Recommended Posts
Quote"They yelled at me a lot," she said. "They were unnecessarily mean."
Can you imagine???
Oh, the humanity!
SkyDekker 1,150
It is kind of funny...but why yell, I would think they already got their point across by showing up....
Andy9o8 0
QuoteQuote"They yelled at me a lot," she said. "They were unnecessarily mean."
Can you imagine???
Oh, the humanity!
Poor attempt at diversion.
And misses the point completely.
She's lucky they didn't take a rubber hose to her, then ship her off to Gitmo.
SkyDekker 1,150
True, I think they just reserve that for actual political opponents 
<> - So there is still some compassion over there
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
bch7773 0
QuoteQuote"They yelled at me a lot," she said. "They were unnecessarily mean."
Can you imagine???
Oh, the humanity!
they punished her for a solid 15 minutes!!!
MB 3528, RB 1182
wmw999 2,160
QuoteAndy: I don't have a huge problem with the interview. But they could have conducted it at 7 pm, at the house, in the presence of her parents, and away from the prying eyes of other kids and school administrators.
Yep. Nothing like public humiliation to make someone think twice about doing something really stupid. That's why they make kids turn their shirts inside-out, or wear really stupid ones, or tie their pants with rope, for clothing infractions.QuoteGawain: I understand your point, but I think their approach at school was intended to do more than just interview the girl, but also send the message to other idealistic teenagers about how seriously such actions are interpreted.
Personally, I think this is pretty much appropriate as long as there was at least one (and preferably two) representatives from the school in with her. And the more publicity the better.
It's perfectly OK to think the president is an idiot. It's fairly common for a 14-year-old to say "I hate and and I hope you die." But the way they learn that it's not OK for a 21-year-old to say that kind of thing is for there to be consequences for the 14-year-old saying them.
And most of us would much rather our kids learn from someone else's consequences rather than their own.
Wendy W.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
Andy9o8 0
Again, which misses the point(s). Law enforcement officers do not (or at least should not) unilaterally determine guilt and mete out punishment. That's not their job. And the parents should have been present for the interview, and to me it looks like the SS deliberately circumvented that.
If I were the kids' father, I'd be pissed at my kid for doing that, supportive of the SS for interviewing her, supportive of the need for my kid to learn a lesson, but pissed at the SS for deliberately going behind my and my wife's back to do the interview outside of our presence, as well as for bringing the school into it.
If I were the kids' father, I'd be pissed at my kid for doing that, supportive of the SS for interviewing her, supportive of the need for my kid to learn a lesson, but pissed at the SS for deliberately going behind my and my wife's back to do the interview outside of our presence, as well as for bringing the school into it.
Amazon 7
QuoteShe's lucky they didn't take a rubber hose to her, then ship her off to Gitmo.
Yep that is for sure.. I keep expecting that to happen just about any day....disagree with the administration in ANY way.. and off to re-education camp for you.
mnealtx 0
QuoteAgain, which misses the point(s). Law enforcement officers do not (or at least should not) unilaterally determine guilt and mete out punishment. That's not their job. And the parents should have been present for the interview, and to me it looks like the SS deliberately circumvented that.
If I were the kids' father, I'd be pissed at my kid for doing that, supportive of the SS for interviewing her, supportive of the need for my kid to learn a lesson, but pissed at the SS for deliberately going behind my and my wife's back to do the interview outside of our presence, as well as for bringing the school into it.
Firstly... what "punishment" was meted out? The 15 minute lecture?
From the article:
QuoteHer mother, Kirstie Wilson, said two agents showed up at the family's home Wednesday afternoon, questioned her and promised to return once her daughter was home from school.
After they left, Kirstie Wilson sent a text message to her daughter's cell phone, telling her to come straight home: "There are two men from the secret service that want to talk with you. Apparently you made some death threats against president Bush."
"Are you serious!?!? omg. Am I in a lot of trouble?" her daughter responded.
Moments later, Kirstie Wilson received another text message from her daughter saying agents had pulled her out of class.
So, the parents DID know.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
Andy9o8 0
QuoteFirstly... what "punishment" was meted out? The 15 minute lecture?
Sigh.
No. As I already said, repeatedly, above, the punishment was pulling the kid from school in a way that all of the school administrators, and all of the other students, would know about it. QuoteSo, the parents DID know.
As I already said, repeatedly, above, the point was they could have easily returned to the house and questioned the kid in front of her parents (as they specifically promised the mom they were going to do), but instead they hurried over to the school to interrogate the kid with her parents absent.
I think this thread is wrung dry now.
QuoteQuoteFirstly... what "punishment" was meted out? The 15 minute lecture?
Sigh.
Are you saying that law enforcement, the Treasury Department in this case, should make sure all interviews (and arrests) are convenient and accommodating to all other parties?
Otherwise, it's punishment?
Again, which misses the point(s). Law enforcement officers do not (or at least should not) unilaterally determine guilt and mete out punishment
Quote
so the way i understand your post is that you believe if someone breaks the law they should not be dealt with by officials until the time and place is conducive to them being dealt with in a way that does not interfere with teir life or embarass them in any way right? Last time i checked anytime i broke the rules in school i was yanked out of class in front of my classmates and dealt with, if a 30 year old man did the same thing no one would have a problem with him being yanked out of work, so what's the difference, she broke the law she should get no special treatment because of her age. if i remember right when i got arrested when i was 16 all the questioning was finished before my parents ever showed up. pulling her out of school was not a punishment, she got what she deserved, a little scare, and now she can go on with her life and was hurt in no way.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower
SkyDekker 1,150
QuoteFrom the article:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Her mother, Kirstie Wilson, said two agents showed up at the family's home Wednesday afternoon, questioned her and promised to return once her daughter was home from school.
After they left, Kirstie Wilson sent a text message to her daughter's cell phone, telling her to come straight home: "There are two men from the secret service that want to talk with you. Apparently you made some death threats against president Bush."
"Are you serious!?!? omg. Am I in a lot of trouble?" her daughter responded.
Moments later, Kirstie Wilson received another text message from her daughter saying agents had pulled her out of class.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, the parents DID know.
true, but if that is truly how it happened than the Agents were less than honest.
Gawain 0
QuoteAgain, which misses the point(s). Law enforcement officers do not (or at least should not) unilaterally determine guilt and mete out punishment. That's not their job. And the parents should have been present for the interview, and to me it looks like the SS deliberately circumvented that.
I am not aware of any state which requires the parents to be present if law enforcement needs to interview a minor. The minor still gets miranda-ized. A lecture is hardly a punishment, and the embarassment of getting pulled out of class does not have staying power. There was no judging or conviction here. By law, she could have been arrested and charged for what she did.
QuoteIf I were the kids' father, I'd be pissed at my kid for doing that, supportive of the SS for interviewing her, supportive of the need for my kid to learn a lesson, but pissed at the SS for deliberately going behind my and my wife's back to do the interview outside of our presence, as well as for bringing the school into it.
So, your only "real" issue is the absence of the parents. You may be right. If I were the kid's father, I would be more interested in making sure the kid was given the option of having at a minimum legal counsel available.
In the end, the kid learned a lesson, I hope. In a day where teenagers are mowing down their classmates in shootings, it's not inconceivable that a kid, properly motivated could also pull off a calculated assassination. Like I mentioned, the Secret Service can't dismiss any of them. I wouldn't want their job.
So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
QuoteAgents were less than honest
Secret Service ....
Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this
Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this
Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this
Andy9o8 0
>>NCclimber: Are you saying that law enforcement, the Treasury Department in this case, should make sure all interviews (and arrests) are convenient and accommodating to all other parties?
Nope. what I'm saying is what is said in my posts. I don't need to keep repeating it.
>>GQ jumper: so the way i understand your post is that you believe ...
Nope, I believe what my posts say I believe. I don't need to keep repeating it.
>>Gawain: So, your only "real" issue is ...
Nope, my real issue is what I said in my posts it is. I don't need to keep repeating it.
I stand by my posts, guys. Agree or disagree; but I'm moving on now. There are boobie threads in Bonfire that require my attention.
Nope. what I'm saying is what is said in my posts. I don't need to keep repeating it.
>>GQ jumper: so the way i understand your post is that you believe ...
Nope, I believe what my posts say I believe. I don't need to keep repeating it.
>>Gawain: So, your only "real" issue is ...
Nope, my real issue is what I said in my posts it is. I don't need to keep repeating it.
I stand by my posts, guys. Agree or disagree; but I'm moving on now. There are boobie threads in Bonfire that require my attention.
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteFrom the article:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Her mother, Kirstie Wilson, said two agents showed up at the family's home Wednesday afternoon, questioned her and promised to return once her daughter was home from school.
After they left, Kirstie Wilson sent a text message to her daughter's cell phone, telling her to come straight home: "There are two men from the secret service that want to talk with you. Apparently you made some death threats against president Bush."
"Are you serious!?!? omg. Am I in a lot of trouble?" her daughter responded.
Moments later, Kirstie Wilson received another text message from her daughter saying agents had pulled her out of class.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, the parents DID know.
true, but if that is truly how it happened than the Agents were less than honest.
Sounds like there was a pair that went to the house and a pair to the school... the article doesn't state if they returned to the house, so no way to know if they were "dishonest" or not.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
Gawain 0
Quote>>Gawain: So, your only "real" issue is ...
Nope, my real issue is what I said in my posts it is. I don't need to keep repeating it.
I stand by my posts, guys. Agree or disagree; but I'm moving on now. There are boobie threads in Bonfire that require my attention.
Dude, you said:
QuoteIf I were the kids' father, I'd be pissed at my kid for doing that, supportive of the SS for interviewing her, supportive of the need for my kid to learn a lesson, but pissed at the SS for deliberately going behind my and my wife's back to do the interview outside of our presence, as well as for bringing the school into it.
You're okay with everything but the parental presence. Your points of judgment and punishment are essentially incorrect, it's the tactics (i.e. no parents present) that you're in disagreement with. Enjoy the boobies...
So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites