Winners only.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, I did work at DHS. Background tells us a lot about the crime. The FBI dedicates considerable resources into dissecting the minute of criminal backgrounds. Do I have a need to know since I'm not directly involved in the case, no. By that standard all sorts of information should be withheld from the public. Why did we need to know about a drag queen burlesque show on the other side of the country, where everybody was a willing participant? What benefit does that provide anyone? I could compile quite a list of stuff that is of marginal benefit. Hell why do they need to report the weather? Either it's already happened and unless it's a hurricane or blizzard it doesn't really affect me, yet every night on every news channel there is 10 minutes of weather.
You were doing fine then started reaching at the end. It's fine. Not everyone is able to have a conversation.
 
F95D2B7F-7C92-41AB-BE1F-5B5DF2F0E8BB.jpeg
 
I still want to hear the real reason you need to know the details and background of the alleged criminals. You are not a LEO, an investigator, a Judge, a prosecuting attorney. So how does the information benefit you?
Why are you insisting on a demonstrable NEED for information to be available?
That’s advocating even more that a governing body have control of what we can see or hear.

Imagine trying to check out a library book on roofing and being told you cannot, since you are not a roofer, do not own your own house, and cannot assist anyone else in roofing.

You’ve advocated for government control of information in two different ways now.
Can you explain the WHY to us?
 
The sky is falling!! I literally don’t know a single person who thinks the periodic table should be eliminated. Why would you think that any of that won’t be taught here?
Because we're just that stupid. They're already stripping down college criteria in similar fashion. Grade schools are passing kids that are 2-3 grades below their grade levels. Now we have "tests are racist." Maybe the tests are racist because math and science are racist; I'm sure I'm not the first person to say that, but at least I'm being sarcastic...

They've been stripping spending for children with mental/behavioral issues for decades and now for the most part they're just placed in public schools with little to no support and causing distraction for the children without those disabilities so everybody can suffer equally. We have all these no tolerance anti-bullying policies to stop school violence (namely shooting), which has completely failed, so we get even stricter with the policies. I could go on and on, but the point is we keep doing stupid shyt when it comes to education, what makes you think we're not capable of doing something that stupid?
 
Why are you insisting on a demonstrable NEED for information to be available?
That’s advocating even more that a governing body have control of what we can see or hear.

Imagine trying to check out a library book on roofing and being told you cannot, since you are not a roofer, do not own your own house, and cannot assist anyone else in roofing.

You’ve advocated for government control of information in two different ways now.
Can you explain the WHY to us?
No he's not advocating for gov't control (nor private control) - I guess it just happens magically...
 
Because we're just that stupid. They're already stripping down college criteria in similar fashion. Grade schools are passing kids that are 2-3 grades below their grade levels. Now we have "tests are racist." Maybe the tests are racist because math and science are racist; I'm sure I'm not the first person to say that, but at least I'm being sarcastic...

They've been stripping spending for children with mental/behavioral issues for decades and now for the most part they're just placed in public schools with little to no support and causing distraction for the children without those disabilities so everybody can suffer equally. We have all these no tolerance anti-bullying policies to stop school violence (namely shooting), which has completely failed, so we get even stricter with the policies. I could go on and on, but the point is we keep doing stupid shyt when it comes to education, what makes you think we're not capable of doing something that stupid?
I thought you were thinking along religious lines as the reason we would eliminate evolution in school. We have an accountability problem in America. No one is responsible for their own actions, especially our spoiled weak children. Of course, our system is really about money and power, not creating critical thinking adults. Between public AND private money (liberals love to compare government funding here to socialist countries where private money isn’t used), we fund our schools per student more than any country in the world by far, yet our teachers have to beg in the streets with “red for Ed” signs to get more pay. it seems like their is a black hole that ***** in money somewhere in the school system causing teachers to buy their own school supplies and whine to the public about the lack of funding while simultaneously working in the richest education system in the world. But I suppose that’s probably all just conspiracy and the real problem is that we just havent thrown enough cash at the problem, since that’s the way to fix everything in this country.
 
Why are you insisting on a demonstrable NEED for information to be available?
That’s advocating even more that a governing body have control of what we can see or hear.

Imagine trying to check out a library book on roofing and being told you cannot, since you are not a roofer, do not own your own house, and cannot assist anyone else in roofing.

You’ve advocated for government control of information in two different ways now.
Can you explain the WHY to us?
I am guessing this is why people like you get so confused so easily. I am not advocating nor insinuating in any way be it directly or round-a-bout that anyone keep anyone else from any information. Furthermore this is a direct example of why people don't get along with you.

How many crimes are committed where the criminals information is never even mentioned? The ones that get mentioned are the ones that fit a narrative so they can bring in viewers or are interesting enough to bring in viewers.

On to your dumb example of the roofing book. A roofing book would have information that will help with the construction of a roof. I am NOT a roofer so I don't NEED the book. So using your ******** example, tell all of us how you or Jimi77 knowing a shooters sexual identity gives you information that will help you do anything.

Now, Rob, I will dumb it down. Here is a STATEMENT: I do not think it is necessary or necessarily safe for NEWS MEDIA to give out an alleged criminal or suspects information before a conviction is made. This information does nothing for the general public. It's like a mother bringing home groceries and the kids asking how she got the money to get the groceries. The information is available but it does the kids no good to know the information. They can't do anything with the information.

I could go on but you are already demonstrating that it is getting difficult to comprehend what I am saying without jumping to conclusions then running with what your mind makes up as reality or facts.
 
‘"If we create computers smarter than humans, then what’s left for humans? said Kevin, in a grim vision of the future.’

‘“There is not going to be a battle between nations but a battle between AI and humanity,” he warned.’

 
I am guessing this is why people like you get so confused so easily. I am not advocating nor insinuating in any way be it directly or round-a-bout that anyone keep anyone else from any information. Furthermore this is a direct example of why people don't get along with you.
You very clearly said the information should only be available through and FOIA request. If the information is only available through an FOIA request as per your directive, then the information is controlled by the government. That means that you are advocating for government control of the information. There is no other way around it.
How many crimes are committed where the criminals information is never even mentioned? The ones that get mentioned are the ones that fit a narrative so they can bring in viewers or are interesting enough to bring in viewers.
This statement has no relevance. The thing about free information is that people can choose to disseminate what they want and what they don’t want to. I can tell you the color of my car if I feel like it, or I can choose not to tell you. And infotainment Nettwerk can tell you who the shooter is, or choose not to; if they have the information it’s their freedom of choice what to do with it.
Our media is not state-sponsored or run.

On to your dumb example of the roofing book. A roofing book would have information that will help with the construction of a roof. I am NOT a roofer so I don't NEED the book. So using your ******** example, tell all of us how you or Jimi77 knowing a shooters sexual identity gives you information that will help you do anything.
You call it a dumb example, then you illustrate why it’s a good example.
You’re not a roofer, so you don’t NEED to read a book about it. It you CHOOSE to, you think you should have to file an FOIA request to be able to see it.
How do you feel about public jail rosters or warrant lists? Should they exist, and if they should, what information to you deem acceptable for the lists?

Now, Rob, I will dumb it down. Here is a STATEMENT: I do not think it is necessary or necessarily safe for NEWS MEDIA to give out an alleged criminal or suspects information before a conviction is made. This information does nothing for the general public. It's like a mother bringing home groceries and the kids asking how she got the money to get the groceries. The information is available but it does the kids no good to know the information. They can't do anything with the information.
What does a conviction have to do with it? A conviction doesn’t change a person’s skin color, age, sexual orientation, political leanings, etc.
And your analogy of the kids and their mother’s income is not valid. People get to choose what they want to share about themselves. If she chooses not to give her kids that info, so be it.
But she doesn’t get to control what other people might say to her kids. A family acquaintance might tell the kids without knowing mom has a secret.
Welcome to societal living.
I could go on but you are already demonstrating that it is getting difficult to comprehend what I am saying without jumping to conclusions then running with what your mind makes up as reality or facts.
I comprehend you just fine. You made it clear multiple times that you think information should be kept under lock and key by the government unless said government deems we have the correct “need” to know such information, and that information outlets such as “news” networks should be prevented from sharing information unless the government sees a demonstrated “need” for that information to be released.

Its a concept well known in other places.
State-run media, heavily filtered and monitored internet, etc.
The people benefit from it greatly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

Slo_Ride

5,000+ posts
Regulator
Thread starter
Slo_Ride
Joined
Location
ATLANTA
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
33,976
Views
968,768
Last reply date
Last reply from
Buck
IMG_1882.jpeg

slater

    Oct 4, 2025
  • 0
  • 0
Screenshot_20251004_120904_Photo Translator.jpg

1aespinoza

    Oct 4, 2025
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top