I am not at all sure why you posted that. He is entitled to and deserves a fair trial, like anyone else. He did not do it on purpose. The best possible outcome for him is to never again work as a LEO, be sued and lose in civil court and NOT go to jail. That is if he wins, which he won't. He was properly charged for causing a death with no intention of meaning to do so. We all deserve fair trials.
He fell asleep at l0:00 or thereafter in the morning. If he was so tired he shouldn't have been driving or stopped for coffee. This is reckless behavior and he has a history of drunk driving which was suppressed. His father is in law enforcement and that's how he got a job. Otherwise, he should never have been on the force. But that's the way we recruit our police offiers. Largely through family connections. And this leads to family coverups. Also, he did not submit to an alchol test when arrested. I think most everyone agrees the average citizen would never have received the same treatment. He didn't even perform CRT on victims and started bemoaning that his 'career" was over according to some accounts. That is why I stated it's a travesty. And I continue to maintain this.Where is it written that police officers aren't human too and guilty of crimnal behaviors? Others agree that he should and could still be charged as a felony which it should have been.
He fell asleep after several days of 12 hour shifts. I have driven when tired and almost crashed. His conviction ( if it happened) for drunk driving has nothing to do with this, and he was given and passed a test. Do you know his father in law got him the job? He did assist the victims. Giving CRT to an injured person can get YOU prosecuted if they die and you are not certified. I don't consider it a travesty at all. If he had been drunk and speeding, I would feel otherwise. Could it be your open minded love for humanity does not extend to police officers?
That's exactly the case. If it had been some normal joe who'd been involved in the accident, Traveler would never have typed those words.
Traveler is a hater.
There is nothing I've posted that speaks of hatred. Only equal standards under the law and no special treatment for police officers. Now, if you want to twist and turn that into a hate statement, I'm sure your warped mind will have no problem doing that. it's not exactly like you've shown yourself to be a highly principled person on this forum. But go ahead pointyhead, as Bluepeas says , write all the hateful things about everyone you seem to need to do nonstop. You and Jiff both. I noticed yet another cruel and vicious attack against Trouble I See. Only bullies pick on those less fortunate than themselves. And the police are not less fortunate than most given their high salaries and benefits although they do seem to want to cry matry all the time. There are those who work dangerous jobs for far less pay and benefits and we never see them posting on this site or complaining the way you folks do nonstop.
No Ernie, it's that I think the law should be applied equally to all. If someone's tired, they have a responsibility to pull over. To take a nap or get a cofffee. Everyone knows or should know their limits. this is a young man who should have more endurance. There are many people who pull l2 hour jobs. And some are truckers, and they do have accidents. Police officers have tough unions. They can negotiate breaktimes for officers. Everyone makes mistakes in life. My point is that this young man has made too many mistakes behind the wheel and drunken driving arrrests have been part of them. He has a history of driving recklessly. You can deny this reality, but it's reality. And it has nothing to do with anti-police. It has to do with equal standards for everyone INCLUDING police officers.
BTW, Ernie, since you are not sure why I posted what I did and we interpret the facts differently, I hope you'll give me the benefit of the doubt and simply agree to disagree rather than to question my motives and intent like Eggbert who is expected to act like this about any comments critical of police actions that people have.
And another thing, anyone can make mistakes, but police officers know the law and should be held to the same or higher levels since they have to go around and arrest people for these same kinds of crimes. And again, I repeat, this was not an older person who fell asleep at the wheel.
Traveler: He made a mistake and is paying for it. His career as an LEO is over regardless of the outcome of the trial. He will always be remembered as someon responsible for the deaths of two people. I am quite satisfied with the outcome. He will almost certainly spend a year in jail, minimum, where ex LEOs have a hard time of it.
So funny. Traveler writes a bunch of hate filled anti cop rhetoric and when called on it, says "no i didnt."
Huge hater and a HUGE hypocrite. Combine that with a pseudo-intellectual's mental capacity and you have Traveler, ladies and gentleman.
Traveler, here is the problem I see with your post: You refer to a history of driving recklessly, but do not support it with anything other than a DUI as a juvenile. Other than the DUI to what history are you referring? I am not denying the DUI is a big one, I am asking what other reckless driving did the officer engage in? As for the blood/urine test - the officer provided a sample. There is nothing disparate about how the DA is handling this case. If you replaced officer with average joe the same charge would have been filed. The criteria for felony reckless driving requires that the person do something overtly reckless. Falling asleep is not overtly reckless. I do not know why you think that this officer is different than any other person who falls asleep at the wheel. In your post you claim because he is a young man he should have more endurance. Why, because he is a cop? Sorry, but exhaustion hits the brain of everyone equally. Hence Three Mile Island, many plane crashes (that take the lives of hundreds) and so on. It does appear that your anger about this incident is specifically related to the defendant being a cop. That is fine, you can hate the police but don't deny it.
I read the news stories extensively on the Cupertino Sherriff who hit the two bicyclists. I also read all the public comments in all the newspaper stories. In fact, my comments are mild and issue-based in comparison to many of the critical comments about this story.
So, we have a disagree here around the facts. Your conclusion about me hating the police doesn't follow, but then neither Eggbert nor Jif ever reasons, and they self-admit that they don't debate or argue too on this forum because they obviously don't know how. I'm not going to debate with 2 admitted attack dogs on this issue further. I'm simply going to re-state the facts in support of my conclusion. You can draw whatever manufactured and erroneous conclusions you please. I'm not here to be popular or ingratiate myself with either of you two. I'll leave that for others.
To repeat the facts as reported:
l) He took a blood test but it was commented on and not reported that he took a blood test immediately. That that was refused. He took one much much later after the facts.
2) I believe he had one not two DUI incidents as youth.
I cannot remember exactly.
3) Like I've stated, officer's know the laws for better. If he was tired first thing in the morning he was responsible for doing one of two things. PUlling off the road, and or stopping and getting a cup of coffee.
We have a difference of opinon on whether or not this constitutes reckless behavior. Most posters and commenters believed he was charged lighter than most civilians would have been charged with a similar crime and that there is a double standard going on here.
It's also been noted that he didn't offer an apology to the family or contact them afterwards. The sherriff department did this. It's obvious what this young man was most interested in doing was protecting himself, his career. Not in making in expressing remore, making amendments to the families, etc.
Now that might be okay in the books of two attack dogs on this site, but it's not okay in my book. And I believe my book is that of the average citizen and your books are of hate-crusaders. So, continue on your crusade of nonstop attacks. Your not going to achieve anything thru your slanders and distortions of my position. People who post the vicious things that the both of you post, take constant cruel potshots at others more unfortunate than yourselves and who have not add the opportunities that you both have obviously had, don't have any credibility in my book and those of others. But keep on with your self-serving attacks as neither of you is able to post anything constructive or thoughtful here. Your stock in trade is to attack and I'm sure you're both well-honed at it as that is all either of you ever do. That and post hate comments. Coulter and Limbaugh could use the both of you as their little poodles.
Ernie, you're off subject. I never said that about the police. The post was about the Cupertino sherriff. I said that about Jiff and Eggbert. But you're surmise they are cops since they wrote in defense of the sherriff so you feel insecure now and so I'm assuming you want to make points with them. but if they are not cops as Jif claims, then your conclusion is flawed. What is it that Jif said about making false assumptions? And I'll add, then leaping to conclusions and taking on comments that don't follow the line of the debate.
Traveler: Sorry, you can't presume to know me. I am posting because your anti police bias is so obvious ( it sounds just llike the typcial racist remark "I don't know what color they are.")
I have cop friends and doubt anyone posting on this forum is a cop. Jif says some things I agree with, Egbert is way too extreme for me. In either case, I disagree with both of them as often as I agree.
Your attack on the driver here tells me one thing: You don't like cops. A common liberal failing, I still hear people call cops "pigs" which I find repugnant. The standards today for the police in CA are SO MUCH higher than forty years ago there is no comparison.
The problems that have led to an increasing rich/poor schism in our society go far beyond the ability of most to understand, myself included. The delineation into two armed camps, good guys and bad guys, likewise. I know and understand some of the social and cultural problems that have led to the rich poor divide.
Regardless of history, justice, freedom, hope or any other fine ideal, I want 1200 cops in Oakland to protect the working citizens from the vandals and jackals who prey on them. Despite the fact that good guys and bad guys are two side of the same coin, the bad guys are the ones with the guns shooting women, kids, men, drug dealers and other thugs. So there you go. I choose to perpetuate the status quo, and thus participate in institutionalized racism for selfish reasons.
Guilty.
Pardon my topic jacking.
Yes Ernie, and people who make things black and white draw black and white conclusions. You state you'll remain with the "status quo". You are incapable of seeing that things don't need to be either one way or another or you don't feel comfortable staying neutral. So, you cannot see nor concede that anyone has a position that is neither. So, your conclusions is an anti-police biase. That's your conclusion and that might be Eggbert's and Jif's as well. But I disagree and don't accept that. If you choose to paint or push me into that category, that's your affair. It shows a limited and insecure mindset in my opinion. And please don't ascribe to me the conclusions you're drawing about your own analysis and mindset. They are your words, not mine. And along with the rest of your faulty assumptions and conclusions, I urge you to read my last post to Jif where I stated Oakland needs more police officers. But what the average citizen in Oakland wants is an honest police force. As for your "cop friends", or your conclusions about who posts on this site and who doesn't, you are not necessarily the most informed individual on this site about Oakland, OPD and Oakland police officers. And I'll leave it at that. Obviously, you're feeling very uncomfortable.
nahh, you're rambling. I like Dellum's programs to reach out to youth and try and show them alternatives. I just want more cops as well.
I doubt anyone on this forum has any OPD connections. If Egbert was a cop, he could be fired for the posts he makes here, and the average OPD officer is not stupid enough to do something like that. Jif a cop? I don't think so. Oops tchrisj aside, who is in both the CIA, the FBI, and has high level connections in Homeland security, the DIA, the OPD and mayor's office, and is a former Navy Seal.
In any case, see ya.
Ernie, not only are you off topic, you're rambling, and speculating about all kinds of things now too numerous for me to address nor do I even want to bother trying. You're becoming another self-annointed, self -appointed expert making generalized pronouncements. you've strayed into areas I have no interest in discussing further with you or commenting on especially as you've shown your own biase and willingness to jump to conclusions and speculate on things you know nothing about. So goodbye on this topic and thread.
M&M Peanut-aka erniem,
Just reading the debates here and low behold...
I said my family members are in Law Enforcement, FBI, CIA and the Military and can't tell me everything they do because....
The Thin Blue Line, Thin Grey Line, Thin Green Line, Thin Black Line FREAKING exists!
And, most of all, they can't tell me everything and it's for my safety!
THE TRUTH CAN BE DEADY!
Even though I have an alias in this forum...I don't have to lie and put others down to make myself seem above it all.
My God, admit it Already! The law should apply across the board! But it doesn't, that's why the following happens...
"Bend the rules a little, he's part of the good ole boys. He's one of us!" "It's us against them!"
Traveler and Alias you were saying...
Is it cop-hatred to feel that cops are held to a different standard of the law? I dont happen to think so. Police are paid to enforce compliance of laws by citizens, and thus are expected to fully understand the laws they inforce. It would seem then that if they knew the laws so well and are being paid to enforce them that they might be held to an even higher standards to obey them, and in cases where they did not would recieve even harsher consequences than the average citizen. But since they are only regular people doing a job, the argument could be made that all people are apt to run afoul of the law in one fashion or another (thus the principle of law enforcment), and all deserve equal treatment in the eyes of the law- I could entrtain that one. But if they do deserve equal treatment, why would'nt it stand to reason that a person who falls asleep at the wheel and ends up killing a family in oncoming traffic, if even a cop, would be charged with something- help me here- vehicular manslaughter, involuntary ms, wreckless something or aonther?
As much as know in my heart that accidents do truly happen and people end up in stuations that they truly could not avoid or prevent and did not intend to happen, for which they should not be prosecuted because the burden of guilt & turmoil created in one's life alone in most cases are retritribution enough- but the law does not see it as I do.
In cases such as this, the officer needs to be treated EXACTLY the way an average citizen would expect to be treated under the same circumstances. None of that thin blue line, take the sobriety test later, watching out for one of our own garbage. Its really an easy argument because there are no black male perps to scapegoat in this scenario. He should've been given a breathalizer on the spot or taken directly to a station or OHN for an immeadiate screen and allowed to go home with paid leave. When nothing's found in his system and falling asleep is his only excuse, he should face some form of prosecution from the da- same as any of us could expect- and probably be let go as a consequence of that stain on his record.
So let's be clear- what constitutes a "history of behavior." I ask because in the forum about the woodfox murder, it was a taken as a given that mr.woodfox had a criminal history, when I check the article it was unclear, but cited one incident and then claimed he had a "criminal history." Traveller did te same thing in regards to the duputy...? How many crimes/laws do you gotta break to constitute a crminal history?
When you reach a general standard or just get the definition let me know, and what ever that is, let's apply it to everone shall we?
Alias, I read I believe SF Chronicle that Mr. Woodfox had been tried but not convicted for homicide in SF and that he was a suspect in two other cases police were looking into. I cannot remember everything in that article but I would google it on the San Francisco Chronicle site. Also, could you tell me which "you" you are addressing about a legal standard? Are you asking the nabbobs on this site, or me? Thanks. Otherwise, thanks for re-stating my position which all of the above-commentators are in denial about. That is, they deny the code of silence. But Fajitagate is the best example of that. Police officers live under the code of silence. And particularly, a father and son. But the rest of us don't and these nabbobs just don't get that. They think the rest of us should be part of the "Code of Silence" as well. Or, they think because the police have a difficult job that we should give them some kind of "license". Oakland has a terrible crime situation but it hasn't unhinged everyone. Not yet at least.
Should've put that maybe..I asked that to all because in one forum its okay to just surmise that Woodfox had a- what was it?.."storied criminal history", as one poster put it, but then you made the same assertion here about the deputy and you were accused of making overstatements. So I just wanna know what makes up a history? How many mistakes do you get to make, and of what kind, before you're officially a criminal?
http://cbs13.com/local/fatal.bike.crash.2.675421.html
According to this article the deputy pled guilty to a speed exhibition charge in 2001 and faced a "pair of charges". See link above. I take it you can read and google, right Eggbert?Or do you just rely on the general ignorance of the public to support your claims?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/11/MNCTVH7DF.DTL
And Jif, you're another disseminator of false information. This article clearly states two things: The deputy had an ENTIRE DAY OFF BEFORE the incident and 2) He left the scene before an investigating officer could arrive to give him a blood test. But continue to twist and distort the facts per your own biase. The public is not so easily fooled as you would have them be, not even Oakland.
Read it yourself. He had a day off TWO days before the incident and worked a long shift the day before. Anyone who has worked 12 hours shifs ( i worked 13 once in a row) can tell you how you progressive lose sleep and one day IS NOT enough to make it back. At the end of my 13 day stint I injured myself enough to need medical care. He did not leave the scene he was escorted to a substation. No where does it say he refused a test.
Traveler, you lose all credibility. You ARE another cop hater.
You don't read all the articles and leap to conclusions. In the SF Chron article it states he left the scene before the investigating officer came. You are quicker to make pronouncements a la Eggbert and Jif then you are to get the facts. You have no credibility either and also, it appears, want to pin labels on people because you are too lazy to seek out all the facts and don't want to bother understanding anyone's position. Go ahead Ernie, be another apologist for the sick status quo. Criticims equals hatred, yeah, right. I know people who have worked many more shifts back to back and haven't hurt themselves. But keep on making excuses. You reveal yourself and your ignorance as you try to twist the story to your own personal perceptions and experiences. and continue making excuses. And since I have no credibility, don't bother debating or answering me any more please.
you dummy. exhibition of speed is an alternative to the DUI charge. Also known as a wet reckless. And the "pair of charges" you refer to are from the same DUI incident. It's obvious you know knowing about the California Vehicle Code, or you would know that you are talking out of your rear end right now.
So if he got a seatbelt ticket when he was 16 are you going to count that as a conviction too?
You're in such a rush to judge this dude, you will throw anything at him you can.
You're as stupid as Trouble I see. Idiot.
The article stated " a pair of offenses." Two charges, recklessness and DUI. he was allowed to plead down to the lessor charge. I blame his father and the people who hired him when he wasn't suitable. But he is responsible too. Now I know you white boys aren't used to being held accountable and responsible for your actions. You think that's for black people only. So you squeal like stuck pigs because you aren't used to being challenged. Go ahead, your insults suit you. They are as limited and boring as you are.
And yes, we have EVERY right to judge officers of the law. He's not just a "dude" for your information. But you're so pitiful you don't know any better.
The police are more or less equivilant to [bleep]s and thugs with the exception that the law's on their side and pays their salaries. Especially in the sense that even the one's with ethics and morals often take the coward route and allow the bad seeds to violate whom they see fit. As good cops go, don't suppose there are too many around seeing as how it'd be pretty difficult to move up the ranks if you're not willing to play the game the way the big boys play. I'm sure there are some "good" cops who get by on the see no evil hear no evil ticket, but that's not a cops charge (so call them good if you wish). They're supposed to cite wrong-doing and crime wherever they see it, not wherever they choose to see it.
Can we be be honest here? He's obviously going to recieve some preferential treatment due to the fact he's a sherrif- they're already trying to put a spin on what occured by not acknowledging witness accounts, and statements made by the deputy himself. What complete and utter ccrap- "We cant comment on whether or not he was tested...If that doesn't let you know they're keeping their lips shut now in case they need to create some lies later nothing will. We are talking about so-called professionals- that are expected to deal appropriately with matters that are sensitive to the public- that are so callous and inconsiderate that instead of easy minds in the sense of decency, specifically the family's, they choose to be vague and deceitful with their statements. I mean seriously, why not say he'd been tested and they couldn't reveal results pending further investigation- minus the lawyer/liability talk?
Are we idiots here or is it a known and illustrated fact that the "thin blue line" exists? However if the latter is not the case, I'm serving all you can eat denial-zombie pie for any idiot with an appetite.
And where's that good old conservative bootstrap talk about personal responsibility? If this guy was tired he should've taken responsibility, picked himself up by the bootstraps, and taken a personal nap....how about that? Dont mean to be so venomous but i'm irked by the fact if this were an eqaul age black male, non-officer, he would've been the scum of the earth, a drugged up dead-beat miscreant, in need of the chair for murdering those poor cyclists...gimme a break. The glaring double standars are sickening folks. You cannot escape karma.
You're stupid too. Why do people who know only what they see on TV feel free to comment like they are experts?
"They're supposed to cite wrong-doing and crime wherever they see it, not wherever they choose to see it."
Wrong. Police have a thing called discretion and are free to use it. That's why some people get warnings instead of citations.
Misdemeanors and felonies are not citable, therefore do not meet the standards you were blabbing about.
Go smoke some more weed.
Oh so its not the cop's job to point out wrongdoing and crimes when they witness it? Or it is their job, but only when they choose to do it? Discretion..Sclhmiscretion...yada yadda yaddaa...I guess that'd be the same discrimination- oops- discretion used to allow him to leave the scene of an accident before investigators arrived.
Heaven forbid anyone but you knowing a member of law enforcement, and drawing conclusions based on creditable information from actual sources...I don't that kiddie stuff so many folks on here seem to have trademarked. I think critically about issues before I let idiotic presumptions fly out of my mouth and I've long ago gotten over that adolescent teenager 'I know I'm right' phase like the one you seem to be going through now. I don't need to sugar coat things for those who are unable to envision the bigger picture and can't readily grasp the concept that "us vs. them" is the problem as someone admitted earlier. If I'm polite its only because I'm trying to be civilized as is required for a worthwhile debate or exchange of knowledge with other civilized folks. With that said...
Now which a-s-sclown is going to sit here and tell us there isn't an underwritten code of silence in law enforcement?!? You?!? Eggwipe-You are not talking to a child, as the lack of logic in your incoherent arguments insist you believe. I know the sky is blue because I see it with my eyes, not because I read it in a book, and certainly not by hearing it from you. A code of silence isn't unique to the police you jerk- it exist in any social circle where comradery, morale, and trust are apart of the general requirements to effect productivity- because at some point it always becomes "us" against "them."
Intelligence is almost totally nullified when you lack the ability to think critically... you smart a-s-s dummy.
Alias, yes we all know what time it is. But please serve your dessert to Eggbert, Jiff and Ernie and the rest of their compatriots who like to waste time playing games and pretending that the department is not all covering up for James Council?
It's really interesting how much time and emotion they can pour out on one police officer and yet these same individuals have not spoken one word about the dead victims. Obviously, civilian's lives come secondary to them no matter what race and class. They really do think they are above us all and deserve some kind of special get-out-of-jail card when they pass Go. Guess they will just have to find out the hard way like the rest of the world. Meanwhile they are going to fight this reality just as hard as they can it appears.
Interesting how you just glossed, no wait, totally ignored the fact that you were completely wrong about the DUI charge.
Like I said before, when you are proven wrong, you just ignore the facts and keep on hating.
(If) you have a spouse, he/she/it must hate to argue with you, since you are never wrong.
Idiot.
Traveler, let's start here: I am not defending Dep. Council. He should be charged like every other citizen who is charged for vehicular manslaughter. In fact, he has been! Let us use this example: CHP Officer Brent Clearman was killed by a hit and run driver (Council left the scene because it is policy and his presence probably did not help the other bikers mental well being) who later turned himself in. Mind you this was a scene where several police cars had their lights flashing to alert drivers that the police were there but that was not enough to keep this driver away from Off. Clearman, running him down, shattering his windshield, stopping to wipe his eyes of the debris and then going home for a beer. The driver was Russell Rodrigues who was charged with the felony because he left the scene. Rodrigues sentence? Hold onto your seats people - 4 whopping years! http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20061026/ai_n16818653 I do not know the driving history of Rodrigues but I would guess it was not stellar. As for storied criminal history try something more than DUI. I prefer to think of storied as something like several arrests over a long period of time to include as a juvenile. If one is charged with a murder, linked to a couple more and the ACORN wiretap I'd say that is more significant than having a DUI (again no apologies for the DUI) as a juvenile.
Is it a fact that procedure dictates an officer immeadiately leave the scene of an accident as Council did? If so its out of synch for them to report that he left the scene before investigators were able to interview him...
In juxstaposition, if Rodriguez got four years perhaps Council would get 6-8 for killing two people? I could live with that argument...
Not going to touch on you assuming in regards to the condition of his driving record.....tsk,tsk,tsk
As far a storied criminal history, several arrest does not a criminal make in my opinion. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Isnt that the spirit of the law? It would stand to reason that black males living in the acorn projects would have a disprortionate amount of run-ins with the law, as for as the wire tap and the murder case, I hear ya callin but again no convictions. If he were that much of a criminal you mean to tell me they couldn't make anything stick out of all those arrests- not even a gun, some crack from his personal stash, no weed, nothing? Makes a rational person wanna warm up an argument about profiling in high crime areas....Council on the other hand, plead down two other charges, and received a judgemnet of a lesser crime instead, but was found guilty nonetheless. I understand your argument but 1>0.
I will not debate the issue of what policy is in Cupertino, because I do not know. I will say that I remember Council's attorney explaining every step that occurred following the accident and there did not appear to be any concern about impropriety. The media seemed to be concerned because they did not understand, but who cares what the media thinks? I'm curious about this sticking point about Council leaving the scene. How do you think that happened? Council said, "Hey guys this is taking a bit long do you mind if I run down to the Top Dog to get a couple of hot dogs? Anyone else want one? My treat! Hey let the investigators know they can catch up with me back at the station - I'm out!" or is it possible with the unbelievable amount of officers and commanders on scene one of them removed him from the scene? My guess would be that Council probably did not speak to the investigators until after he spoke to his attorney, so who cares if he left the scene? I'm sensing a non-issue here! BTW alias, I was tired last night and did not read the entire article I attached which does not speak about Rodrigues driving record but it does say he was fired for theft and arrested about a week after making bail for the Clearman case with cocaine. Sounds like a guy after your very own heart. Let the excuse making begin...
Jif, Obivously, YOU don't care a blood test was not immediately taken and was delayed I believe for quite a while. And this is a "nonissue" here because YOU say so? Let the excuse making begin. And you and Eggbert are always first in line when in comes to police, aren't you? Well, maybe there are those people in the world who don't care what the media think except when they want their own cause championed. But for the rest of the public, they rely on the news media and the 4th estate to keep them apprised of things like that that you and others gloss over as unimportant.
Jif, I have no explanation for the charges in the Rodrigues case. 2 wrongs don't make a right though. I agree with Alias. Council took the lives of two people and should be charged and sentenced accordingly. Anything less is a TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE PURE AND SIMPLE.
When I first read about this I was horrified. I am both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, and used to train in pelotons on similar roads ( groups of cyclists following closely).
My first reaction was: What a tragedy for everyone involved. Because that is what the word is for. Tragedy occurs every day in this world. It occurs when a child is born in poverty to a crack addicted mother, and it occurs when a middle class white guy runs over othe middle class white people accidentally. It occurs when a man is shot in the back when running away from the cops.
Tragedy is life. Wanting to blame someone for it is called stupidity.
I see Ernie, when police officers committ crimes, it's called a "tragedy". Gee, I'll have to remember this one. BTW, I heard there is room for a Sgt-At-Arms at the Reactionary Foaming-At-The-Mouth Slug Society, Oakland Chapter. You might want to consider applying for the position.
Traveler: In this case I agree with Egbert. Tragedy and horror are the defining edges of our experience. Blaming others for it is the defining human occupation. You are a functoning human.
Ernie, you cannot have it both ways. You are obfuscating and excuse making just like all the criminals and their families in Oakland who claim they were getting their lives together.Suddenly, the notion of personal responsibility doesn't apply here at all. Now the only defining earmarks of this situation are "tragedy". That's bullcrap and you darn well know. Just stop now Ernie. If you cannot be honest. then just quit with the crap and excusemaking already. I don't know you and those other buffoons online think you are the self-annointed authorities to tell everyone else how they should view the situation. Well, you not. You're no expert on any of this and neither are those two other self-annointed clowns.
Posted on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 16:47 — by Traveler
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 434
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 218
- The Thin Blue Line, Thin Grey Line, Thin Green Line, Thin Black Line FREAKING exists!
- And, most of all, they can't tell me everything and it's for my safety!
- THE TRUTH CAN BE DEADY!
Even though I have an alias in this forum...I don't have to lie and put others down to make myself seem above it all. My God, admit it Already! The law should apply across the board! But it doesn't, that's why the following happens... "Bend the rules a little, he's part of the good ole boys. He's one of us!" "It's us against them!" Traveler and Alias you were saying...Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 180
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 434
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 51
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 434
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 456
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 759
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 218