Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2014 11:29:39 GMT -5
"Darren Wilson’s first job was on a troubled police force disbanded by authorities
FERGUSON, Mo. — The small city of Jennings, Mo., had a police department so troubled, and with so much tension between white officers and black residents, that the city council finally decided to disband it. Everyone in the Jennings police department was fired. New officers were brought in to create a credible department from scratch.
That was three years ago. One of the officers who worked in that department, and lost his job along with everyone else, was a young man named Darren Wilson.
Some of the Jennings officers reapplied for their jobs, but Wilson got a job in the police department in the nearby city of Ferguson."
Jennings is a shit hole. It is filled with thugs and criminals and the town is probably 90+% black. It is one of the most dangerous places in St louis. They probably did what they did because the place is a lost cause.
|
|
Bonny
Junior Associate
Joined: Nov 17, 2013 10:54:37 GMT -5
Posts: 7,459
Location: No Place Like Home!
|
Post by Bonny on Nov 29, 2014 11:52:01 GMT -5
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Nov 29, 2014 11:58:41 GMT -5
One thing I find telling about that photo - I think we'd be moved no matter what color that boy was. He could be black, white, or green with pink spots. It's a beautiful photo with a very important message. We're all human. The color of our skins does not change that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2014 12:27:58 GMT -5
One thing I find telling about that photo - I think we'd be moved no matter what color that boy was. He could be black, white, or green with pink spots. It's a beautiful photo with a very important message. We're all human. The color of our skins does not change that. At USA they thought I'm white person at India/Bangladesh they thought I'm brown person go figure.
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Nov 30, 2014 9:47:41 GMT -5
I too wondered about the insurance and whether or not the losses would be covered. I would be livid if I paid all those years for insurance only to have it creatively twist an exclusion to get out of paying when I really needed it. The bad PR like during Katrina or Sandy might get them to pay, but who knows whether those business owners would be able to carry their expenses for the duration of the BS red tape.
Yeah, but ongoing business expenses are covered under yet another type of insurance, which very, very few businesses own. It's incredibly complicated, but here's a stab at the coverages you'd need and the likelihood that most of these businesses have that coverage:
Property Insurance on the Building - covers fire and certain types of theft. Again, not sure if acts of looting, vandalism or "rioting" will be covered. Covers the building only, not any of the property inside the building unless it's a specific type of policy that's less common in business. Many businesses will have this mainly because it's required if they have a mortgage on the building.
Property Insurance on the Contents, such as inventory for sale, furniture, fixtures, computer equipment, etc - covers fire and certain types of theft. Not sure if acts of looting, vandalism or "rioting" will be covered. Just covers specifically what is listed and up to the dollar amount of the policy. Fewer businesses will have this type of coverage. It's trickier to get written and not required unless you have a loan on the inventory or equipment. Plus, if you've had a fire that destroyed the building, it's really tough to prove exactly what inventory you had at the time since your records are now gone.
Business Interruption Insurance - covers the businesses ongoing expenses and losses from not being able to operate. Very uncommon because it's often expensive for small amounts of coverage. Not even obtainable in certain disaster prone areas (Florida hurricane zone for example.) My guess is that very, very few of the businesses have this and that would be what they'd need if they were to have their expenses covered during the duration of anything. Property insurance will pay to replace the specific property the policy covers, but doesn't pay your ongoing expenses; you need this special business interruption insurance for that. And, again, not sure if it will be applicable in the case of riots...
That is some very useful information, thank you. If WWBG-Corp takes shape, I will keep this handy. Although I don't anticipate having any physical location for a long time. That first type, like you said, probably wouldn't cover the "stuff". Sounds remarkably similar to buying a home. The second type seems like the one that would hopefully protect your contents in a riot. In todays "cloud based" market, I'm hoping most people have a copy of their records elsewhere. Though I suspect this type of insurance is also easy to abuse. I'm thinking of Homer Simpson claiming that a fire destroyed his Picasso and collection of antique cars. I could see that third one being very expensive, and most businesses being unable to afford it. By the way Milee, I bought the Pelican cooler. I went for the 20qt. I haven't gotten to take it on a serious test, but I've kept some ice packs in it and it keeps them cold for days.
|
|
Bonny
Junior Associate
Joined: Nov 17, 2013 10:54:37 GMT -5
Posts: 7,459
Location: No Place Like Home!
|
Post by Bonny on Nov 30, 2014 16:35:36 GMT -5
WWGW,
Those "High Value" items would likely have to be covered by a special rider which you pay extra for and must document including value. Typical examples are expensive computers, paintings, jewelry, furs and antiques.
When we were burglarized in Germany we couldn't really file a claim for all of DH's jewelry because we had almost no documentation that he owned any of it. And while we had the sales receipt for my laptop, the value was almost entirely off-set by our deductible.
You should review your policy limits every year and understand what its limitations are. After recognizing the artists for two of our paintings when we were at the Huntington Library in Pasadena we finally bought "High Value" property insurance for them through USAA.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Dec 1, 2014 11:40:20 GMT -5
There are some opportunist's in on the looting but it is not a good idea to dismiss the number of people there that are really protesting the unpunished shooting of an unarmed black youth. They don't know where to direct their anger and energy yet but if these incidents continue there is a good chance they will figure it out. If they get organised it will be a bigger problem than some looting. Later, the terms unarmed black youth has been bandied around in the media to create the image of a skinny black 14 year old in the public's minds. As I understand it, the victim was unarmed, black and 18 years old. He was also 6 foot four inches tall and weighed about 300 pounds. I'd imagine, a pretty powerful young man. And he was in the process of attacking the police officer at the time he was shot. By the way, the victim was stopped by the police officer because his rather unusual physical description and clothing matched the description of a person who had robbed and beaten the living daylights out of a shop keeper shortly before. I suspect, and apparently the grand jury agreed, that the victim wasn't the innocent bystander that many have tried to portray him as.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 13:41:45 GMT -5
tskeeter right or wrong about Michael Brown in particular, you have a large community that believes there are no repercussions to those that shoot their youth. They have believed this for a while and are not being dissuaded by the grand jury verdict. It's not smart to just dismiss them.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Dec 1, 2014 17:30:46 GMT -5
tskeeter right or wrong about Michael Brown in particular, you have a large community that believes there are no repercussions to those that shoot their youth. They have believed this for a while and are not being dissuaded by the grand jury verdict. It's not smart to just dismiss them. I think we need to recognize that our legal process is an attemp to take public opinion out of the process and to focus legal proceeding on facts, not opinion. Failing to do so results in nothing more than a lynch mob. We also need to consider that public opinion is not infallible. Remember, at one time a commonly held opinion was that the earth was flat. Until people were presented with facts to show other wise. Even then, I'm sure there was a lot of debate about what was opinion and what was fact. An understanding of the grand jury process is also helpful, when considering what happened in Missouri. The grand jury process is weighted in favor of the prosecution. The defendant is not even represented in front of the grand jury, and the defendant has no opportunity to object to any of the evidence that is presented to the grand jury. The grand jury is all about presenting only the prosecution side of the story. The standard of proof for a grand jury is much lower than the standard of proof in a criminal trial. Under Missouri law, in order to forward an indictment, 9 of the 12 members of the grand jury must vote that there is reasonable cause to prosecute the defendant. A unanimous decision of the grand jury is not required. If you can't convince 75% of a jury when you are only obligated to tell one side of the story, maybe you don't have a very strong case.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 17:38:34 GMT -5
tskeeter right or wrong about Michael Brown in particular, you have a large community that believes there are no repercussions to those that shoot their youth. They have believed this for a while and are not being dissuaded by the grand jury verdict. It's not smart to just dismiss them. I think we need to recognize that our legal process is an attemp to take public opinion out of the process and to focus legal proceeding on facts, not opinion. Failing to do so results in nothing more than a lynch mob. We also need to consider that public opinion is not infallible. Remember, at one time a commonly held opinion was that the earth was flat. Until people were presented with facts to show other wise. Even then, I'm sure there was a lot of debate about what was opinion and what was fact. An understanding of the grand jury process is also helpful, when considering what happened in Missouri. The grand jury process is weighted in favor of the prosecution. The defendant is not even represented in front of the grand jury, and the defendant has no opportunity to object to any of the evidence that is presented to the grand jury. The grand jury is all about presenting only the prosecution side of the story. The standard of proof for a grand jury is much lower than the standard of proof in a criminal trial. Under Missouri law, in order to forward an indictment, 9 of the 12 members of the grand jury must vote that there is reasonable cause to prosecute the defendant. A unanimous decision of the grand jury is not required. If you can't convince 75% of a jury when you are only obligated to tell one side of the story, maybe you don't have a very strong case. Or maybe you don't wish you will convince them.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Dec 1, 2014 17:42:12 GMT -5
Later, the terms unarmed black youth has been bandied around in the media to create the image of a skinny black 14 year old in the public's minds. As I understand it, the victim was unarmed, black and 18 years old. He was also 6 foot four inches tall and weighed about 300 pounds. I'd imagine, a pretty powerful young man. And he was in the process of attacking the police officer at the time he was shot. By the way, the victim was stopped by the police officer because his rather unusual physical description and clothing matched the description of a person who had robbed and beaten the living daylights out of a shop keeper shortly before. I suspect, and apparently the grand jury agreed, that the victim wasn't the innocent bystander that many have tried to portray him as. There's a crazy amount of fail in this post. He hadn't beaten the living daylights out of anyone. He had shoved a shopkeeper with one hand. The shopkeeper didn't even fall down. The altercation and subsequent shooting happened very shortly after, and it's still not clear whether officer Wilson was responding to a customers 911 call, or just happened to be in the area. The shopkeeper did NOT call 911 and report a robbery or shoplifting, we know that for sure. OK, I'm going to take your statements at what happened prior to the time the victim was stopped by the police officer at face value. That doesn't negate the fact that the victim was a large, powerful young man, not a skinny or chubby youth, consistent with the image the media has tried to portray. Or that it appears that the victim was in the process of attacking the police officer when he was shot.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Dec 1, 2014 17:51:36 GMT -5
I think we need to recognize that our legal process is an attemp to take public opinion out of the process and to focus legal proceeding on facts, not opinion. Failing to do so results in nothing more than a lynch mob. We also need to consider that public opinion is not infallible. Remember, at one time a commonly held opinion was that the earth was flat. Until people were presented with facts to show other wise. Even then, I'm sure there was a lot of debate about what was opinion and what was fact. An understanding of the grand jury process is also helpful, when considering what happened in Missouri. The grand jury process is weighted in favor of the prosecution. The defendant is not even represented in front of the grand jury, and the defendant has no opportunity to object to any of the evidence that is presented to the grand jury. The grand jury is all about presenting only the prosecution side of the story. The standard of proof for a grand jury is much lower than the standard of proof in a criminal trial. Under Missouri law, in order to forward an indictment, 9 of the 12 members of the grand jury must vote that there is reasonable cause to prosecute the defendant. A unanimous decision of the grand jury is not required. If you can't convince 75% of a jury when you are only obligated to tell one side of the story, maybe you don't have a very strong case. Or maybe you don't wish you will convince them. Even if the prosecutor wasn't too convincing, in this case the victim's family was represented by their own witness. A specialist that the victim's family hired to advocate on the behalf of the victim. I'd expect that the testimony of the family's witness would have held some sway with the grand jury if the prosecutor wasn't making the case in an appropriately forceful fashion. And I can't imagine that a judge would let a prosecutor throw a case. Especially one with the visibility that this case has.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 17:59:19 GMT -5
tskeeter you are not getting my point. I'm not arguing whether the grand jury verdict was right or wrong. It doesn't matter. There is a large community of people that sincerely believe it was wrong. They aren't just looters or gang types or idiots. They are good, productive citizens of your country that are protesting what they see as a systemic mistreatment of their youth. To dismiss them and their concerns is a big mistake and will do nothing to alleviate the issue.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 18:00:00 GMT -5
Or maybe you don't wish you will convince them. Even if the prosecutor wasn't too convincing, in this case the victim's family was represented by their own witness. A specialist that the victim's family hired to advocate on the behalf of the victim. I'd expect that the testimony of the family's witness would have held some sway with the grand jury if the prosecutor wasn't making the case in an appropriately forceful fashion. And I can't imagine that a judge would let a prosecutor throw a case. Especially one with the visibility that this case has. I thought a prosecutor will pick out who will talk to the grand jury?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 11, 2024 4:27:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 18:05:23 GMT -5
tskeeter you are not getting my point. I'm not arguing whether the grand jury verdict was right or wrong. It doesn't matter. There is a large community of people that sincerely believe it was wrong. They aren't just looters or gang types or idiots. They are good, productive citizens of your country that are protesting what they see as a systemic mistreatment of their youth. To dismiss them and their concerns is a big mistake and will do nothing to alleviate the issue. He is a protest leader and he is kind except he is angry when a bad person will throw a thing at the police or such.
|
|
Bonny
Junior Associate
Joined: Nov 17, 2013 10:54:37 GMT -5
Posts: 7,459
Location: No Place Like Home!
|
Post by Bonny on Dec 1, 2014 19:05:32 GMT -5
To me there are four different issues; 1. Was the Grand Jury's decision to not prosecute in this case fair? 2. Are young black men unfairly targeted by police? 3. Are the protests legitimate? 4. Is the rioting and subsequent property damage fair?
1.I do think the Grand Jury's decision was appropriate given the set of circumstances and their mandate. I believe this young man made a series of bad decisions which led to his death. Certainly the things that stand out in my mind are his physical size, the fact that he assaulted the officer and attempted to take his weapon from him. In my mind those are all indications of someone who is very dangerous. While it's a terrible shame that an 18 year old died I cannot fault the officer for the course of action he took.
2. I do believe that there is a very high contact rate between young black men and the police. I think this is primarily because of poverty but I do think there is a real perception among young black men that they can't get ahead because of their race. I'm afraid that there is such a strong perception that it's become a self fulfilling prophesy and many teenagers stop trying; stop taking school seriously and find themselves un or underemployed and easier prey for drugs and gangs. I think a strong black men mentoring program taught by black could be helpful. It would be fantastic if President Obama could lead such a foundation when he leaves office. And FWIW I do believe that some police are racist but I don't believe all are racists.
3. I think the protests are legitimate in that the disproportionate number of black men being incarcerated and killed is a serious problem. But I don't think this case is really the poster child for changing the situation.
4. Rioting and looting target businesses in a struggling community that needs all the investment it can get. In my opinion it only reinforces the perception that poor communities are dangerous and not a place to work, live or shop.
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Dec 2, 2014 7:07:22 GMT -5
...:::"Those "High Value" items would likely have to be covered by a special rider which you pay extra for and must document including value. Typical examples are expensive computers, paintings, jewelry, furs and antiques.":::...
Bonny, I've been thinking about this more and more. DW has started amassing quite a wardrobe. Its not jewelry, but she has many many items that hit the $400-$600+ value. I've wondered whether or not they would be covered if we had some kind of catastrophe. Its not on the same level as, say, a Breightling, but if she lost the whole closet we'd be talking many thousands. I wonder whether at the least, I need to call the insurance company and go on record that we have this stuff.
Lets say I had 20 Armani suits (and could prove it). Would the insurance company deny coverage because they wanted some special waiver? Armani suits aren't a Picasso, but a nice collection of them would cost insurance a lot to replace.
|
|