Thursday, July 17, 2014

Stupid Stupid does....

Stupid Is......

With all the pressing issues facing the city of Huntsville, and the state of Alabama, there is a petition being circulated asking the city of Huntsville to pass an ordinance for a $25-$50 fine and community service to children and adults wearing "saggin pants" in public.

Before I type another word let me make if perfectly clear I think sagging pants are a sloppy fashion trend, and adds to the negative perception of black youth.  That said, what part of you can't legislate personal behavior don't you understand?  If you don't like sagging pants, don't wear sagging pants.   It's like telling a woman she can't choose to have an abortion.  It's like telling gay people they can't serve in the military.  It''s like telling women they can't wear pants to work.  It's like telling grown folks they can't gamble  in their own state, with their own damn money.  It's like telling Michelle Obama she can't show her arms.  It's like telling someone you can't drink alcohol on Sunday.  You get my drift?

The Declaration of Independence declares We the People are entitled to Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  If wearing sagging pants makes someone happy, so be it.  If they can't get a job because their pants are sagging that's on them.  If they can't run from danger because their pants fall down around their knees and trip them up, that's on them.  If an airline won't let them  board the plane with sagging pants, that's on them.  You feel me?

Note the race of the young men (?) in the picture above. This is a another way to target young black men, putting them at risk for subjective profiling, something they already face disproportionately.

.....As Stupid does

The Women's Business Center of North Alabama and Bradley Arant Boult Cummings hosted a seminar focusing on bringing your guns to work a year after Alabama began enforcing a law allowing concealed carry permit holders to keep firearms in their vehicles while on the job.  

No charges are expected to filed in the case of the downtown Huntsville shooting at the skate park that left one injured and children running for cover.  As the shooter said  "I think it's a pretty clear-cut case of self-defense,"  Oh, OK.

But let's talk about all the drugs, gun violence, and crime in north .......Huntsville.
Two career readiness seminars will be held soon in Huntsville to help job seekers find work at Remington Outdoor, Toyota and the Huntsville Police Department. Remington announced in February it will create 2,000 jobs over 10 years at its new gun plant in the former Chrysler building near Huntsville International Airport.
Expect more gun makers to follow.

RedEye tiptoeing away from the computer muttering  life is like a box of chocolates....


Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

The shooting in the park does not compare with all the North side shootings and violence!! The guy was at the park and a THUG pulled a gun on him!! Luckily he had his own gun! He may not be an upstanding citizen himself but he was the victim!!What would you do if someone pulled a gun on you?

MOST shooting in the North have been drive bys, dope deals gone bad, shootings into a crowd,shootings over turf, East side, South side, West side etc etc.

I figured you would use that in your typical liberal democratic way but the two DO NOT COMPARE!!!

Redeye said...

The shooter said the victim (the one who was shot) pulled a gun on him. The shooter started a confrontation with the victim (the one who was shot). What would you do if you were minding your own business and someone picked a fight with you?

Brian said...

So asking somebody to stop an objectionable activity is picking a fight. The person who was shot was thinking he could bully the father into backing down by going and getting a gun and threatening everybody.

Redeye said...

Yes, demanding someone stop an "objectionable activity" is "picking a fight". What gave the shooter the right to demand the victim stop an objectionable activity? That's why we pay HPD to protect and serve us. Remember? BTW,the only person who said the victim (the one that was shot) was doing something objectionable, got a gun, and threatened to shoot everybody was the shooter. Now who is the bully here?

Brian said...

And yet the "victim" chose not to press charges.

HPD, and no other police department in the country, have to protect and serve us. Their duty is to respond to crime.

On the other hand, private citizens, do have the right to make a citizen's arrest for a felony, misdemeanor, or "breach of peace".

Would you be defending the "victim" if the father had not shot him?

Redeye said...

Are you defending the shooter? The person who injured one and sent children running from the park?

Would you be defending the victim if he were the shooter?

If citizens can arrest other citizens why are we paying to train police to protect and serve us? Heck why do we even have a police department? Oh,I respond to crime.

Brian said...

There is a reason the police filed no charges. They have both sides stories. There is a reason the victim hasn't made his side of the shooting public. I can make assumption based on what is known. I assume that the victim did get a gun in an attempt to make the father back down. I assume that the victim's gun was probably an assist gun that looked like a real gun. I can assume that when the father didn't back down but stood up, the victim didn't know how to respond. I can assume that the victim was an idiot.

And since nobody had disputed the father's story, I can assume it it's close enough to the truth. I do believe the father might have embellished his story somewhat to make himself look a little better.

I do believe the father is somewhat at fault for what happened but I also believe the victim is more at fault in this case. I believe people were running before the father got his gun. They were running because the victim had got a gun.

If you took your kids to the park and somebody was using the swing set to take pictures of scantily clad women, what would you do?

Redeye said...

Why am I not surprised you believe the victim is at fault in this case? If I took my children to the park and someone was using the swing set to take pictures of scantily clad women, I would take my kids to another park. I certainly wouldn't confront the person, shoot him and send children running from the park. But that's just me.

Brian said...

Do you dispute the order of events?

1) father asks the photographers to stop shooting

2) photographer goes and gets a gun

3) photographer threatens to shoot people

4) father pulls a knife while he walks to his car

5) father gets his gun out of his car

6) father shoots photographer.

Who got their weapon out first?

Redeye said...

I don't know who got their weapon out first, all I know is who the shooter said got their weapon out first. As a matter of fact, the only version we have of the order of events is the shooters.

If you took your kids to the park and somebody was using the swing set to take pictures of scantily clad women, what would you do?

Brian said...

Why hasn't the "victim" told his story?

Why didn't the police charge either man?

Why didn't the "victim" fill charges?

If I was out in that situation, I would question why they choose that location for their photo shoot and probably ask them to stop so the children could use the equipment.

Redeye said...

We don't know what we don't know.

Trying to figure out what gives you the right to question someone about their actions and ask them to stop?

Brian said...

what gives me the right to question somebody. The first amendment. I have the right to ask. The have the right to either respond or ignore me.

Redeye said...

I don't think the first amendment gives you the right to question anyone and demand they stop doing whatever they are doing because you don't like what they are doing. Strike that,I know the first amendment doesn't allow you to question anyone and demand they stop doing anything. We have this little thingy called the Constitution that says all men/women are created equal, and have equal rights to life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

If they ignore you or refuse to stop are you going to get a gun, shoot them, and send children running from the park?

Speaking of rights, if I am minding my business and someone rolls up on me and questions me about what I'm doing and demand I stop, I am going to feel threatened and exercise my 2nd amendment right and stand my ground.

Brian said...

So protesting is not proceed by the first amendment? Because protesting often is demanding that other stop a certain type of behavior.

I never said I would demand they stop. I said I would ask. It they refused and I thought it shouldn't be going on, then I would call the police.8

Redeye said...

So protesting is not the same as confrontation. Most protest are peaceful abd nonviolent. Nice try but no cigar.

Glad to know you would call police, I was beginning to worry. FYI, it is not against the law to photograph scantily clad women on the swing set. And it's first come, first served. The photographer was there first.

Brian said...

The first amendment gives the right to talk to anybody I am legally allowed to approach. They can ask me to leave and if I don't, then they can charge me with harassment. Asking is free speech.

Would you shoot somebody for rolling up on you and adding directions?

Btw, I am still trying figure out why you are defending somebody that got a gun and threatened to shoot people.

Redeye said...

There is a difference between rolling up on somebody asking for directions, and rolling up on somebody and confronting them. BTW, the only person who said the victim got a gun and threatened to shoot people is the shooter. The only person who got shot was the victim.

Brian said...

So what makes asking somebody to do something a confrontation? Is a little old lady asking me to get something for her off of a high shelf at the grocery store a confrontation?

Is being asked to move down one seat in a crowded movie theater to make room for a group a confrontation?

Is asking somebody to stop doing something that could be considered disturbing the peace rather than calling the police and possibly giving that person a criminal record a confrontation?

Redeye said...



Yes, demanding someone stop doing something they consider as disturbing the peace rather than calling the police, getting a gun, shooting them, and sending children running from the park is a confrontation, and disturbing the peace IMHO.

Old Guy said...

I agree with you Redeye that young black men (and the young white men that are imitating them) do themselves an injustice by wearing sagging pants. When I see a young man with his buttocks north of his belt, or holding a fistful of the front of his pants, I shake my head at what they are ding to their own prospects. Full disclosure, I am 55 years old and grew up and participated in the era of the big afros, giant bellbottoms and tiny glasses. So I think sagging pants is about fashion and personal style, and not an inherent moral failing.

Having said that, there is no one from my generation who looks at this without some (or a lot of) distaste. This is partly why young people do these things. But the pants-sagging crowd is generally in need of good jobs, good housing, and general cultural acceptance, and their decision to sag undermines their success in all of these important needs.

It's a sign of maturity, not cowardice, to understand when to bend to the will of the larger society and when not to. Letting your freak flag fly can feel pretty good, but unless you are prepared to accept the consequences, you need to be judicious about when and how to do it.

Redeye said...

Thank you for reading and commenting Old Guy! I agree with everything you said, but I don't agree with passing a law that is directed at one group/race of people, that gives the police the power to profile.