Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Boston Marathon Bombing

78 posts in this topic

Posted

To kill a buncha people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So I don't get into tussles with religiousfolk very often, but I enountered a girl on Facebook that was like "Praise the lord they caught the remaining terrorist!" and I'm just like, "Thank goodness there are brave men and women who risk their lives to catch people who do horrible things like this". Like praising God for a successful surgery, or for a talent. It's irritating.

 

I am also waiting for a motive tho. I find it weird that the news is looking for evidence that the remaining guy isn't that bad of a person and his brother put him up to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

im looking more at "was there some sort of logic to it, a convoluted point, if you will?" "was it just to be famous?" and "did they just do it for the shits and giggles?"

knowing what motivates these things can help in preventing them, though step 1 would still be "stop hyping this shit already"

 

updat: the elder brother might or might not have killed before.

not like its horribly surprising. though killing with a knife and killing with a gun/bomb/other ranged thing are different in the emotional involvement and mentality needed, i think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There was some law passed quite a while ago that says they dont have to read miranda rights immediately if there is still a danger to the public. I imagine they wanted to ask him if there was anyone else involved, other bombs that hadn't gone off yet, etc. You could definitely argue that its streching the law but in this case I'd say it was warranted.

I believe in 1984 was when they made Public Safety an exception when giving Miranda Rights. If for what ever reason after the arrest is made and the public is still at risk it becomes an exception in order to protect the public.

 

For example if they arrested him but they knew they knew or suspected there were more bombs they could ask without reading his rights to him.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning#Public_safety_exception

 

Contrary to popular belief, police don't have to read you your rights when arrested, They only have to read you your rights if they are directly questioning you about a crime. They haven't done that with the second brother yet, at least not officially. You would be surprised at how much you can be asked without Miranda rights being read.

I believe only if they plan to use what they said as evidence.

 

they mentioned that, too.

 

if im understanding them right, the miranda rights boil down to "you can be quiet and you can have a lawyer", but its not like theyre turning to torture or anything. lengthy questioning, maybe. i dunno, it seems more of a court evidence thing, where "i didnt have the rights read, so its not evidence" wont be used now.

They are required to be able to ask questions and use what they say as evidence.

Edited by Michael (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So I don't get into tussles with religiousfolk very often, but I enountered a girl on Facebook that was like "Praise the lord they caught the remaining terrorist!" and I'm just like, "Thank goodness there are brave men and women who risk their lives to catch people who do horrible things like this". Like praising God for a successful surgery, or for a talent. It's irritating.

All of your talents come from God. Yes, they may have been passed down through the generations in your blood, but who's to say that God didn't intend for you to have the exact talents you have now? Or, to be even more general, you have arms, legs, etc. because of God. You draw breath because God allows it. Every action you take, you take because God allows it.

 

So, in essence, her saying "praise the Lord they caught the remaining terrorist!" could also really mean "praise the Lord for the brave men and women who risk their lives to catch people who do horrible things like this!" and it would be the same thing. You're sending the praise back to the origin. It's fine to thank the messenger or the soldier, nothing wrong with that, but why not thank the one who sent them? Or the one who gave them the ability to carry it out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

All of your talents come from God. 

 

We are heading into dangerous territory. Also, true or false, I feel this is incomplete or lacking in some way.

Like, I think I may understand what you are saying but it seems... lacking. I get this nagging feeling that the connotations aren't quite right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

"dangerous" territory?

 

It's simple. God created you. He set the limits to what you can do.

 

Let's say you can sing. Is that a learned thing? Can everyone learn how to sing well? Or are some people gifted with a better voice than others? I think the latter is more in line with the truth. So where did that capacity to sing beautifully come from? Your genes? Those came, originally, from God.

 

Even if you completely deny that, who gave you the air to breath and sing? The earth? Who made the earth? God. 

 

This is all regardless of the fact that I was trying to get across to Sahaqiel that what she said wasn't offensive and I find it odd that it irked him. So I was trying to give him some clarity as to why what she said is okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Brodongo post your thoughts on this whole thing. You're the only member here who was actually there. I want to hear what your experience was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Please, if you don't mind.

Edited by 2jo4 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Chase:

I understood that mentality from the beginning, Chase, but there is as much of a disjoint to me as there might be to you, and it irritates me. For several reasons. The God this person believes in provides free will. If you say that there is some predetermined path someone took or that certain people are born with certain things in mind, it's a contradiction to say that person had free will. I don't believe that that's justifiable, so it's irritating to me becuase it trivializes human ability, emotion, and effort to say that it's any other entity's responsibility. You don't praise God, you praise the doctor. Someone has a talent because he or she worked hard for it. That's simply morally right to me.

 

I don't want to debate this any further for obvious reasons. I'm simply annoyed that this is what some people do, based on my personal beliefs, and you seem to agree with those people, also based on your personal beliefs. So let's leave it at that for now.

 

I do wish news outlets weren't so manipulative; my friend recounted his viewing of the news during the earthquake in Haiti. The reporter was informed in the middle of the broadcast that the earthquake had happened. At the end of the broadcast, he said something like, "Now if you'll excuse me, I have a plane to catch!" Like, parasitically jumping on the story becuase it brings in ratings. Similarly, titles of news articles on the internet blatantly take things out of context or highlight the most offensive part to draw in readers. It's really disgusting to see sometimes. I remember I saw an article that was titled something like "Bill Clinton: 'Americans have the right to be stupid'". Obviously that's pretty offensive sounding right?

 

In the article it was actually Clinton talking about how freedom works in America; everyone is supposed to be provided with equal opportunity, and if they want to do cool stuff, they can, or if they want to gamble away their money, they can, but the country should make sure that damage like that isn't completely irreversible in case someone learns from their mistakes. "Americans have the right to be stupid". It was more complex than that one phrase, but that's what they chose to title the article.

 

It's crazy; I read an article about how this young journalist got so many awards and such high-ranking praise in the journalism community from top-notch journalists, and the reason was that he just simply reported the news. Didn't put a spin on it, didn't have any misleading propaganda titles, didn't insert his political views anywhere, he just wrote news as it happened, and he gets awards for it.

 

My friend and I were talking about how the news stations were probably donning party hats because every time a tragedy comes by; they don't have to write BS news on uninteresting or irrelevant stories, and are pretty much scheduled for just one thing for weeks on end until everyone's burnt out on their cartoonish reporting and stops caring. It makes me worry for the future.

 

I hope the injured in Boston are doing well, and I hope that honest facts get brought to light. I also hope grandiose statements like "Justice wins" are blacklisted in the journalism world.

Treemotan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I do wish news outlets weren't so manipulative; my friend recounted his viewing of the news during the earthquake in Haiti. The reporter was informed in the middle of the broadcast that the earthquake had happened. At the end of the broadcast, he said something like, "Now if you'll excuse me, I have a plane to catch!" Like, parasitically jumping on the story becuase it brings in ratings. Similarly, titles of news articles on the internet blatantly take things out of context or highlight the most offensive part to draw in readers. It's really disgusting to see sometimes. I remember I saw an article that was titled something like "Bill Clinton: 'Americans have the right to be stupid'". Obviously that's pretty offensive sounding right?

reminds me of my friend josh in highschool (hes also the reason that i dont like having my name shortened :<) he was kainda...pompous? a dick? narcissistic? whatever. point is, he could really rub people the wrong way sometimes. anyway, one day, he was riding the bus to school, and some other kid wanted to sit next to him. josh was like "nope" and it degraded (i cant quite remember what dumb thing josh said, but it was, honestly, him being really provocative) into the kid beating josh up. so the bus driver pulled over, somehow the fight was stopped, etc. kid gets taken off the bus, josh sits back down, continue on the way to school. another kid winds up sitting next to him, and josh makes the comment of "pff, he didnt even break my glasses."

 

i said he could rub people the wrong way. he also didnt know how to shut his trap sometimes.

 

that kid gets pissed and starts wailing on him, too. same thing happens, where they get the kid off the bus, etc. i think josh's parents picked him up or something, because i got a text a while later of his grinning, bruised face, and after a bit of conversation, "the guys that did this got expelled". thing is, this went somewhat national. not exactly some weeks-long story, but it had its run. why? because "reverse racism". josh is white, the two kids he pissed off happened to be black. it was nothing more than a guy who kept running his mouth and pissing people off, but they sure as hell didnt report that.

 

josh got several weeks off of school (to protect his identity, since he was on the news), a crapton of youtube attention (he was stalking the comments, honestly), and a lot of free shit sent in as support, including (as he proudly told me) some "one of a kind hand-made, print-screened T-shirts". it was seriously shameful to watch it all go down, and how the media ate it up :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Despite all of the overwhelmingly dumb media sensationalism, sometimes I have up force myself up remember that people aren't as dumb as they seem when it really comes down to it.

Speaking of reverse racism and the news, I work on my school's newspaper staff. There was a story about a student who is trying to get members for a white heritage club. His issues were that he couldn't get club/organizational funding because people were disagreeing with his club, he wanted to ended diversity-based quotas as schools and he wanted to just spread awareness. He was very professional and polite and nice. The newspaper staff was appalled at this concept. They were all talking about how they couldn't believe it was happening. The guy wasn't even trolling people.

I think it was the club organizer's plan to surprise people, hoping that they'd maybe take a closer look at their beliefs and the glaring double standard. The point wasn't that a white group is appalling. All groups like that are puppying stupid. So of course there was a terrible bias, even on this lame community college newspaper. The club organizer even sent the editor an email because they weren't running any information from his position. It was sickeningly biased. Multiple times I had to keep from getting worked up. I desperately wanted to write something about the story in the paper.

Basically, even on the most basic levels, news companies are disgusting.

pheonix561 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

http://news.msn.com/pop-culture/adidas-scores-while-nike-deals-with-boston-t-shirt-fallout



I am considering proposing a business plan to news companies and T-shirt companies. I will propose that I blow up something, give them the information on where and when it will be so they can opportunistically capitalize off of the "tragedy" (and print up T-shirts beforehand) and I will just collect a fraction of the huge profits.

Edited by ∟ ∟ (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

http://news.msn.com/pop-culture/adidas-scores-while-nike-deals-with-boston-t-shirt-fallout

I am considering proposing a business plan to news companies and T-shirt companies. I will propose that I blow up something, give them the information on where and when it will be so they can opportunistically capitalize off of the "tragedy" (and print up T-shirts beforehand) and I will just collect a fraction of the huge profits.

Adidas created the T-shirts after the Boston bombings to donate money to the One Fund Boston, which was set up to help victims of the attack.

...

"we will donate 100% of all profits from the Boston Tribute Tee to The One Fund Boston."

 

imo, owning a tshirt of it is kainda tasteless, but im ok with the 100% profits donated business. i mean, medical bills are expensive as hell, really, and even with insurance it can get pretty nasty. not to mention that there are going to be a lot of prosthetics needed after this. but it would still be pretty...embarrassing? to have a tshirt of this two months from now. 

 

then again, i guess it could be pretty successful at getting money from the population that wouldnt donate to the fund, but would buy a tshirt to wear for candlelight vigils or something.

 

i wanna know just how that fund is being distributed, though, and how much is going to the injured vs how much is going to the city. (im having issues getting on the onefund boston link thing, for some ungodly reason)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.