A descendant of Spanish colonialists to Mexico who did not mix with the indigenous population. So they're still racially European even though their families have been Mexican for centuries. And they tend to be upper class. And feature disproportionately in telenovelas.
In many cases the only difference between a civil rights hero and just a random ******* choosing to be an ******* is a legitimate cause.
Civil disobedience that is non-violent is not criminal behavior. No matter how legitimate the cause may or may not be.
WTF? 1) No, criminals are determined by trials in the United States. 2) She's not even accused of a crime. 3) You're right though: in America, we say "Do what I say or you will 'get forcefully and quickly thrown to the ground and manhandled.'" That's coz we represent the pinnacle of human rights and dignity.
Yep. Ghandi, Mandela, King, etc. were criminals. They understood they were breaking the law and subjected themselves to arrest to protest what they saw as injustice. They didn't complain about being arrested, it was part and parcel of their strategy. Notice the peaceful cooperation of Mr. King and his followers as he is being arrested: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RFeHCG8e5J8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> I don't think we have an official definition of criminal in the united states. We have defined felon, misdemeanant, convict, arrestee, suspect, etc. The most narrow definition is one who has been convicted of a crime, which doesn't necessarily involve a trial (the vast majority of the time, it does not). A much broader but equally accurate definition would be one who has committed a crime, and she fits the bill. I haven't followed along with her legal issues. I know she was arrested but don't know what the DA elected to do with the case. I would not be surprised if they rejected it to avoid the bad publicity. Not every crime is charged. Yes, if you are committing a crime and are being placed under arrest, your options are limited to going along quietly or being manhandled. Such is the nature of being arrested. Your legal outcomes are rarely if ever improved by not cooperating with the arrest.
Not true, she was cited for disturbing schools which is a misdemeanor. They did her a favor by not charging her for assaulting a police officer which is a felony....but they could always add that on later if they feel like it. There's no statute of limitations on felonies in South Carolina.
This is what the other young lady that was arrested had to say about what happen. http://bossip.com/1248750/student-arrested-for-speaking-out-during-officer-slams-viral-rampage-details-entire-incident-video/
Maybe but to be arrested for talking about something that was wrong she has bigger balls than all the males in the room.
Fair enough, ballsy but stupid. She had nothing to gain by being a fool at that moment. It would have had the same impact if she spoke out against it later and she wouldn't be facing a misdemeanor charge. That said, she's super young so I imagine she'll learn at some point how to control herself better than that.
"[He] had nothing to gain by being a fool at that moment." But he had something to lose: his job. D'oh! Defeated by a teenager. "I imagine [he'll] learn at some point how to control [himself] better than that." At his new job as janitor.
This is partially true. He didn't have anything to gain by using excessive force, and it cost him his job. Had he not thrown her across the room, he'd still have his job.....but I'm sure someone will hire him.
As a teacher of over 20 years, I'd just like to reiterate my professional opinion that the teacher in this incident earns responsibility for the criminal action of the cop. As a teacher, if you bring a cop into your classroom, or anyone, you have responsibility for that. In short, this teacher sucks ass. Of course, if teachers got paid more money, America would have more teachers who didn't suck ass. The school shares responsibility for the cop's antisocial outburst, but at one step removed. America too shares responsibility, at some other level of remove. It's not like we're giving one iota of concern about producing good teachers. We view elementary and secondary school teachers almost at the level of postal workers, but we expect so much more from them. Anyway, it's worth noting the total fail of the teacher. Imagine if you were a teacher, how lame you would have to be to get so baffled by a 16-year-old girl and her cell phone that you need to call a cop for backup. The whole concept is idiotic at best, if not evil, for a public high school, where the general public is attending. Good luck in your war against teenage girls and their cell phones! Ur def gonna win
Just so long as you don't blame the people that actually committed crimes then we're good. Blame the teacher, blame the administrator, blame the air conditioner, blame the cell phone provider, blame anyone other than the person that actually committed a crime.
Mexico, Texas, California and Florida were founded by Spaniards; and like the Britons who founded Massachusetts and Virginia, and the French who founded Louisiana, they were all white: even by Americans' colloquial definition of non-black, non-native blood or facial features; and many of them still are. I have no idea how anyone born in this hemisphere could get to adulthood not understanding that.
Yep, I'm not really going to put much blame on a teenage girl fooling with a cell phone. Should she do it? No. Will I allow it to bring my performance of my job to a standstill? Never. Will I call a cop because of a teenage girl with a cell phone? Not in a million years. Will I lose my job because of a teenager with a cell phone? Only if I am the dumbest mother in town. Maybe some posters here need cops in order to deal with cell phone girls. That's fine. Just don't become a teacher.
