WOWK 13 Charleston, Huntington WV News, Weather, Sports
Even now they're still doing it.
He "was charged with obstructing an officer for wearing a pro-NRA t-shirt to school." "FOR WEARING" the t-shirt.
The real story was about a fat cop who couldn't stand a young kid back-talking. This was a simple case of abuse of power in the part of the cop, but the pro-gun zealots were all about the t-shirt.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
The shirt was what set this in motion. I don't expect you ever to understand things here, since it involved logic.
ReplyDeleteYou could also say it was the boy's smart mouth that set it in motion. If he'd obeyed the school's request to remove the t-shirt and didn't mouth off so much there would have been no problem.
DeleteIf those uppity people would stop standing up for their rights, there'd be no problem--do you realize how that makes you sound, Mikeb?
DeleteYou could say the same thing about the damn dirty hippies at Kent State. If they'd just kept their mouths shut, they wouldn't have been shot.
DeleteYou could also say it was the boy's smart mouth that set it in motion.
DeleteSure--one could say that, if one were utterly unconcerned with the truth of the matter. The truth is that the first atrocity of the day--the first crime against humanity and nature--was the band teacher's hysterical demand that the shirt be removed. Every unfortunate event in this entire sordid saga would have been avoided had the sniveling little petty tyrant not decided to impose--by coercive force--his political beliefs upon the student body.
Now it's time for him and the principal to reap what they have sown. Let's hope they choke to death on it.
You could say the same thing about the damn dirty hippies at Kent State. If they'd just kept their mouths shut, they wouldn't have been shot.
DeleteSuperbly stated, Tennessean.
If children were treated as human beings with basic human rights instead of
Deletecattle to be herded and castrated of their free expression... This young man is a shining example of what this country used to stand for. He should be given a medal for standing up for what he believes in and not bowing down to the overwrought ridiculous demands of the sheep who are attempting to lead him down the path to mindless obedience.
Bullshit, he learned from his hillbilly daddy to play the victim, the persecuted gun-rights supporter. That was the reason for refusing to remove the t-shirt. To set himself up as the victim. You guys love that. And that's not what used to make the country great.
DeleteBullshit, he learned from his hillbilly daddy . . .
DeleteHis "daddy"? Do you have access to some news I don't, to indicate his father is even in his life at all? I've only seen reference to his step-father. Regardless, if it's his father, step-father, mother, etc. who deserves the credit for teaching him to question authority and to defy what even you admit was an abuse of power, my hat is off to the superb parenting and mentoring.
That was the reason for refusing to remove the t-shirt. To set himself up as the victim.
Are you planning to make up your mind some day? Sometimes, you admit the arrest was an abuse of power (linked somehow to the officer's weight, apparently). Presumably you won't try to dispute that young Mr. Marcum was the target of that abuse. So explain, please, what's wrong with characterizing the target of abused authority as "the victim."
Actually, I think we can all agree that the way this is turning out, the word "victim" must now be changed slightly, to "victor." He stood up to evil, and he defeated it, and the petty tyrants are ignominiously backing away from their misdeeds as fast as they can, doubtless wishing that instead of America, they were in Iran, or North Korea, or New York, or California, where such behavior by officialdom is expected.
And their scheme to be victims wouldn't work worth a damn if the school just respected his rights.
DeleteSo the WOWK reporter is a "pro-gun zealot"? That would make her one of the incredibly rare (according to Mikeb) female "pro-gun zealots," would it not?
ReplyDeleteThe real story was about a fat cop . . .
Mikeb seems to be nearly as fixated on weight as he is on race, it would seem, although he appears not to have any interest in explaining the relevance. I of course don't mean to imply that he applies his fatism uniformly. Rachel Jeante's physique merited not a word from him.
No, she's not necessarily a pro-gun anything. She could simply be influenced by the strident and repetitive pro-gun bleating that we're continually bombarded with.
DeleteAbout Rachel, I did say she was not the most sympathetic witness. Didn't you catch that?
She could simply be influenced by the strident and repetitive pro-gun bleating that we're continually bombarded with.
DeleteYeah--that's probably what's going on here--she's sneakily, misleadingly pushing a political agenda in which she doesn't believe. Funny stuff.
About Rachel, I did say she was not the most sympathetic witness. Didn't you catch that?
Oh yeah--I caught it. What I did not catch is any snarky reference to her weight. The obvious conclusion is that, as intellectual leader of the "imprison Zimmerman" crowd, Ms. Jeante gets a free pass.
As Greg said, the shirt (and some ultrasensitive school employee) is what made this a big story. And it is now what sets this story apart from all the other stories about mouthy teenagers in school. So, though it may not be accurate, we are now stuck with it.
ReplyDeleteSo you now agree that it was an abuse of power to arrest and charge the boy?
ReplyDeleteIn the last couple of discussions we had, you said that the cop's and DA's actions were appropriate. That's what led to some of the insults I hurled.
Whether you changed your mind or miscommunicated your position before, I'm glad to see that you see this case for what it was.
Did I say the cops and DA acted appropriately?
DeleteThe point I've been making from the beginning is young Jared was not charged "for wearing an NRA t-shirt." That was the misleading headline that you guys kept pushing - except Kurt, of course.
Yes, you did say that they acted appropriately.
DeleteThe report was quite accurate, with the exception of the part you highlighted where it would have been better if they substituted the word “for” with “after”. Even still, the line you quoted is quite clear that the charge is “obstructing an officer” (not wearing a T-shirt), and the whole piece mentions that charge several times, what led to the charge, and stressed our first amendment rights.
ReplyDeleteTime for the lawsuits to commence, and the boy's father and attorney pretty much said so on camera.
ReplyDeleteThe judge and prosecutor, unfortunately, enjoy absolute immunity, though both should go to disciplinary boards for misconduct. The prosecutor because he's an asshole, the judge for abuse of authority: you don't bar someone from a courthouse just because she's trying to serve a petition in a gag order hearing you're presiding over. The bull-dyke bailiff should have known better, and she should be going down as well.
The police officer has qualified immunity, that's probably going to be stripped first thing.
The teacher, principal, superintendent, and school board have no immunity. They should make sure their homeowner's insurance is paid up because the liability portion is going to get tapped.
Why did the case get dropped? I think the judge finally remembered that the position is elected and got told by the county chair that the primary election usually decides matters. Probably too late, as this case won't go away before the next election cycle.
The bull-dyke bailiff should have known better . . .
DeleteI hate to come across as part of the Political Correctness Police, but is that really necessary? There are plenty of legitimate grounds to criticize her, without speculation about irrelevancies.
The police officer has qualified immunity, that's probably going to be stripped first thing.
Unfortunately, that's apparently not going to happen, according to the NRA:
For his part, Marcum has offered an apology for any perceived disrespect to the officer, and he and his mother agreed to forego any civil action against the City of Logan, its police department, the police officers involved.
I very much wish they had stuck to their guns (no pun intended). Young Mr. Marcum and his family are 100% in the right, and the "authorities" are 10,000% in the wrong.
Actually, and maybe Tennessean can help with this question--is that agreement legally binding? Could Marcum wait until the statute of limitation runs out on the bullshit "obstructing an officer" charge, and then file suit, claiming long term emotional pain and suffering, or some such?
Regardless, it's my understanding that there will be a civil suit against the Logan County School District.
Personally, I'd prefer ropes and lampposts for the band teacher, the principal, the prosecutors, the judge, and the bailiff, but if the school has to cough up a painful amount of cash, and fires the principal and the band teacher for idiotically getting the school into that situation, I guess I'll have to call that good enough.
I don't think the school will be held liable for anything. They were within their rights to ask for the removal of the shirt.
DeleteThe schools wasn't within its rights. It may have been within the weasel language of its dress code, but certainly not within its rights.
DeleteThey were within their rights to ask for the removal of the shirt.
DeleteHmm--"within their rights to ask . . . "
Interesting choice of words, and commendably consistent (something that often gives you trouble):
If he'd obeyed the school's request . . .
Yes, an interesting choice of words on your part indeed. If I didn't know any better, I might call it a careful choice of words, but we all know how offended you get about careful wording.
Nevertheless, careful or not, your wording makes your position (well, this part of it, anyway) unassailable. I agree, the school was within its rights to "request" the shirt's removal. Their request was denied, as per young Mr. Marcum's Constitutionally protected rights.
Apparently even the school administration belatedly realizes that they were in no place to demand the shirt's removal, since they now categorically state that students wearing such shirts will no longer be harassed.
It is, after all, pretty difficult to justify demanding the removal of a shirt depicting a rifle (a shirt in perfect compliance with the school's dress code), while the school proudly displays a 7-foot statue of a man with a rifle (a "military-style" rifle, with fixed bayonet, no less) and a hand grenade, on a 12-foot granite base in the parking lot.