Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeones View Post
    I suppose english isn't your first language? Because I see you got the comma in your comment but you seem to be overlooking it, basically here it separates the statement instead of "false racist complaints" the comma basically makes it "false complaint that is also racist." Another way you could see it is the comma can mean "and" basically "false and racist complaints" you make a statement like "this, that, and also this" you don't say "this and that and also this"

    - - - Updated - - -



    They are here too, but I think you generally have to become known for making multiple frivolous calls before it amounts to anything this seems to make that unnecessary. The goal is likely to keep people from being afraid to call in an emergency, but there has been enough of these malicious calls trying to weaponize emergency response to make them feel this is a necessary step.
    You guys have that history with the whole swating trend a few years ago too,I think here you get a stern talking too first time if you make some stupid 999 calls persistence leads to hefty fines and eventually some prison time

    Making false allegations is also a crime in the UK if im remembering right but its only usual used if its fairly obvious in the course of an investigation the allegation was clearly false and also made with malicious intent

  2. #22
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    This is pointless because 99.9999% of the calls are about people reporting shady activity and not reporting them on the basis of race. The caller would have to be very explicitly race motivated before you could actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the call was based on race and not on shady behavior.

    This is largely a symbolic and "feel good" act that won't fly in an actual court case.
    The Act is explicitly about supporting civil cases against those discriminating in this way.

    Civil courts don't work on the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. They work on the "to the preponderance of the evidence" standard. Is it more likely that the caller was a racist dingbat? Yes? Judgement for the plaintiff.


  3. #23
    Pit Lord smityx's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Walmart Basment FEMA Camp 7
    Posts
    2,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Milchshake View Post
    That's like every August, as both cities get ready to empty out for Burning Man.
    Except now they are emptying out as people flee the state. San Fran has lost like 40+% of it's small businesses that arn't coming back since the beer virus began.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by smityx View Post
    Except now they are emptying out as people flee the state. San Fran has lost like 40+% of it's small businesses that arn't coming back since the beer virus began.
    You do know that at least 1/3rd of businesses nationwide are not coming back right? We are facing a depression next year unless major actions are taken. If you think rural areas are going to fare better I got a bridge to sell you.

  5. #25
    Pit Lord smityx's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Walmart Basment FEMA Camp 7
    Posts
    2,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    You do know that at least 1/3rd of businesses nationwide are not coming back right? We are facing a depression next year unless major actions are taken. If you think rural areas are going to fare better I got a bridge to sell you.
    I'm aware of this. The topic was specific to San Fran, CA though so that what I was centering on.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    You do know that at least 1/3rd of businesses nationwide are not coming back right? We are facing a depression next year unless major actions are taken. If you think rural areas are going to fare better I got a bridge to sell you.
    Almost like there is a comprehensive plan to stop that from happening that has been sitting on Mitch McConnell's desk for 5 months now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    This site is amazing. It's comments like this, that make this site amazing.

  7. #27
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Milchshake View Post
    "Fiddle dee dee, answer me these questions three, else I call the cops on thee."
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  8. #28
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    43,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    Didn't know this wasn't already a thing.

    Bullshit calls to 999 in the UK have been illegal for decades.
    Yeah I am going to have to agree on this point. It's already illegal to call police for BS reasons, not only that but there are already federal hate crime laws. The problem is that so much of what happens on a 911 call are judgement calls by the officer based on their interactions with the community.

    This law isn't going to change that and is going to create more red tape


    What about the next jackass who calls 911 because Subway didn't put enough jalapenos on his fucking sandwich.
    Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Yeah I am going to have to agree on this point. It's already illegal to call police for BS reasons, not only that but there are already federal hate crime laws.
    This law will act as a deterrent for people who would otherwise call the cops on a "suspicious" black person. Stiffening the penalties for specific circumstances for existing offenses is not a new thing.
    What about the next jackass who calls 911 because Subway didn't put enough jalapenos on his fucking sandwich.
    Charge the jackass with filing a false report?

    If he is spouting racial epithets about the Subway clerk as the reasoning he didn't get his jalapenos, maybe charge him under the CAREN act as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    This site is amazing. It's comments like this, that make this site amazing.

  10. #30
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    43,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Antiganon View Post
    This law will act as a deterrent for people who would otherwise call the cops on a "suspicious" black person. Stiffening the penalties for specific circumstances for existing offenses is not a new thing.
    Here is the thing. That is already against the law. I also admit this is a HUGE problem for example the woman in Central Park, I am not sure exactly why once the video evidence was given she wasn't clearly charged with a hate crime immediatly.

    Especially since she explicitly complained of a black man putting her in danger, when he clearly wasn't.

    This isn't about laws, this is about culture, and this has been going on a long time, but thanks to social networking the light is finally being shown, so now what needs to happen is when there is conclusive evidence people need to start being arrested and charged with what is already a crime on the books.

    This, this measure seems like an idea, but an idea I can also see backfiring.


    Quote Originally Posted by Antiganon View Post
    Charge the jackass with filing a false report?

    If he is spouting racial epithets about the Subway clerk as the reasoning he didn't get his jalapenos, maybe charge him under the CAREN act as well.

    I agree but the jackass in question wasn't making a complaint about race, just simply that the clerk shorted him on toppings. This jackass should have already been charged with the laws on the books.
    Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis

  11. #31
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Yeah I am going to have to agree on this point. It's already illegal to call police for BS reasons, not only that but there are already federal hate crime laws. The problem is that so much of what happens on a 911 call are judgement calls by the officer based on their interactions with the community.

    This law isn't going to change that and is going to create more red tape


    What about the next jackass who calls 911 because Subway didn't put enough jalapenos on his fucking sandwich.
    This law doesn't change a lot with regards to criminal penalties; it just ensures that calling the cops for racist reasons can be considered a false report.

    The real meat of it is in allowing the victim of said report to sue whoever made it for up to $1000 for doing so. That's civil court stuff and doesn't really involve the cops at all.


  12. #32
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    43,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    This law doesn't change a lot with regards to criminal penalties; it just ensures that calling the cops for racist reasons can be considered a false report.

    The real meat of it is in allowing the victim of said report to sue whoever made it for up to $1000 for doing so. That's civil court stuff and doesn't really involve the cops at all.
    Hmm I was already under the impression that can happen, especially in San Francisco.

    Personally I think with cop culture and the culture of calling the cops on PoC for simply existing, this is going to fall short.


    However if it is as you said just a legal tool to aide in making it easier for the falsely accused to made whole again, awesome. However I do worry this could backfire.
    Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis

  13. #33
    A 1000 bucks in San Francisco is nothing.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    A 1000 bucks in San Francisco is nothing.
    For some, San Francisco is highly gentrified.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    This site is amazing. It's comments like this, that make this site amazing.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Antiganon View Post
    This law will act as a deterrent for people who would otherwise call the cops on a "suspicious" black person. Stiffening the penalties for specific circumstances for existing offenses is not a new thing.

    Charge the jackass with filing a false report?

    If he is spouting racial epithets about the Subway clerk as the reasoning he didn't get his jalapenos, maybe charge him under the CAREN act as well.
    laws don't work as deterrents, if they did there wouldn't be crimes.

  16. #36

    Alliance

    Which party has the onus of the burden of proof? Is the caller expected to prove it wasn’t racial, or is the other person supposed to prove it was racial?
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD

  17. #37
    This seems like one of those laws that will probably be effective in lowering racial calls simply because it exists, but it may be tricky to enforce in court. Proving intent is tough.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeth Hawkins View Post
    Which party has the onus of the burden of proof? Is the caller expected to prove it wasn’t racial, or is the other person supposed to prove it was racial?
    I imagine, like all law, it would be on the plaintiff, in this case the city, to prove the case. That's generally how law works in my experience, is there something you've read that leads you to believe differently?

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Yeah I am going to have to agree on this point. It's already illegal to call police for BS reasons, not only that but there are already federal hate crime laws. The problem is that so much of what happens on a 911 call are judgement calls by the officer based on their interactions with the community.

    This law isn't going to change that and is going to create more red tape


    What about the next jackass who calls 911 because Subway didn't put enough jalapenos on his fucking sandwich.
    I don't know how it works in the US. But does seem pointless have 2 laws for the same thing.

    In the uk we have a law and then tiers of mitigating circumstance and gritting circumstance that alter the min and max sentence, there no specific crime called a hate crime in the UK, instead we have it as an agrivating circumstance for all crimes, so any crime committed if it shown to be motivated racism or homohobia etc the max sentence and min sentence gets raised.that way there's no need for hundreds of specific laws

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    laws don't work as deterrents, if they did there wouldn't be crimes.
    Obviously they aren't 100% effective was deterrents, but to pretend they are 0% effective is ridiculous.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    This site is amazing. It's comments like this, that make this site amazing.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •