- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is America Starting To Target Thought Crime?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:26 am to boosiebadazz
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:26 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Was the government involved in any of that?
Does it matter whether it is the government or the media?
Having your life destroyed is still being destroyed. It is much like the current debate raging here. Being murdered with a knife or a gun, does it matter which?
2
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:28 am to SavageOrangeJug
I'd suggest that the Free Marketplace of Ideas policed Sterling's speech, but I doubt you want to hear that.
I'll just mosey on out of here and let you continue on with your thread.
I'll just mosey on out of here and let you continue on with your thread.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:30 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
No not at all. This thread is titled "...starting to target thoughts" and as I noted in my post hate crimes have been around a while. So clearly he cant be referring to that.
Hate crime is where your thoughts are used as a motive for the crime and you are prosecuted.
We are now moving the area of, your thoughts are the crime.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:31 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Yes, it was against California law.
Not according to her.
But thats neither here nor there. Sterling didn't get in trouble for his thoughts, he got in trouble for his explicit statements recorded for all to hear (whether legal or illegal doesnt make much difference, you can't unring that bell)
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:32 am to boosiebadazz
Thank you very much for being so gracious. I'm sorry, but I am fresh out of big gold stars. Will a blue check mark at the top of your paper suffice?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:33 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
But thats neither here nor there. Sterling didn't get in trouble for his thoughts, he got in trouble for his explicit statements recorded for all to hear (whether legal or illegal doesnt make much difference, you can't unring that bell)
I'm more concerned about a citizen having his or her private conversations recorded and leaked to the media than I am about what Sterling said. You should be as well.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:34 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Does it matter whether it is the government or the media?
I guess the "media" is a good scapegoat for you. Easier that just facing the reality that the Sterling situation was the free market, take it or leave it.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:34 am to onmymedicalgrind
If it was illegal she should be prosecuted.
What is worse. A racist statement made in privacy, or the loss of privacy to make sure we maintain political correctness even in our own home.
What is worse. A racist statement made in privacy, or the loss of privacy to make sure we maintain political correctness even in our own home.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:35 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
We are now moving the area of, your thoughts are the crime.
No, thats Minority Report.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:38 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
I'm more concerned about a citizen having his or her private conversations recorded and leaked to the media than I am about what Sterling said. You should be as well.
Not terribly, no. If you are a public figure with alot of money on the line you need to be careful how you carry yourself in public and private. Nothing new there.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:38 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Easier that just facing the reality that the Sterling situation was the free market, take it or leave it.
Not hardly. If he had said in public what he said in private, then you may have a point. However, the ends justify the means in Leftistland.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:39 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
If it was illegal she should be prosecuted.
Great. Take that up with the Los Angeles District Attorney.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:39 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Thank you very much for being so gracious. I'm sorry, but I am fresh out of big gold stars. Will a blue check mark at the top of your paper suffice?
Something tells me you're not really interested in an actual discussion of whether we're targeting thought crime. Something tells me you're just looking to bitch and for "confirmation" that what you're saying is true.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:40 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Not terribly, no. If you are a public figure with alot of money on the line you need to be careful how you carry yourself in public and private. Nothing new there.
Wow. So I guess famous folks can simply assume that their private conversations may be recorded for quality assurance purposes.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:42 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Great. Take that up with the Los Angeles District Attorney.
So you support a loss of privacy to maintain political correctness?
Perhaps you should be monitored here. In case we have to report, "dude said sumpin bad 'bout Obama."
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:42 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
What is worse. A racist statement made in privacy, or the loss of privacy to make sure we maintain political correctness even in our own home.
You are setting up a false dichotomy while conflating two separate issues. Lets assume his privacy was violated. I agree with you, she should be prosecuted. But once consumers and sponsors heard his tirade, they are not allowed to freely take their money elsewhere?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:43 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
thing tells me you're not really interested in an actual discussion of whether we're targeting thought crime. Something tells me you're just looking to bitch and for "confirmation" that what you're saying is true.
You're the one that is trying to shite in the thread because you don't like it. I thought you were so graciously leaving?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:44 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Not hardly. If he had said in public what he said in private, then you may have a point. However, the ends justify the means in Leftistland
Whether he said it in private or public is irrelevant; people heard it. And people didn't like it, and people decided to put financial pressure on the Clippers and NBA. Thats the free market. Govt was not involved at any step of the way. You sound like you want to start regulate private entities?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:45 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
they are not allowed to freely take their money elsewhere?
Sure they are, it is their business and their money.
Should he be forced to sell his business? Two-way street here.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 9:47 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Wow. So I guess famous folks can simply assume that their private conversations may be recorded for quality assurance purposes.
It wouldn't hurt. Its called being cognizant and cautious. If I had as much to lose as Donald Sterling, I would never say anything that controversial public or privately to my mistress.
Page 2 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News