user1111 wrote:
hmmm... complaining about a problem without proposing a solution is called whining.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:


Do you really believe the issue is the lack of a father figure?? I am not going to argue that a dual parent home isn?t beneficial, but you walk a dangerous route claiming that gangs, violence and everything else that is wrong in the world comes down to single mother homes.

Yes, I do believe this is a large part of the issue. I read a quote recently where someone made the argument that much of gang life comes down to members essentially filling in the void for a father figure. The gang rewards and punishes, just as a father would. The gang also provides the cohesive social structure that otherwise would be found in a two parent house.

Under the current situation, the mother works two jobs to get by while the child returns to the empty house. This becomes untenable over time, so the child joins a gang which fills in the parenting gap, to disastrous results, eventually creating a Lord of the Flies type situation.

I really do believe that things would be a lot better for all involved if that 75% fatherless figure was greatly reduced.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:


Do you really believe the issue is the lack of a father figure?? I am not going to argue that a dual parent home isn?t beneficial, but you walk a dangerous route claiming that gangs, violence and everything else that is wrong in the world comes down to single mother homes.

Yes, I do believe this is a large part of the issue. I read a quote recently where someone made the argument that much of gang life comes down to members essentially filling in the void for a father figure. The gang rewards and punishes, just as a father would. The gang also provides the cohesive social structure that otherwise would be found in a two parent house.

Under the current situation, the mother works two jobs to get by while the child returns to the empty house. This becomes untenable over time, so the child joins a gang which fills in the parenting gap, to disastrous results, eventually creating a Lord of the Flies type situation.

I really do believe that things would be a lot better for all involved if that 75% fatherless figure was greatly reduced.

Pebble wrote:


Do you really believe the issue is the lack of a father figure?? I am not going to argue that a dual parent home isn?t beneficial, but you walk a dangerous route claiming that gangs, violence and everything else that is wrong in the world comes down to single mother homes.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:

Their first amendment rights were not trampled. Nobody went to jail for it and nobody was fined for it. If these people are that insistent on putting up a shrine, they can do so on their own private property and not on property in which they don?t own.

Well, that was private property as the sign in the first photo clearly states. Of course, I'm assuming that the owner of the building was OK with this when they started putting all this stuff up. It's one thing if the owner had the display taken down, quite another that Fulop "had it taken down."

There is a sign on the private property dictating that the police monitor and maintain it. Secondly, the candles on the sidewalk is clearly litter. As such, it is within the city's control to remove it.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:

Their first amendment rights were not trampled. Nobody went to jail for it and nobody was fined for it. If these people are that insistent on putting up a shrine, they can do so on their own private property and not on property in which they don?t own.

Well, that was private property as the sign in the first photo clearly states. Of course, I'm assuming that the owner of the building was OK with this when they started putting all this stuff up. It's one thing if the owner had the display taken down, quite another that Fulop "had it taken down."

Pebble wrote:

Their first amendment rights were not trampled. Nobody went to jail for it and nobody was fined for it. If these people are that insistent on putting up a shrine, they can do so on their own private property and not on property in which they don?t own.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCishome wrote:
In this case, #OOPS# the first amendment.

Uh, no why?

Does this First Amendment only apply to what you like? You're missing the point, then.

Well it doesn't apply everywhere. This instance could very easily be seen as inciting violence, in which case it does not apply.

Um, no, it doesn't even come close to passing the tests set by the Supreme Court, such as shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. There were no fighting words, no obscenities. Nor does it defame or libel anyone. As far as I could tell from the news coverage, the display was merely expressions of grief by the gunman's family and friends. They don't urge anyone to commit violence, and I don't think anyone who heard about this even thought the display reflected the views of the vast majority of JC residents. Give the public some credit. The whole point of living in a free and open society is the tolerance of views at odds with our own.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

user1111 wrote:
"I had it taken down last night," Fulop said. "I am not going to let a few residents pretend like they express the views of a great city like Jersey City."

More

Did NJ.com post the right slideshow? The photo captions mention someone else and a different shooting incident. As much as I heartily disagree with paying tribute to a murderer, I am disappointed that Fulop is essentially taking credit for trampling on someone's First Amendment rights. (Yes, I know I'm going to get flamed for saying this)

EDIT: NJ.com just fixed the photo captions.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Ahhh and now a news reporter has been suspended for speaking his mind on this topic:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/ ... utm_campaign=ShareButtons

Keep digging your goddamn heads in the sand people. Keep firing the people with opinions who aren't afraid to speak the truth on this topic.

Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

Dude, you're just going off the rails here. I suggest you take a step back from blaming non-white people for all of the problems and take a hard look at yourself.

There isn't some vast liberal media. Nor is there a conspiracy to pretend that there are no problems.

I agree he is coming off as unhinged, but currently these problems plaguing JC are all caused by black gang members. That's just a fact. Three more cops were injured today and I don't need to read an article to know what the perps look like.

And the cause of the problem is multifold, poverty, lack of education, etc. But the NJ news reporter nailed it on the head when he said all of this stems from blacks growing up without fathers.

It is sad that one cannot say this in public, because I think if this problem were confronted head on, we all would benefit.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCishome wrote:
In this case, #OOPS# the first amendment.

Uh, no why?

Does this First Amendment only apply to what you like? You're missing the point, then.

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCishome wrote:
In this case, #OOPS# the first amendment.

Uh, no why?

Does this First Amendment only apply to what you like? You're missing the point, then.

Well it doesn't apply everywhere. This instance could very easily be seen as inciting violence, in which case it does not apply.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

JCishome wrote:
In this case, #OOPS# the first amendment.

Uh, no why?

Does this First Amendment only apply to what you like? You're missing the point, then.

JCishome wrote:
In this case, #OOPS# the first amendment.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Ahhh and now a news reporter has been suspended for speaking his mind on this topic:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/ ... utm_campaign=ShareButtons

Keep digging your goddamn heads in the sand people. Keep firing the people with opinions who aren't afraid to speak the truth on this topic.

Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

Dude, you're just going off the rails here. I suggest you take a step back from blaming non-white people for all of the problems and take a hard look at yourself.

There isn't some vast liberal media. Nor is there a conspiracy to pretend that there are no problems.

I agree he is coming off as unhinged, but currently these problems plaguing JC are all caused by black gang members. That's just a fact. Three more cops were injured today and I don't need to read an article to know what the perps look like.

And the cause of the problem is multifold, poverty, lack of education, etc. But the NJ news reporter nailed it on the head when he said all of this stems from blacks growing up without fathers.

It is sad that one cannot say this in public, because I think if this problem were confronted head on, we all would benefit.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Ahhh and now a news reporter has been suspended for speaking his mind on this topic:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/ ... utm_campaign=ShareButtons

Keep digging your goddamn heads in the sand people. Keep firing the people with opinions who aren't afraid to speak the truth on this topic.

Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

Dude, you're just going off the rails here. I suggest you take a step back from blaming non-white people for all of the problems and take a hard look at yourself.

There isn't some vast liberal media. Nor is there a conspiracy to pretend that there are no problems.

user1111 wrote:
"I had it taken down last night," Fulop said. "I am not going to let a few residents pretend like they express the views of a great city like Jersey City."

More

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Ahhh and now a news reporter has been suspended for speaking his mind on this topic:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/ ... utm_campaign=ShareButtons

Keep digging your goddamn heads in the sand people. Keep firing the people with opinions who aren't afraid to speak the truth on this topic.

Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
...

You may be confusing the perp with the Daniel Wilson, the guy who was on the run
...

I wasn't confused. Both Campbell and Wilson were on the run since last week - and both were wanted in connection to a prior homicide. Some their friends and family likely harbored these fugitives, and if so, they need to be brought to justice.

No confusion about that.

JCMan8 wrote:
...

You may be confusing the perp with the Daniel Wilson, the guy who was on the run
...

jerseymom wrote:
In all my years in Jersey City, this has to be one of the saddest photographs I have ever seen:

dtjcview wrote:
I was a little conflicted at first on this story. Clearly the perp was loved as a son, husband and father and his actions might have been out-of-character to his loved ones. His actions certainly appeared to be more deranged than simply evil.

But there's no way he could have remained on the run without the help of some of the people paying these obnoxious tributes. These people are directly responsible for Officer Santiago's murder. They need to be brought to justice.