock boy say he made modifications to make it look less su ious? I take his statement as he knew he was bringing something to school that could be mistaken for a bomb, how do you interpret his "make it look less su ious" comment?
Too much tabloid teevee and hollywood tbh
Still makes no sense to just take the electronics out of one enclosure, slap them into another enclosure, and think you'd impress a teacher.
And the first teacher advised him not to show anyone else for some odd reason. Hmmm, what could that reason be?
Why didn't the first teacher get scared
He made it less su ious so that he wouldn't get in trouble seems plausible enough.
If he really wanted to scare people, why didn't he make it more su ious?
Was supposedly an engineer teacher, so probably understood it wasn't dangerous, but might appear dangerous to laypersons.
So he wouldn't get in trouble for what?
K, should have been enough right there not to get arrested
For bringing a digital clock to school that might look like something from MacGyver to some people.
So he tried to make it less su ious.
And then told his first teacher about the clock.
lol macgyver got'em rattled
pussified murikkkans
Why would he bring something to school that he already admittedly knew would be viewed as su ious?
“Anyone with even a basic hobby-level understanding could see it was a commercially available mass-produced product that was just taken out of its enclosure, and placed in a pencil box,” DiPasquale told The Daily Beast. “So I read some more about the story, and nowhere did I see anybody actually bring that point up.”
“Here we have a social media frenzy going on, with everybody to the president of the United States giving him a pat on the back, and I started thinking less about the clock, and more about us, as a society,” he added.
The public outcry over Mohamed’s arrest was also, presumably, less about the clock and more about what it says about us, as a society, that such a thing would happen.
DiPasquale questioned if other aspects of the teenager’s story about the clock aren’t being fully reported or fact-checked by reporters. In one interview, for example, Mohamed says he closed the pencil case with a cord so it wouldn’t look su ious in school.
“I’m curious, why would ‘looking su ious’ have even crossed his mind before this whole event unfolded, if he was truly showing off a hobby project, something so innocuous as an alarm clock. Why did he choose a pencil box, one that looks like a miniature briefcase no less, as an enclosure for a clock?” DiPasquale wrote.
Since carrying a pencil box is not a crime, Mohamed does not, presumably, owe anyone an explanation. But DiPasquale says that Mohamed and his poorly repurposed clock aren’t the problem—it’s the knee-jerk reaction from the press and social media activists crying racism and attacking school administrators and police without knowing all the facts.http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...d-s-clock.htmlA research scientist narrated a similar takedown of Mohamed’s device on YouTube and faced a surge of negative comments accusing him of racism and of picking on a 14-year-old kid.
Thomas Talbot, an electronics author and prominent medical virtual reality scientist, said the clock’s printed circuit boards and ribbon cables, along with the 9-volt battery backup, are signs of a commercial product.
In his video, Talbot displays a photo of Mohamed’s clock and on screen, flashes an arrow over a tangle of cords jutting from the case. “This was put in here to look like a device, with these cables and these… to look like a device that would be su ious, and I think intentionally so,” he says of the design.
“This is simply taking a clock out of its case, and I think probably for provocative reasons, intentionally,” he said in his video. He did not elaborate further.
“When I saw this, I thought, ‘We’re getting duped here,’” Talbot told The Daily Beast, adding, “Anybody who knows electronics really well needs less than five seconds to know that was a clock taken out of the box.”
He wanted to show off the clock.
Why didn't the cops press charges if you think this issue is such a big deal?
First comment.
Lazy, psuedo-intellectual missing the point again.
lol Blake.
Is this one better?
Last edited by vy65; 04-14-2016 at 04:47 PM.
thinking that was worthy of showing off. If you truly believe that this brilliant inventor kid found this slopped together taken apart clock lol invention I can see where you are coming from but I don't buy it for a minute. He didn't "invent" anything to show off IMO. He pulled a prank and brought something he admittedly knew was su ious and could be viewed as a bomb. I don't think he expected the overreaction and the fame though, that was just a bonus for his family and him.
So now his clock was just slopped together. You guys need to make up your mind if he's a hack or an evil genius.
Again, if it's such an issue for you that he tried to make it "less su ious" why were there no charges filed
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
