Guys, guys! Remember that he's black. When a black person is sueing the school for this kind of violation, it's stealing from the poor community. When white atheists do it over school prayer, it is a heroic act and they had it coming.

(November 30, 2015 at 11:19 am)paulpablo Wrote: I agree that it seems paranoid of the teachers to report him to the police but I don't know all the little details of the incident that took place that day.

They never thought he had a real bomb, they thought he had a hoax bomb.

According to the video teachers are required to call police when someone does something like that in a school. Which makes sense.

It's not like our education system is in the stone age anyways

(November 30, 2015 at 11:27 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 30, 2015 at 11:19 am)paulpablo Wrote: I agree that it seems paranoid of the teachers to report him to the police but I don't know all the little details of the incident that took place that day.

They never thought he had a real bomb, they thought he had a hoax bomb.

According to the video teachers are required to call police when someone does something like that in a school. Which makes sense.

I've heard a lot of different stories of what happened and why it happened.  Obviously I've heard the mainstream story, that everyone in the school was Islamophobic and also hated him because of his skin colour, but I've heard stories saying he acted antagonistic and was repeatedly told to not go around a school with a device that looks like a bomb a few days after the anniversary of 9 11 by several teachers and refused.

(November 30, 2015 at 11:31 am)paulpablo Wrote:

(November 30, 2015 at 11:27 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: They never thought he had a real bomb, they thought he had a hoax bomb.

According to the video teachers are required to call police when someone does something like that in a school. Which makes sense.

I've heard a lot of different stories of what happened and why it happened.  Obviously I've heard the mainstream story, that everyone in the school was Islamophobic and also hated him because of his skin colour, but I've heard stories saying he acted antagonistic and was repeatedly told to not go around a school with a device that looks like a bomb a few days after the anniversary of 9 11 by several teachers and refused.

Yeah it all depends on who you believe. It's the kid's word against those of the teachers.

(November 30, 2015 at 11:26 am)Quantum Wrote: Guys, guys! Remember that he's black. When a black person is sueing the school for this kind of violation, it's stealing from the poor community. When white atheists do it over school prayer, it is a heroic act and they had it coming.

 (1) I wasn't aware Ahmed Muhammad was black I assumed he was middle eastern or something, I actually never saw his race as being important.

(2)  I've never said a white atheist is heroic for sueing a school,  and just to clarify I think it would be horrible if an atheist sued any tax funded organization for as much as 15 milion dollars over a school prayer. I don't think myself or anyone else on this forum has said it is heroic.

(3)  I'm not saying Muhammad is stealing by suing anyone, I'm just stating a fact that the money he takes will be funded by money taken from the community, indirectly, none of the people who were responsible for his supposed trauma will be punished by the taking of 15 million dollars and if he is truely traumatized maybe the most he could ask for is the cost of therapy, not 15 million dollars.

The thing with making comments that are sarcastic and supposedly humerous is that I can't actually tell who you're talking to or what point you're trying to make, from the look of it, it seems like you're accusing me of treating this black person who I didn't even identify as being black unequally to imaginary characters who you have made up in your imagination who are white atheists who you assume I'd treat better than Muhammad.

Ok, I'm not talking to you then...

(November 30, 2015 at 1:18 pm)paulpablo Wrote: (2)  I've never said a white atheist is heroic for sueing a school,  and just to clarify I think it would be horrible if an atheist sued any tax funded organization for as much as 15 milion dollars over a school prayer. I don't think myself or anyone else on this forum has said it is heroic.

Forget the figure, it's seriously the most unimportant thing here. Neither Ahmed, his lawyers, the school district, the police, etc. have anything to do with the compensation amount. That is *entirely* up to the judge. I'm serious, the lawyers could ask for $15 billion, and the judge could decide to give Ahmed nothing, or conversely, the lawyers could ask for a tiny amount of money, and the judge could instead demand the school pay $15 million. It's entirely up to the judge, and probably a few pieces of legislation which define limits of compensation, etc.

The reason they ask for $15 million is to try and convince the judge to award the highest amount of compensation possible; that is what lawyers are paid to do. It's also because the process of suing anyone is often long and drawn out. Let's say that the judge agrees that compensation is necessary, and awards $5 million instead of the full $15 million. Neither the school district or the police will settle for that, and will likely appeal, at which point maybe another judge decides that it should be $1 million. Maybe then Ahmed's lawyers appeal that ruling, but it doesn't go in their favor and the amount is reduced again. The point is, after the legal process is exhausted, the amount of compensation actually paid out (minus the lawyers fees) is probably a fraction of the amount asked for.

Quote:(3)  I'm not saying Muhammad is stealing by suing anyone, I'm just stating a fact that the money he takes will be funded by money taken from the community, indirectly, none of the people who were responsible for his supposed trauma will be punished by the taking of 15 million dollars and if he is truely traumatized maybe the most he could ask for is the cost of therapy, not 15 million dollars.

So you are saying that if an organization violates your rights, you aren't owed any kind of compensation other than what it might cost to recover from any trauma? So effectively, the organization isn't actually punished for the original violation, just the outcome of it? That's setting a dangerous precedent right there. Rights are rights; violating them has to be punished, or they are just meaningless words.

(November 30, 2015 at 2:38 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 30, 2015 at 1:18 pm)paulpablo Wrote: (2)  I've never said a white atheist is heroic for sueing a school,  and just to clarify I think it would be horrible if an atheist sued any tax funded organization for as much as 15 milion dollars over a school prayer. I don't think myself or anyone else on this forum has said it is heroic.

Forget the figure, it's seriously the most unimportant thing here. Neither Ahmed, his lawyers, the school district, the police, etc. have anything to do with the compensation amount. That is *entirely* up to the judge. I'm serious, the lawyers could ask for $15 billion, and the judge could decide to give Ahmed nothing, or conversely, the lawyers could ask for a tiny amount of money, and the judge could instead demand the school pay $15 million. It's entirely up to the judge, and probably a few pieces of legislation which define limits of compensation, etc.

The reason they ask for $15 million is to try and convince the judge to award the highest amount of compensation possible; that is what lawyers are paid to do. It's also because the process of suing anyone is often long and drawn out. Let's say that the judge agrees that compensation is necessary, and awards $5 million instead of the full $15 million. Neither the school district or the police will settle for that, and will likely appeal, at which point maybe another judge decides that it should be $1 million. Maybe then Ahmed's lawyers appeal that ruling, but it doesn't go in their favor and the amount is reduced again. The point is, after the legal process is exhausted, the amount of compensation actually paid out (minus the lawyers fees) is probably a fraction of the amount asked for.

Quote:(3)  I'm not saying Muhammad is stealing by suing anyone, I'm just stating a fact that the money he takes will be funded by money taken from the community, indirectly, none of the people who were responsible for his supposed trauma will be punished by the taking of 15 million dollars and if he is truely traumatized maybe the most he could ask for is the cost of therapy, not 15 million dollars.

So you are saying that if an organization violates your rights, you aren't owed any kind of compensation other than what it might cost to recover from any trauma? So effectively, the organization isn't actually punished for the original violation, just the outcome of it? That's setting a dangerous precedent right there. Rights are rights; violating them has to be punished, or they are just meaningless words.

I don't have a definite answer to that because I think it's complicated.

But I'm not saying they should just be punished just only for the outcome of the situation, even if Ahmed said he was very happy with the police actions that took place and was sorry for wasting their time there obviously should be some punishment for the police officers who made mistakes when handling this incident.  They could be fired or at least they should be forced to be retrained to do their job better.

In an organization like a police force, I don't see how taking money from the organization is a punishment, they aren't a business in competition with other businesses.  The government will ensure the money for the police is always there by forcibly taking it off the people within the population via taxes or by taking property, speeding fines and things like that.

It would seem more logical, if Ahmed's family were really concerned with the actual events that happened as opposed to being concerned with just opportunistically making money, they would ask for the individual police officers and teachers involved in the event to be fired or have disciplinary action put against them.

(November 30, 2015 at 9:16 pm)paulpablo Wrote: They could be fired or at least they should be forced to be retrained to do their job better.

Just a pet peeve of mine. I cringe whenever I hear 'retrain'. If retrain means that the training needs to be revamped and the new and better training deployed, I'm okay; however, this is rarely what is meant. Retrain typically takes the meaning "we fucked up and the simplest way to address it is to subject the learner to what we've already subjected them to before knowing full well that this training failed the first time around"; all in an attempt to give the aggrieved a false sense of assurance because 'something' is being done.