[MRipley]

Coremodels wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>MRipley wrote:</div>
A NYC police officer was executed while performing his duties for the community.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/05/us/new-york-police-officer-shot-dies/index.html

Not sure what that has to do with police brutality.

I’m curious though, will the guy who shot him be suspended from work with pay instead of arrested while they look into it? Will he be questioned only after a mandatory “cooling off period”? Will his interrogators be disallowed from threatening him with the applicable punishments for his crime during questioning? Will the accused be given access to the names and testimony of all his accusers before being questioned?

I mean, I’m sure you had some point here…but I certainly don’t see it.

Seems to me that the title of this thread had something to do with Police Brutality & Violence in the US, and this appears to be a violent action involving a police officer. Would it make you more comfy if there was a thread title “Public Brutality and Violence Against Police”?

And there is no question that you could not comprehend actions like this officers killing and how it may relate to police interactions with the public, so please disregard this incident as we all know you will. It really isn’t meant for people with your mentality.

Rus, thanks for getting it.

[MRipley]

A NYC police officer was executed while performing his duties for the community.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/05/us/new-york-police-officer-shot-dies/index.html

[MRipley]

I think freighter is a scam.

[MRipley]

McFly wrote:

Sort of like –

shit…. spilled my coffee…

[MRipley]

Opps, seems they left the cost of infrastructure from the walking and bicycle modes. Just an oversight I’m sure, LOL.

[MRipley]

Based on the available information/evidence I have no problem with a murder charge against this cop, and hope that they would charge any of the other officers that might have tried to cover for him.

I also have absolutely no problem with justified shootings by cops.

[MRipley]

thecandlelab wrote:

Here are the two photos I promised above. One is a monstrosity of a bike rack that the businesses on that block fought because it really chokes off walking traffic and visibility, and the second is a sign stuck right in the middle of the sidewalk by the Grandview Cafe. Nothing says “This is our turf” like making people walk around your sign in the hopes of building your commission’s brand.

Business’s fought these signs/bike rack because they choke off walking traffic and visibility? Really?

A little stick sign that’s hardly even noticeable doesn’t seem to “mark territory” nearly as much as the tables and chairs in front of Staufs that create a trip-hazard maze for walkers to thread through, or the raised patios that choke the side walk to a single lane in front of the businesses directly across from Spagio. Then there are all those visibility blocking trees to contend with..

But really, this place has become a pedestrians nightmare with that crazy big bike rack and couple of street signs.

[MRipley]

jbcmh81 wrote:

Why do you think actions should not have consequences? I haven’t seen anyone advocate for ruining the woman’s life. I have seen people advocate taking their business elsewhere, along with calling a spade a spade in doing so. She made a choice, but now she is supposed to get a pass because it may cost her her business? That’s not how life ever works. If she loses her business, it’s because of her own decisions. It’s ridiculous to act like people have no responsibility in what they do and say.

LOL, exactly what actions did the video maker take against the couple? Seem more like she was exercising her right to inaction based on her beliefs. You and others are doing nothing but creating severe consequences for the photog BECAUSE they don’t follow your belief.

[MRipley]

Walker Evans wrote:

How about just a sincere apology? Those still have value IMHO.

You’re asking for an apology? You really think she should apologize for following her version of faith and beliefs, or maybe it’s for not following yours?

[MRipley]

rus wrote:

Really Rus, all white ducks? You seem to be able to produce funny white duck memes pretty quickly.

Why they would only use white feathered ducks in this GIF? I’m pretty sure that Mallards, Bald Eagles, and even Pink Flamingos could giggle as well or even better which would more accurately represent the diversity of nature. It has to be a racial statement of some sort, right?

[MRipley]

drew wrote:

A paper that represents the city, and is created to help you understand the city, ideally has to be composed of the city.

In their “About Us” section they make no mention that they are about helping anyone understand the city or trying to be some sort of culturally diverse representation of Columbus.

“Columbus Alive is a weekly entertainment magazine and website serving central Ohio with fresh, fun coverage of the music, arts, food and nightlife that makes this city tick.

Like our paper, our readers are precisely the kinds of people advertisers want to target: They are involved, well-educated, prosperous and energetic people in the prime of their lives who believe in making the most out of this community.”

Sounds like they are all about targeting a crowd that their advertisers want. Plain and simple. Some people may dream that the rag has to be more than that because it has “Columbus” in the name, but in reality, it’s just another advertising media piece. Sorta like some of the local talk radio shows that are nothing more than hour long advertisements with goofy babble filling the time between ad spots.

[MRipley]

Chris Sunami wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>JeepGirl wrote:</div>
So race based hiring is cool as long as it’s your preferred race?

And that would be…?

Anything But White? (‘dem whites don’t know Chinese food like a Chinaman anyway)

[MRipley]

Zyro wrote:

So does this mean Kasich’s restrictions were overturned?

Personally, I’m glad. Speeders, especially in a city trying to become more pedestrian friendly, should be reprimanded accordingly. Kasich must really, really like cars.

I don’t think that ruling has anything to do with the upcoming regulations requiring a police officer to be present at camera locations to personally witness a violation before a civil citation could be issued.

[MRipley]

Rahburts wrote:

The problem now is that it’s more convenient for those to drive into the city and once they’re in, whats the point of hoping on the bus if you’ve already got your car there. Just my opinion.

I guess that’s the issue that rail wishers have when attempting to justify their dream to the masses, they try to cite an admittedly more convenient, existing system as a “problem”.

[MRipley]

jbcmh81 wrote:

I know the source is a bit different, but we’re still talking about a tax on a private company’s revenues, not a direct citizen tax.

So you think that the tax that private companies pay doesn’t go into the cities general fund?

[Author]

Posts