OT: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

Discussion in 'rec.music.guitar' started by Odin, Aug 12, 2003.

  1. Odin

    Odin Guest

    Mind the "OT" in the header and don't read any further if
    you're gonna whine about lack of guitar content.

    Setting: Dallas, Texas. Dallas PD hired their first
    African-American chief of police in 1999. Chief Terrell
    Bolton was "skip promoted" while an officer. What that
    means is that he was a sergeant and got promoted straight to
    assistant chief, passing the ranks of lieutenant, captain
    and deputy chief in the process. He has absolutely no
    skills as a police administrator.

    The city of Dallas has the highest crime rate per capita in
    the USA for 6 years in a row (that's every year the new
    chief has been in office). But the chief claims that "crime
    is down" because the *numbers* of crimes committed are down
    versus ten years ago. What he seems unable to understand is
    that numbers of crimes are down nationwide, but that the
    crime *rate* is higher than every other city in the US.
    This chief has been in the middle of one boondoggle after
    another. The Dallas County DA's office won't even talk to
    him (they think he's a joke), he kicked the FBI out of the
    interagency programs with the DPD because the FBI had
    investigated him before he was appointed chief, the police
    unions (except, of course, the black union) think he's a
    joke, department morale is down, crime is up, etc.

    All in the name of diversity.

    And now a story about how well the reverse discrimination
    (affirmative action) hiring program is working for the
    Dallas Police Department. FYI, affirmative action has sent
    droves of veteran officers to the suburbs and deflected
    droves of qualified, but white, candidates to the suburbs.
    Suburban police departments are getting the cream while DPD
    hires the dregs.

    In June of 2000, Derrick Evans, a black man, applied to the
    Dallas police department. He stated on his application that
    he had never been arrested. He was admitted to the academy.
    While in the academy the DPD learned that he had been
    arrested for public intoxication. Lying on an application
    is grounds for immediate dismissal from the academy, and the
    academy commanders recommended that he be dismissed. A
    Hispanic commander under the chief and the black chief
    overruled and Evans was allowed to remain in the academy.

    As a police recruit, while Evans was still in the academy
    his name came up as a suspect in a murder investigation (the
    victim was an acquaintance of the recruit's girlfriend and
    the recruit was placed in the area having a confrontation
    with the victim the night of the murder). Homicide
    investigators and internal affairs investigators had recruit
    Evans take a polygraph exam (which is standard procedure for
    any recruit or officer under investigation) and they
    questioned him about the murder. To the question "Did you
    kill Simuel Huey, Jr." the officer answered "No" and his
    answer was found to be "not truthful". However, there was
    no physical evidence to charge the recruit with in the
    murder. Investigators recommended that the recruit be
    terminated. Chief Bolton's staff overruled and the recruit
    was allowed to remain and graduate from the academy. His
    failed polygraph was common knowledge in the department, a
    real morale booster for all of the good officers in the
    department.

    A few weeks ago officer Evans' stepdaughter came home and
    said that some kids had beat her up. Rather than call a
    marked unit to meet him there officer Evans rounded up 15
    relatives, armed with baseball bats and screwdrivers, and
    drove to the scene of the alleged fight. Upon arrival,
    officer Evans, wearing baggy pants, a muscle shirt and his
    badge around his neck and walking with his pistol in his
    hand, confronted the crowd. The situation escalated.
    Officer Evans claims that a 19 year old pointed a gun at him
    so he fired at the 19 year old several times, striking him
    once.

    A few days ago the Dallas Morning News learned that in
    addition to his arrest for being drunk and his failing a
    polygraph that asked him if he committed murder, officer
    Evans was twice the subject of an emergency restraining
    order placed on him by a judge when his ex-wife sought
    relief from his assaults. He failed to mention this in is
    application according to police officials, and the Dallas
    police would have the public believe that they were unable
    to find out this information that the DMN discovered using
    only public records. When the DMN confronted the chief with
    this info the chief ordered the officer into an IA meeting,
    which lasted 14 hours and cost the taxpayers thousands, and
    fired the officer at 6:30 on Saturday. The chief only fired
    the officer because the paper threatened to run the story
    and the chief wanted to fire the officer before the story
    ran. They claim that they fired him for displaying his
    weapon in a manner that would alarm the public.

    Now the local papers, the police, the city council, the
    "community leaders", just about everyone in Dallas is asking
    "how could this happen"? Yet nobody will say the words
    "affirmative action". The DPD had numerous chances to fire
    this guy and had damn good reasons every time. Why didn't
    they fire him? The DPD is turning away white applicants
    while breaking the rules to retain black applicants who have
    an arrest history and fail polygraphs about murdering
    people.

    Celebrate diversity.
  2. gozy

    gozy Guest

    Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

    I object to your use of the term "reverse discrimination". I know you're
    referring to affirmative action, but discrimination is discrimination no
    matter why it's done, who benefits or who does not.

    If it's wrong, it's always wrong.

    Exceptions: None.
  3. Odin

    Odin Guest

    Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

    "gozy" <gozy@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message

    > I object to your use of the term "reverse discrimination".

    I know you're
    > referring to affirmative action, but discrimination is

    discrimination no
    > matter why it's done, who benefits or who does not.
    >
    > If it's wrong, it's always wrong.
    >
    > Exceptions: None.


    Agreed. Except when it discriminates against whites.
    Didn't you get the memo? White males are the devil and are
    fair game for discrimination.
  4. volantus4

    volantus4 Guest

    The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.
    No true equality between the races or the two genders can exist unless
    there is equality in all respects something which the Federal and
    State governments reject.I have personally experienced overt and
    covert forms of discrimination (because of my being a caucasian male)
    while working and/or applying for positions for the city and/or county
    of Dallas, Texas. This same type of reverse discrimination appears to
    me, as the author of the original post stated, to be the norm in
    Dallas City government (and in Dallas County government also in my
    opinion)(and in Texas State Government in my opinion).
  5. gozy

    gozy Guest

    Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)


    > Didn't you get the memo? White males are the devil and are
    > fair game for discrimination.
    >
    >


    Oh! No, I missed that one. My error.
  6. 'nuther Bob

    'nuther Bob Guest

    On 13 Aug 2003 17:23:45 -0700, misters@swbell.net (volantus4) wrote:

    >The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    >against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    >for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    >arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    >that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    >and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.


    Warning... warning... danger Will Robinson, non-sensical run-on
    sentence. What'd he say ?

    >No true equality between the races or the two genders can exist unless
    >there is equality in all respects something which the Federal and
    >State governments reject.


    Oh, OK, that was understandable. I agree. Equality is equality. For
    a while there may have been a need to give an advantage to those
    who had been long discriminated against. I think that need has
    passed.

    >I have personally experienced overt and
    >covert forms of discrimination (because of my being a caucasian male)
    >while working and/or applying for positions for the city and/or county
    >of Dallas, Texas.


    We all have our axe to grind. Just learn to hate the people who
    screwed you and use that hate as a mechanism of motivation.
    Works for me :)

    Bob
  7. ryanm

    ryanm Guest

    "volantus4" <misters@swbell.net> wrote in message
    news:deb969ed.0308131623.6b63addc@posting.google.com...
    > The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    > against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    > for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    > arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    > that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    > and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.
    > No true equality between the races or the two genders can exist unless
    > there is equality in all respects something which the Federal and
    > State governments reject.I have personally experienced overt and
    > covert forms of discrimination (because of my being a caucasian male)
    > while working and/or applying for positions for the city and/or county
    > of Dallas, Texas. This same type of reverse discrimination appears to
    > me, as the author of the original post stated, to be the norm in
    > Dallas City government (and in Dallas County government also in my
    > opinion)(and in Texas State Government in my opinion).
    >

    I don't know what you've experienced, but I have found that the white
    male between the ages of 18-45 with no children are the most discriminated
    against group by city and state governments as well as other private
    programs. For example, an 18 year old white male cannot get any scholarships
    or grants for college money without competing against everyone else. The
    problem with that is that almost every other racial, gender, or ethnic group
    has a scholarship program in which they only have to compete with others of
    the same group. If I were to fund a scholarship for poor white kids I would
    be called a racist, however there are scholarships for blacks, asians,
    women, etc, where the primary requirements are based on those lines rather
    than scholastic performance. Additionally, several years ago a friend and I
    were working at the same company, were the same age, and were in the same
    ethnic group, but I was able to get significantly better life and health
    insurance policies for the same cost because I had children. Years before,
    right after my first child was born, I was unemployed for a while. I tried
    to get my child on Medicade so that she could see a doctor, but they turned
    me down. Meanwhile, I knew a 35 year old hispanic guy who had a job and no
    children at the same time but was enrolled in Medicade as well as receiving
    food stamps. The woman at the medicade office told me that if I could be
    classified as any other ethnic group than caucasian I would've been able to
    get my kid on medicade.

    I'm all about giving some people help if they need it, but it had gotten
    ridiculous.

    ryanm
  8. Odin

    Odin Guest

    "volantus4" <misters@swbell.net> wrote in message

    > I have personally experienced overt and
    > covert forms of discrimination (because of my being a caucasian male)
    > while working and/or applying for positions for the city and/or county
    > of Dallas, Texas. This same type of reverse discrimination appears to
    > me, as the author of the original post stated, to be the norm in
    > Dallas City government (and in Dallas County government also in my
    > opinion)(and in Texas State Government in my opinion).


    And Dallas wonders why crime is up, the tax base is down and nobody wants
    to live there. The entire "leadership", and I use that term loosely, in
    Dallas is a joke. They don't have the slightest clue about *anything*.
    Dallas is an exercise in political correctness that went bad a long time
    ago.

    Here's another tidbit for anyone thinking about moving to Dallas.

    Al Lipscomb, the venerable "civil rights leader" of Dallas (who has a
    felony conviction for selling drugs way back in the day) was convicted of
    federal bribery charges. He accepted thousands of dollars from the owner
    of the biggest taxi company in Dallas in exchange for favorable votes for
    cab companies. He doesn't deny this. When he was prosecuted he blamed it
    on racism.

    But wait, it gets better. It seems that a current city council member has
    nominated Al Lipscomb to sit on the Police Citizens Review Board that hears
    civilian complaints on police and makes recommendations to the chief.
    Here's a guy with felony convictions, who has an extreme dislike for the
    Dallas Police, and a city councilman wants him to sit in judgment of the
    police. This should instill great confidence in the police that they are
    getting a fair and just hearing from the review board. As long as they
    don't mind a convicted felon (that they investigated) sitting on the board.
    Who comes up with this shit?

    Steer clear of the city of Dallas unless you want to live in a circus that
    plays with your money and gives you nothing in return.
  9. Steve

    Steve Guest

    Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

    >I object to your use of the term "reverse discrimination". I know you're
    >referring to affirmative action, but discrimination is discrimination no
    >matter why it's done, who benefits or who does not.
    >
    >If it's wrong, it's always wrong.
    >
    >Exceptions: None.
    >


    Really? See below....

    ==========================
    To ensure we Americans never offend anyone -- particularly fanatics intent on
    killing us -- airport screeners are not allowed to profile people of Muslim
    Decent. They will, however, continue to check pilots with proper
    identification, Secret Service agents who are members of the President's
    security detail, and 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips.

    Let's pause a moment and take the following test...

    In 1972, 11 Israeli athletes were killed at the Munich Olympics by:

    (a) Grandma Moses;
    (b) The night cleaning crew at Rockefeller Center;
    (c) Invaders from Mars; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    ___________________________________


    In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by:

    (a) Norwegians from the Lichen Herbarium of the University of Oslo;
    (b) Elvis;
    (c) A tour bus full of 80-year-old women; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    ___________________________________


    In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up and 243
    Marines were killed by:

    (a) A Dominos pizza delivery boy who was "stiffed" on a tip;
    (b) Crazed feminists complaining that having to throw a grenade
    beyond its own burst radius in basic training was an unfair and sexist
    job requirement;
    (c) Geraldo Rivera making up for a slow news day; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    ____________________________________


    In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed and 259 people on the plane and
    11 people on the ground were killed by:

    (a) Luca Brazzi, for not being given a part in "Godfather 2";
    (b) The Tooth Fairy;
    (c) Butch and Sundance, who had a few sticks of dynamite
    left over from their train robbery;
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    _________________________________________


    In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed and 6 people were killed
    by:

    (a) The entire cast of "Cats";
    (b) Martha Stewart;
    (c) Cheese-crazed tourists from Wisconsin; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    _____________________________________


    In 1995, Khobar Towers, a military barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia,
    was bombed and 19 military were killed by:

    (a) Rodney Dangerfield because he never gets any respect;
    (b) Hillary, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems;
    (c) Jane Fonda (well, maybe); or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    _______________________________________


    In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania a were bombed and
    223 people were killed by:

    (a) Mr. Rogers;
    (b) Chelsea Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems;
    (c) The World Wrestling Federation to promote its next villain:
    "Mustapha the Merciless"; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    ___________________________________________


    In Dec 2000, the U.S.S. Cole was bombed and 17 Navy personnel were
    killed by:

    (a) Pee Wee Herman;
    (b) The Little Old Lady from Pasadena while experiencing a
    severe case of hot flashes during menopause;
    (c) Brittany Spears, Christina Aguilera, N'Sync, and the Backstreet Boys; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    ____________________________________


    On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked, over 3,000 people were
    killed and the WTC was destroyed along with the Pentagon
    being damaged by:

    (a) Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck, and Elmer Fudd.
    (b) The US Supreme Court,
    (c) Barney; or
    (d) Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
    _________________________________________


    Hmmm...nope, ain't no patterns here. Darned if I know why we should
    ever even think about profiling.

    =======================


    SEFSTRAT
    solo webpage: http://members.aol.com/sefstrat/index.html/sefpage.html
    band webpage: www.timebanditsrock.com
  10. Steve

    Steve Guest

    <<The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.>>

    Fortunately, the Bakke Court disagreed with your rationale.


    SEFSTRAT
    solo webpage: http://members.aol.com/sefstrat/index.html/sefpage.html
    band webpage: www.timebanditsrock.com
  11. 'nuther Bob

    'nuther Bob Guest

    On 14 Aug 2003 13:30:44 GMT, sefstrat@aol.comnospam (Steve) wrote:

    ><<The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    >against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    >for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    >arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    >that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    >and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.>>
    >
    >Fortunately, the Bakke Court disagreed with your rationale.
    >
    >

    The who did what now ?

    Bob
  12. Steve

    Steve Guest

    <<On 14 Aug 2003 13:30:44 GMT, sefstrat@aol.comnospam (Steve) wrote:

    ><<The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    >against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    >for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    >arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    >that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    >and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.>>
    >
    >Fortunately, the Bakke Court disagreed with your rationale.
    >
    >

    The who did what now ?

    Bob >>

    Alan Bakke successfully argued that he'd been denied admission to medical
    school because he was discriminated against as a white male. The case was
    ultimately decided in his favor by the US Supreme Court. Famous case.

    Sidelight: by the time the Supreme Court heard and decided the matter, Bakke
    had already graduated from another medical school.


    SEFSTRAT
    solo webpage: http://members.aol.com/sefstrat/index.html/sefpage.html
    band webpage: www.timebanditsrock.com
  13. Odin

    Odin Guest

    "Steve" <sefstrat@aol.comnospam> wrote in message

    > Alan Bakke successfully argued that he'd been denied

    admission to medical
    > school because he was discriminated against as a white

    male. The case was
    > ultimately decided in his favor by the US Supreme Court.

    Famous case.
    >
    > Sidelight: by the time the Supreme Court heard and

    decided the matter, Bakke
    > had already graduated from another medical school.


    Nobody ever accused the wheels of justice of being speedy.
  14. 'nuther Bob

    'nuther Bob Guest

    On 14 Aug 2003 15:30:38 GMT, sefstrat@aol.comnospam (Steve) wrote:

    ><<On 14 Aug 2003 13:30:44 GMT, sefstrat@aol.comnospam (Steve) wrote:
    >
    >><<The unsound and emotional arguments for "reverse discrimination"
    >>against caucasian males are in actuality, arguments against equality
    >>for minorities and women rather than for the same because such
    >>arguments lack the rationality, and contain the emotional rhetoric
    >>that identifies groups that lack the capacity for rational judgement
    >>and ethical behavior that is identified with being a caucasian male.>>
    >>
    >>Fortunately, the Bakke Court disagreed with your rationale.
    >>
    >>

    >The who did what now ?
    >
    >Bob >>
    >
    >Alan Bakke successfully argued that he'd been denied admission to medical
    >school because he was discriminated against as a white male. The case was
    >ultimately decided in his favor by the US Supreme Court. Famous case.
    >


    OK... but I think the other poster was arguing against AA, not for it.
    I'll be the first to admit that his one sentence paragraph was at best
    confusing. So, the Bakke Court agreed with his rationale.

    Bob
  15. gozy

    gozy Guest

    Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

    Profiling is not discrimination. If the police are searching for a left
    handed person, they are not discriminating against left handed people, they
    are resonably limiting their search, which is what you illustrate.

    My point is that affirmative action is discrimination, pure and simple.
  16. Grant

    Grant Guest

    'nuther Bob wrote:

    >>No true equality between the races or the two genders can exist unless
    >>there is equality in all respects something which the Federal and
    >>State governments reject.

    >
    >
    > Oh, OK, that was understandable. I agree. Equality is equality. For
    > a while there may have been a need to give an advantage to those
    > who had been long discriminated against. I think that need has
    > passed.



    I think that RACE is no longer the issue. It's economic/cultural
    background. I know people who are members of "traditionally
    disadvantaged" racial minorities who are well-educated and successful
    members of the middle class. For these people, race appears to create
    no serious barriers, at least in the region where I live. There is no
    apparent reason, to my eye at least, why their children should be
    treated differently than white middle class kids for school admissions
    and similar purposes. It's also interesting that in many of these
    cases, the persons in question weren't born in the U.S. but immigrated
    from a country where they were in the majority, and where they were
    already a member of at least the middle class.

    On the other hand, I think that people born and raised in one of our
    worse ghettos (or maybe a run down trailer park in Kentucky) is going
    have trouble gaining entry to the middle class if he/she is Caucasian.

    In short, my problem with *racial* affirmative action is that race is
    only *correlated* with being born and raised under very difficult
    circumstances, it is not a one-to-one relationship. In fact, it's a
    kind of blatant racism in the sense that it says, "if you have dark
    skin, then we're going to help you whether you need it or not, and if
    you're white, you're not going to get any help even if you need it."

    If it were up to me, affirmative action programs would be refocused so
    that economic and cultural tests (e.g., has anyone in this kid's family
    ever graduated from high school?) are utilized rather than tests based
    on physiological race.

    Just my $0.02
  17. Grant

    Grant Guest

    Grant wrote:
    >> On the other hand, I think that people born and raised in one of our

    > worse ghettos (or maybe a run down trailer park in Kentucky) is going
    > have trouble gaining entry to the middle class if he/she is Caucasian.

    ^^^
    "even if" is what I meant to say
  18. Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

    It's pretty comvenient to blame all of Dallas's crime problem on the
    appointment of one Chief....I'm not a big fan of affirmative action either
    (for the exact reason you convey here), but your committing an argumentative
    fallacy by pointing out one injustive and blaming the whole problem on that
    one thing without any evidence to back up your claim (the Evans case doesn't
    show that Bolton is responsible for the higher crime rate)....I'm sure it is
    much more complex.

    --

    J. Durango

    "The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today (is) my own
    government" - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.


    "Odin" <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in message news:3f396101@shknews01...
    > Mind the "OT" in the header and don't read any further if
    > you're gonna whine about lack of guitar content.
    >
    > Setting: Dallas, Texas. Dallas PD hired their first
    > African-American chief of police in 1999. Chief Terrell
    > Bolton was "skip promoted" while an officer. What that
    > means is that he was a sergeant and got promoted straight to
    > assistant chief, passing the ranks of lieutenant, captain
    > and deputy chief in the process. He has absolutely no
    > skills as a police administrator.
    >
    > The city of Dallas has the highest crime rate per capita in
    > the USA for 6 years in a row (that's every year the new
    > chief has been in office). But the chief claims that "crime
    > is down" because the *numbers* of crimes committed are down
    > versus ten years ago. What he seems unable to understand is
    > that numbers of crimes are down nationwide, but that the
    > crime *rate* is higher than every other city in the US.
    > This chief has been in the middle of one boondoggle after
    > another. The Dallas County DA's office won't even talk to
    > him (they think he's a joke), he kicked the FBI out of the
    > interagency programs with the DPD because the FBI had
    > investigated him before he was appointed chief, the police
    > unions (except, of course, the black union) think he's a
    > joke, department morale is down, crime is up, etc.
    >
    > All in the name of diversity.
    >
    > And now a story about how well the reverse discrimination
    > (affirmative action) hiring program is working for the
    > Dallas Police Department. FYI, affirmative action has sent
    > droves of veteran officers to the suburbs and deflected
    > droves of qualified, but white, candidates to the suburbs.
    > Suburban police departments are getting the cream while DPD
    > hires the dregs.
    >
    > In June of 2000, Derrick Evans, a black man, applied to the
    > Dallas police department. He stated on his application that
    > he had never been arrested. He was admitted to the academy.
    > While in the academy the DPD learned that he had been
    > arrested for public intoxication. Lying on an application
    > is grounds for immediate dismissal from the academy, and the
    > academy commanders recommended that he be dismissed. A
    > Hispanic commander under the chief and the black chief
    > overruled and Evans was allowed to remain in the academy.
    >
    > As a police recruit, while Evans was still in the academy
    > his name came up as a suspect in a murder investigation (the
    > victim was an acquaintance of the recruit's girlfriend and
    > the recruit was placed in the area having a confrontation
    > with the victim the night of the murder). Homicide
    > investigators and internal affairs investigators had recruit
    > Evans take a polygraph exam (which is standard procedure for
    > any recruit or officer under investigation) and they
    > questioned him about the murder. To the question "Did you
    > kill Simuel Huey, Jr." the officer answered "No" and his
    > answer was found to be "not truthful". However, there was
    > no physical evidence to charge the recruit with in the
    > murder. Investigators recommended that the recruit be
    > terminated. Chief Bolton's staff overruled and the recruit
    > was allowed to remain and graduate from the academy. His
    > failed polygraph was common knowledge in the department, a
    > real morale booster for all of the good officers in the
    > department.
    >
    > A few weeks ago officer Evans' stepdaughter came home and
    > said that some kids had beat her up. Rather than call a
    > marked unit to meet him there officer Evans rounded up 15
    > relatives, armed with baseball bats and screwdrivers, and
    > drove to the scene of the alleged fight. Upon arrival,
    > officer Evans, wearing baggy pants, a muscle shirt and his
    > badge around his neck and walking with his pistol in his
    > hand, confronted the crowd. The situation escalated.
    > Officer Evans claims that a 19 year old pointed a gun at him
    > so he fired at the 19 year old several times, striking him
    > once.
    >
    > A few days ago the Dallas Morning News learned that in
    > addition to his arrest for being drunk and his failing a
    > polygraph that asked him if he committed murder, officer
    > Evans was twice the subject of an emergency restraining
    > order placed on him by a judge when his ex-wife sought
    > relief from his assaults. He failed to mention this in is
    > application according to police officials, and the Dallas
    > police would have the public believe that they were unable
    > to find out this information that the DMN discovered using
    > only public records. When the DMN confronted the chief with
    > this info the chief ordered the officer into an IA meeting,
    > which lasted 14 hours and cost the taxpayers thousands, and
    > fired the officer at 6:30 on Saturday. The chief only fired
    > the officer because the paper threatened to run the story
    > and the chief wanted to fire the officer before the story
    > ran. They claim that they fired him for displaying his
    > weapon in a manner that would alarm the public.
    >
    > Now the local papers, the police, the city council, the
    > "community leaders", just about everyone in Dallas is asking
    > "how could this happen"? Yet nobody will say the words
    > "affirmative action". The DPD had numerous chances to fire
    > this guy and had damn good reasons every time. Why didn't
    > they fire him? The DPD is turning away white applicants
    > while breaking the rules to retain black applicants who have
    > an arrest history and fail polygraphs about murdering
    > people.
    >
    > Celebrate diversity.
    >
    >
    >
  19. "Odin" <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<3f3bbe24@shknews01>...
    > "Steve" <sefstrat@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
    >
    > > Alan Bakke successfully argued that he'd been denied

    > admission to medical
    > > school because he was discriminated against as a white

    > male. The case was
    > > ultimately decided in his favor by the US Supreme Court.

    > Famous case.
    > >
    > > Sidelight: by the time the Supreme Court heard and

    > decided the matter, Bakke
    > > had already graduated from another medical school.

    >
    > Nobody ever accused the wheels of justice of being speedy.


    Isn't the concept of "I'm a minority - I'm a straight white man" shit
    getting a little bit old and tired? Do you guys really think all this
    bullshit you are carrying on with actually new/innovative/shedding on
    issues of race and affirmative action? Odin, your guitar playing sucks
    ass (yes, I've heard your clips) and your attempts at social
    commentary are pathetic. Fuck off already.
  20. Odin

    Odin Guest

    Re: Political correctness is killing us (literally)

    "gozy" <gozy@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote in message

    > Profiling is not discrimination. If the police are searching for a left
    > handed person, they are not discriminating against left handed people,

    they
    > are resonably limiting their search, which is what you illustrate.


    You're right, but racial profiling is looking for suspects without knowing
    that the suspect are of a certain race, but simply looking closely at the
    race that has most often committed like crimes. It's a biased means of
    investigation that subjects innocent people to suspicion, but it doesn't
    violate any civil rights and it is based in sound logic.


    > My point is that affirmative action is discrimination, pure and simple.


    Correct.

Share This Page