Latest Breaking News

dballance

(5,756 posts)

41. geek_tragedy is assuredly trolling for a pissing match. Look up thread. He argued the other side.

Thu May 2, 2013, 06:51 PM

May 2013

Just looking at the posts in this thread I'd say geek_tragedy is just trying to stir crap and pick fights. S/He's been on both sides of the argument about rights just within this thread.

Up thread s/he argues that restraining orders are a violation of rights. Now s/he's arguing that people who are charged should be prevented from attending classes, etc.

If geek_tragedy is trying to educate people and get them to see both sides I believe it can be done more constructively than what I've seen in this thread. One doesn't have to be so argumentative to get across a point.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

UMass: 1 arrested is suspended, 2 not enrolled [View all] DonViejo May 2013 OP

Whoa.... that's FUCKED UP. harmonicon May 2013 #1

Point Taken DallasNE May 2013 #2

That was my thought, re: drug possession. harmonicon May 2013 #3

If the question is involvement with terrorist attacks, well yeah geek tragedy May 2013 #6

... and if they're not guilty, then what? harmonicon May 2013 #8

They can always sue. geek tragedy May 2013 #10

Good point. harmonicon May 2013 #13

So, you don't think civil restraining orders should ever be permitted, correct? geek tragedy May 2013 #15

No one should be forced to do anything without any standing of the law behind it. harmonicon May 2013 #18

What about innocent until proven guilty? geek tragedy May 2013 #19

You know that a school isn't a court of law, right? harmonicon May 2013 #22

Restraining orders are given pre-conviction. geek tragedy May 2013 #25

Your Argument is Absurd. No Violation of Rights. A Judge Issues an Order. Not a School or LEO. dballance May 2013 #39

I was engaging in reductio ad absurdum. geek tragedy May 2013 #40

So NOT the same thing. A Judge has to issue a restraining order. dballance May 2013 #36

Technical Correction DallasNE May 2013 #48

They could suspend him for not attending class. But if UMASS wants to be seen as tough on terrorism, 24601 May 2013 #11

The Suspended Student Is Not Charged With "Attacks" DallasNE May 2013 #16

Those are the initial charges. geek tragedy May 2013 #20

5 years for carrying two joints? Huh? Cali_Democrat May 2013 #46

Does It Take 3 Joints To Get Over The Threshold DallasNE May 2013 #47

You would prefer that accused rapists be allowed to attend class with their geek tragedy May 2013 #5

Yes. harmonicon May 2013 #7

"there's no reason to think the accused is a rapist" geek tragedy May 2013 #9

Hi, welcome to the first day of criminal justice 101. harmonicon May 2013 #12

That's for incarceration/criminal trials, not the right to attend class. geek tragedy May 2013 #14

What did I "pretty much" do? harmonicon May 2013 #17

You said that if a woman accuses a man of rape, that there's "no reason" geek tragedy May 2013 #21

I sure did. (nt) harmonicon May 2013 #23

So, you see no duty on the part of the school to make itself safe geek tragedy May 2013 #24

I can't tell if you're trolling or if you don't understand simple concepts. harmonicon May 2013 #26

You said that an accusation is "no reason" to think someone committed a crime. geek tragedy May 2013 #27

That's why it's good that we do have such rights. harmonicon May 2013 #28

You understand the basic difference between lynching someone geek tragedy May 2013 #29

You REALLY didn't google those terms I gave you, did you? (nt) harmonicon May 2013 #30

No, I just understand them much better than you do. geek tragedy May 2013 #31

I'm really glad I'm not a trout. harmonicon May 2013 #35

geek_tragedy is assuredly trolling for a pissing match. Look up thread. He argued the other side. dballance May 2013 #41

So one of the threads on Latest Breaking News is about a women charged with lying to police about 24601 May 2013 #44

SOP at most colleges and universities. Xithras May 2013 #33

Allowed back into school, sure, but what about their time and other expenses? harmonicon May 2013 #34

It wasn't a person I knew. Xithras May 2013 #43

I think it's really a tricky issue. harmonicon May 2013 #45

thanks for the news, DV Cha May 2013 #4

How did they live in a dorm if they werent enrolled? Gin May 2013 #32

the other two lived elsewheres, I believe and have wealthy families. KittyWampus May 2013 #38

I used to teach Anthropology at Umass Dartmouth. mysuzuki2 May 2013 #37

Ah... "neo-communist" I called it when I was in college. harmonicon May 2013 #42