And you're expecting thread on the interwebs to lead to new understandings of commonalities which could lead to greater understanding of...?

So very likely.

LOL dude thinks it's okay for a kid of any age to get tasered. You're an idiot, and you probably are a shitty attorney, too.

ORLY? Well, piss in my Honey Bunches of Oats with Peaches and tell me it's 2% milk.

Despite Iota Man calling you racist in a previous post, the post you just responded to (and much of this thread) was about age.

You sound ridiculous.



Oooooooookay...back to more important things:

I can see that you believe a child should not be tasered. Do you think there are extenuating circumstances? People earlier in this thread mentioned young people with weapons.

I never said that.

Reading comp fail.

Even the individual you're being a cheerleader for thinks you're going too far.

And I've been very consistent in saying that age is a factor, but definitely not the only factor, and that in this case, I definitely can see the arresting officer's point of view when the child and an adult are interfering in a lawful arrest and that specific age rules are tough because age identification and particularly cross-racial age identification is very problematic when the potential child and another adult are interfering in arrest where the arrestee is already resisting.

What's so hard to understand about that?

I did not ask you to repeat anything.

You are being slow as hell. You responded to Iota Man's post about age with "that's truth no matter what color you are."

But then again, your words said you did not understand what the hell was going on. Glad to help.

And your cheerleader still apparently thinks there's a racial element to a police officer using a taser on an individual while making a lawful arrest while that individual and an adult are interfering in the arrest. I think he's a sheltered toolbag who may never have seen an arrest where folks interfered with an officer, but what the hell do you care?

Actually, Iota Man is correct. You believe that there are factors that matter more than (or as much as) age. That can be inferred to mean that you believe that a person of practically any age can be tasered if the situation warrants it. Afterall, you stated that "any child of mine would be respectful enough of authority not to interject themselves into my arrest which would never happen. This isn't rocket science. If you don't want to be tased, don't screw with the police. It really is that simple."

Iota Man is responding to someone who he believes is a racist, arrogant, idiot. That happened before this thread and has nothing to do with me.

It can be inferred that I would support the tasering of a 6-year old not carrying a bazooka? Yeah..okay.. If he thinks that, I stand by my reading com fail statement.

Sure thing. See page 1. That's not all that hard to read into.

No, you chose to repeat yourself just as you chose to discuss white privilege with yourself and chose to attempt a Sandusky joke. I simply stated that the post you were responding to was about age and not race.



It is cute that you have a need to dismiss Iota Man as a cheerleader. You think he is a sheltered toolbag and he thinks you are a sheltered racist, arrogant, idiot. Game, set, and match.

At the end of the day, you are the one who brought up white privilege in this thread and you are the one who attempted (failed) to recap page 1 simply because I stated that MysticCat and I were trying to make this a more general discussion.

If whether or not the child of ages 6-16 is brandishing a weapon (children younger than 6 can carry a handgun) is the ultimate determinant, Iota Man is correct that you believe a child of practically any age can be tasered if deemed necessary.



What does Iota Man have to do with page 1 of this thread? He labeled you a racist idiot because of the Andre Turner thread. I just labeled you an idiot.

In your imagination, what happened on page 1 of this thread? Nevermind, you still do not know. LOL.

If a weapon is involved that's endangering somebody's life, that's a different situation.

Yes, you did.

LOL says the Grand Wizard who thinks black folks should just "get over" 400 years of oppression.

You don't know what I've seen.

Or...Here's a thought: You could not make jokes about child sex abuse. Whether you are trying to make fun of the pedophile or not, the point is that it is coming across as you thinking child sex abuse is funny. If you want to derail the thread about whether or not a child should be tased--whatever but, to take it to the level of thinking sexual abuse is a laughing matter then, I have a problem with that.

This makes me think of a friend of mine who is a nurse and makes jokes about people who are mentally handicapped. I would never send my family members to a professional who makes light of something so serious. The same could be said about an attorney who views child sex abuse as something to make light of on a chat forum. I sure hope you never work with victims of sexual abuse since it appears to be a laughing matter for you.

You know nothing about me. In fact, I do a rather large amount of pro bono representing victims of abuse in juvenile deprived court after being taken away from abusive parents by child welfare services, usually trying to terminate the parents' rights. It's a very serious matter. I suppose you've never told or laughed at an off-color joke in your life?

I wasn't trying to be tasteful, neither were DrPhil or cheerleader, who think it's okay to throw around words like racist without giving it a second thought.