sinik wrote:
Quote:

djh101 wrote:
Quote:

The pedestrians are as bad as the drivers here.

My friend Dirt McGirt is absolutely correct with this statement.

You guys have no clue. I have been 50% or more across the crosswalk (with the lights in my favor) and had drivers turn into the street I was crossing, without looking, causing me to take evasive action.

One guy even stopped and came at me again, obviously thinking that I should back up and let him pass in front of me. It was in a clearly marked crosswalk. The guy was turning out of another street where there was a stop sign. There were no parked cars obscuring his view.

Unfortunately these are regular occurrences. Some of you people clearly dont walk much or you would have experienced something similar yourselves.

Quote:

Drivers can?t always stop on a dime when that happens ?last minute? --- even at 25MPH which is the limit for most of these streets.

Most drivers are not driving at 25mph. On Jersey or Marin (where it is clearly posted), they are driving considerably faster. In the case of Marin at 8th and 9th most of the drivers are hitting 50mph.

ianmac47 wrote:
When I'm in a crosswalk, I only stop for POS cars. I mean, if you are driving a nice import and you hit me, well I know you at least have the book value of the car.

djh101 wrote:
Quote:

The pedestrians are as bad as the drivers here.

My friend Dirt McGirt is absolutely correct with this statement.

More than a few pedestrians seem to have this ?let?s play chicken? attitude with oncoming cars, which manifests itself one of two ways:

1). By crossing mid-block where they have no crosswalk whatsoever (and purposely taking their dear sweet time crossing just to break your balls even though they are jaywalking).

2). By obliviously stepping out into a crosswalk from what they should know to be a totally blind spot for the driver of the oncoming car (eg: from behind a large vehicle on the corner or, in fact, any vehicle that is parked too close to the corner). Drivers can?t always stop on a dime when that happens ?last minute? --- even at 25MPH which is the limit for most of these streets.

My only hope is that the JCPD --- if indeed they step up on enforcement ---- will recognize (and enforce) based on the understanding that there is responsibility to met by both parties. Pedestrians are at fault just as often as are drivers.

The best thing that one can do to avoid car accidents is not to drive like an A-hole. Similarly, if you're a pedestrian who doesn't want to get run over, then don't walk like an A-hole.

Eleanor_A wrote:
I've never understood why cable companies were never considered a "technical" monopoly. You move into a certain area and you don't have a choice in cable companies. Yes, I know we have a choice with dish TV, but what if you don't want the dish?

The gov't broke up Ma Bell and made the phone industry competitive. Maybe this would be a kick in the ass for Comcast to give a shite.

Erica wrote:
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:

It's vandalism, and he should be punished because vandalism is a friggin' crime. What is hard to understand about that?

Vandalism is a crime but it's usually a misdemeanor or low-level felony (depending on the value of damage, whether it's federal property, etc) - usual punishments include fines, reparations, probation, and community service - not jail time.

So I think some people are taking issue with the idea that someone should/would be put in jail for vandalism. No one's arguing that it's acceptable or that there shouldn't be consequences.

CapnJon wrote:
DirkMcGirt you said "Any law that makes something illegal when there is no victim of violence IS arbitrary, immoral and unjust." does that mean you don't think it should be illegal to steal? or lie (under oath)?

just wonderin!

zeitgeist101 wrote:
Quote:

betterIN_JC wrote:
Definitely agree with Brewster on this. When laws become arbitrary how can a citizen know when they are safe? What would make the police any different than a gang or the mob? Just watched the movie training day. it really brings out the concept of why a peace officer can think they are doing good and how their views can become distorted in the name of "justice" when really they are hurting those they are charged to protect.

I agree with you that laws should not be arbitrarily enforced or made up on the spot as we go along; constants are a necessity. But we also need to use common sense about what battles we should be fighting.

These cops did not make up this law for one person because they didnt like him or for any other arbitrary reason- they were enforcing a mandate from their superiors that was made public at least a week in advance of this temporary prohibition on bringing alcohol on the train. Did the cops probably give the guy an attitude and perhaps bully him a little? Most likely, after all people who become cops often do so because they want to have power over others. Did this guy act like his civil rights were being violated when all the cops were saying was that they can't make any exceptions to this rule (which the police probably thought was a stupid rule anyway)? Yes he did.

This incident gives us no rational reason to make us believe that we are no longer safe from the people who are charged with our protection. In this case the slippery slope argument is no argument at all.

The guy with the wine is just being indignant because his pride was hurt.

betterIN_JC wrote:
Definitely agree with Brewster on this. When laws become arbitrary how can a citizen know when they are safe? What would make the police any different than a gang or the mob? Just watched the movie training day. it really brings out the concept of why a peace officer can think they are doing good and how their views can become distorted in the name of "justice" when really they are hurting those they are charged to protect.

JC98 wrote:
dear concerned citizen,
the 'car scratcher' has been around for a long time, at least ever since I moved here, which was about 13 years ago. he is harmless, in fact, he can be very nice, you can talk to him, he is not a monster. I highly doubt that he scratches cars, since I have never seen him doing it. Smashing bottles on Christopher Columbus Drive, yes, reading the paper, yes, but nothing violent of any sort.
people with mental illness don't know where to go, because this country doesn't provide help. starting a 'homeless hunt' and locking them away is extremely inhumane and reminds me of germany between 1933 and 1945. I would suggest, if you can't adapt to the Urban life, why not move back to the suburb?

Mathias wrote:
Quote:

DirtMcGirt wrote:

This meltdown couldn't have happened without the Fed. The market can't overheat without government policies that force easy money into the market.

And Obama was born in Kenya, liberals are really undercover marxists etc etc[/quote

What? Can we stick to the topic at hand?

Quote:

DirtMcGirt wrote:

As for teachers, no one wants to cut education budgets, but fiscal responsibility still matters.

And of course fiscal responsibility means gutting the public education system, attacking public education workers who are living on 40-60k a year as uncaring pigs at the trough.

Mathias wrote:
Quote:

FGJCNJ1970 wrote:
Personally, I am glad that this didn't pass.

To get anywhere from a 4.3 to 4.7 % raise is just obnoxious while we're still very much in the Great Recession and so many in the private sector (myself included) have lost our jobs outright.

Giving themselves these generous raises does nothing to help the kids. NJ teachers are already the highest paid in the nation.

Finally, I think there is a LOT of waste in our public schools and a lot of teachers who have their jobs because of that thing called tenure. I'm sick of being taxed to hell for it - and I don't even have kids.

Tenure needs to go. In the 70's when I was in elementary school there were between 30-40 kids in my class with just one teacher. I'm not buying that we have to have a lower student / teacher ratio for kids to succeed.

CUT CUT CUT

FG

How do you feel about all the bonuses being doled out on Wall Street despite the "great recession" and the fact that these same folks have played such a large role in the current economic crisis?

So the way to improve the education system is to cut teachers pay, increase the number of students per classroom and to make it easier for folks like Epps and Mcann to fire and hire teachers (Hey wouldn't it be great if the pols are able to dish out teacher jobs to their friends and family like they do with the police and fire department!!)

No thanks

Mathias wrote:
Quote:

DirtMcGirt wrote:
Quote:

ogden1 wrote:
Cato, just curious.
What do you think these salaries should be?
Do a comparison througout the major cities in the state and let us know your findings.
Do you think Elena Scambia did a bang up job???
Compare her to Epps. Who is better?

Whatever the market will bear.

They are already paid what the market will bear.

ogden1 wrote:
Cato, just curious.
What do you think these salaries should be?
Do a comparison througout the major cities in the state and let us know your findings.
Do you think Elena Scambia did a bang up job???
Compare her to Epps. Who is better?

heights wrote:
Quote:

jc97 wrote:
The 4% increase that teachers are reported to be receiving is misleading. All teachers are not receiving a 4% pay increase. Only those teachers who have been teaching for ten years are due for this increase. Over the course of the first ten years of their careers they have been earning between $40,000 and $53,000 dollars, depending upon their level of education. As I teacher with a master's degree who has dedicated ten years of service to this district, I am finally up for an increase in pay that would bring me to a somewhat decent income of $61,000. So I ask you, with this level of education and this amount of years devoted to the children of our city, is a raise to $61,000 dollars per year obnoxious? I think not.

$61,000 can by a lot of apples. And just think I know lots of non-college workers who get paid more and thats just for 8 hours a day without over time.

trambone wrote:
I hate to disagree, but every child by the time they leave the 12th grade should've learned certain things. Information that every American child should know. That would be considered cookie cutter. Sadly its the parents then the teachers. So many parents think its 100% on the teachers to make sure their children learn.

Oh also the answer is not charter schools, but to fix the American way. Education dropped when the Cold War ended. Our goal was to be better then the USSR at everything. Now we unite against no one, but ourselves it seems.

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

DirtMcGirt wrote:
If we want to decrease violent crime, we need to end the War on Drugs. It has been a complete failure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crack_epidemic_(United_States)

The crack epidemic is correlated with a sharp increase in crime, especially violent crime. Research by two prominent economists from the University of Chicago...suggest that crack was the most prominent factor contributing to the rise and fall of social ills in the African American and Latino communities between 1980 and 2000.

Between 1984 and 1994, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced an increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.

The reasons for these increases in crime was due mostly to the fact that distribution for the drug occurred mainly in low-income inner city neighborhoods. This gave many inner city residents the opportunity to move up the "economic ladder" in a drug market that allowed dealers to charge a low minimum price. The basic reason for the rise of crack was economic.

Evidently, crack cocaine use and distribution became popular in cities that were in social and economic chaos such as Los Angeles and Atlanta. 'As a result of the low-skill levels and minimal initial resource outlay required to sell crack, systemic violence flourished as a growing army of young, enthusiastic inner-city crack sellers attempt to defend their economic investment.' (Inciardi, 1994) Once the drug became embedded in the particular communities, the economic environment that was best suited for its survival caused further social disintegration within that city. An environment that was based on violence and deceit as an avenue for the crack dealers to protect their economic interests.

JerseyCityPower wrote:
I would--except he's DEAD..the CIA killed him.

JerseyCityPower wrote:
You STILL will NOT answer with a simple YES or NO.
Sad.


You are SOOooooooo outraged that Che allegedly SAID something. (And NEVER actually DID the allegation)

YET...you refuse to definitively CONDEMN right-wing Cubans for their terror attack on US soil. (something which DID happen.)

You're so funny.


Oh...btw..."straw man argument"--YOU should look up the meaning.

JerseyCityPower wrote:
No, Dirt.. there was NO straw man argument.

I repeatedly ASKED you a question ....if you denounced the right-wing Cuban's terror attack on US soil against the United Nations buliding.

YOU said NOTHING...and still refuse to completely answer THAT question.

It's really quite simple:

Do you condemn the right-wing Cubans' use of missles to attack the United Nations at which Che Guevara was speaking? Yes...or NO?

JCorNYC wrote:
9/11 happened because we became lax and people like ianmac's mentality of too liberal allowed terrorists to successfully do their deed. We show we are aware then it will help deter what they are planning in our soil.

I speak from experienced. Being in the place where terror struck and losing colleagues while running amok don't know where to go will change ones way of life.

JerseyCityPower wrote:
AGAIN......

Dirt......So, Do YOU...condemn the right-wing Cubans' act of terrorism?

Yes or NO?

Br6dR wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityPower wrote:
One person's FREEDOM FIGHTER is another's "terrorist".

Who benifits from the oppression and blockade on CUBA?

Would our 'founding fathers' (and sisters) be considered 'terrorists' by the British?

The very troops being supported NOW---are THEY not killing in Iraq and Afghanistan and torturing (at Guantanamo--IN CUBA)?



Thoughts to ponder while you sit comfortably at your computer.

What I ponder while I sit comfortably at my computer is that leftists are as one sided and narrow minded as the far right. They both see what they want to see and disregard the rest. (I must be drunk, I'm channeling Paul Simon.) I see little difference between the far left and the far right. In fact, I think they're one and the same. (That's why no one goes from the far left or right to the center. When they switch philosophies they go from one extreme to the other.)

Ridding the Middle East of Christians is not being a "FREEDOM FIGHTER", it's being a right wing assh*le. (And I'm an atheist.)

Murdering women and children is not being a "FREEDOM FIGHTER", it's being the Middle East version of a right wing lunatic.

But you champion their cause because the enemy of your enemy is...