Anonymous wrote:I have not read this whole thread and don’t intend to.

I am so sick of incidences like this becoming national. There are so many more important issues in the world. Why focus on something like this that is really a more local issue?
(This is a rhetorical question - I know WHY it is being done.)

Better question - why the organized activists? You answer lies there

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand why either of the adults feel the situation in TX would even be a concern of anyone in McLean.

It only matters to one of the adults because her daughter was disinvited from a party because of it.

I think the AA woman should have just showed up as planned. It was made into a huge deal, for what? I'm sure nothing would have come of it and the kids would be better off. the AA mom has her own bias, assuming McLean residents are racist.

I have not read this whole thread and don’t intend to.

I am so sick of incidences like this becoming national. There are so many more important issues in the world. Why focus on something like this that is really a more local issue?
(This is a rhetorical question - I know WHY it is being done.)

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the PP but I, personally, am defending his actions. He was called to the scene by residents in the community. He sees a mob of unruly kids who are not listening and mouthing off. And he acted accordingly. All you have is the video tape; it seems that residents there are telling quite a different story. Some being interviewed are saying that this isn't the first time they've had issues with some of these kids; that the have come before, been unruly, and even engaged in sexual activity in front of some of the youngsters in the community. You might be quick to dismiss these residents claims; I'm not. I feel that more will come out down the pike and the media will quietly slink away onto the next issue with nary a apology, and move onto the next incident. And there WILL be another. At this point, seeing how activists are always on scene in a heartbeat, I'm inclined to think there is more to this all than meets the eye.

Is there anyone who still wishes to dispute my claim that there are posters who are defending the police officer? Or, is this just another case of my bias and emotions clouding my judgement?

Okay, one, finally!

What I noticed is when it comes to the teenagers, the phrase 'we don't know yet' surfaces much more often than when it comes to the officer. Do I need to explain why? Nah, didn't think so.

I am the pp who defended the offcer's actions - reason being is partially exactly what you point out. Second reason is residents if the neighborhood speaking out about the trouble they'd been having recently with similar incidents. I also am hearing that the two previous calls the officer had just responded to were suicides. That means he kinda wasn't having a really good day.

And now his name is brandished across the papers and Sharpton and the New Black Panthers are involved.

Completely sick

I really appreciate the police officer and the chief of police stating unequivocally that the police officer's actions were wrong. I also appreciate the police officer apologizing.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand why either of the adults feel the situation in TX would even be a concern of anyone in McLean.

It only matters to one of the adults because her daughter was disinvited from a party because of it.

And because the disinvitation was almost certainly in response to white parents at the Langley pool discussing how fortunate they are that black kids do not go there.

The officer had no cause to pull anyone's hair or draw his weapon.

This is not complicated.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if your child had a friend who was a minority, you would not invite that child to a party because there is "potential" trouble inviting that kid to a private pool? See...here is the issue. I do not see what trouble could arise other than some busybody making a comment. Which, if this is my child's friend, I will stand up and respond to. I do not care what color they are. What kind of example are you setting for your child? Keep quiet if one of your friends is treated unjustly? You may be able to live in peace, but your child is the one who is going to have to face her friend everyday in school. And these are just children! No way I would put my own child or her friend through that. Belonging to "the club" is just not that important to me (and I DO belong to a private pool that, thankfully, has a number of AA families).

This is where we part. I don't have a private pool. I don't belong to a private club. I live among many black people, not 'a number of AA families'. Where I stand, it's more important to keep your nose clean and avoid any blemish on your personal record the best way you can. We, the great unwashed, have to keep it real. We don't have lawyers on retainer to deal with potential civil suits from angry moms of allegedly mistreated kids.

I oversee a very diverse group of people at work. Racial conflict is not common, but it surfaces once in a while. Not once have I heard a substantiated claim from a black employee who complained about 'racism'. I have to deal with the fallout, because it's my job. But I want to spare my kid this insanity. Go ahead, judge and label me all you want; it is irrelevant to me. Because my child is a white male, it doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do. When push comes to shove, he will be deemed the root of all evil by default. I have to teach my child to stay away for his own sake. I have seen too many lives practically ruined over false allegations. My child deserves better.

White males, apparently the most oppressed group on earth. I've said it before, but DCUM truly has become the Onion.

Indeed it has. White people sniveling apologies about something they didn't even do? And speaking for 'all whites'? Please!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if your child had a friend who was a minority, you would not invite that child to a party because there is "potential" trouble inviting that kid to a private pool? See...here is the issue. I do not see what trouble could arise other than some busybody making a comment. Which, if this is my child's friend, I will stand up and respond to. I do not care what color they are. What kind of example are you setting for your child? Keep quiet if one of your friends is treated unjustly? You may be able to live in peace, but your child is the one who is going to have to face her friend everyday in school. And these are just children! No way I would put my own child or her friend through that. Belonging to "the club" is just not that important to me (and I DO belong to a private pool that, thankfully, has a number of AA families).

This is where we part. I don't have a private pool. I don't belong to a private club. I live among many black people, not 'a number of AA families'. Where I stand, it's more important to keep your nose clean and avoid any blemish on your personal record the best way you can. We, the great unwashed, have to keep it real. We don't have lawyers on retainer to deal with potential civil suits from angry moms of allegedly mistreated kids.

I oversee a very diverse group of people at work. Racial conflict is not common, but it surfaces once in a while. Not once have I heard a substantiated claim from a black employee who complained about 'racism'. I have to deal with the fallout, because it's my job. But I want to spare my kid this insanity. Go ahead, judge and label me all you want; it is irrelevant to me. Because my child is a white male, it doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do. When push comes to shove, he will be deemed the root of all evil by default. I have to teach my child to stay away for his own sake. I have seen too many lives practically ruined over false allegations. My child deserves better.

+1 pp

That cop's life is ruined - and possibly in danger - and those teenwalk away feeling like they won a gold medal, rather than be held accountable for their bad behavior. Way to empower idiocy y'all

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't this guy get suspended then he resigned. Obviously he did something wrong.

Not necessarily

Necessarily.

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local/collin-county/2015/06/09/mckinney-officer-resigns-from-the-force/28760035/

"The actions of Eric Casebolt are indefensible," police Chief Greg Conley told reporters at a news conference late Tuesday afternoon, saying the officer was "out of control during the incident."

Administrative leave is not the same thing as being suspended.

Actually, I believe it is. More importantly, the officer clearly did something wrong and what he did was "indefensible" (despite the efforts of some posters here to defend them).

Your bias may be blinding you, Jeff.

Few if any posters here defended the suspended officer's overreaction. What many posters here (myself included) were trying to say is that 1) the overreaction had more to do with the teenager's individual behavior than with some general racism, and that 2) as a general rule, the best way to avoid police overreactions is to not act as a smart ass (and, not jump over fences and be part of a group trespassing property).

NP - is there any evidence that the girl he tackled was trespassing? Or that she had jumped over a fence?

Nope. But there is quite a lot of evidence that she was part of such a group (that, remember, has created enough chaos to send 12 cops over) and that she acted as a smart ass instead of just leaving the scene as requested.

Just to be clear, are you defending the officer's actions? You seem to be providing a justification.

Not the PP but I, personally, am defending his actions. He was called to the scene by residents in the community. He sees a mob of unruly kids who are not listening and mouthing off. And he acted accordingly. All you have is the video tape; it seems that residents there are telling quite a different story. Some being interviewed are saying that this isn't the first time they've had issues with some of these kids; that the have come before, been unruly, and even engaged in sexual activity in front of some of the youngsters in the community. You might be quick to dismiss these residents claims; I'm not. I feel that more will come out down the pike and the media will quietly slink away onto the next issue with nary a apology, and move onto the next incident. And there WILL be another. At this point, seeing how activists are always on scene in a heartbeat, I'm inclined to think there is more to this all than meets the eye.

And I would love anyone on here who cannot see this point, to have such a mob scene descend on your HOA private pool or swim club-I think your tunes would change...

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand why either of the adults feel the situation in TX would even be a concern of anyone in McLean.

It only matters to one of the adults because her daughter was disinvited from a party because of it.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh the quotes are all screwed up...


I am not the PP. But this is McLean, VA? I am not saying this story is not true, but it seems Susie is crazy. McLean, VA right, not McLean, Kentucky or Mississippi.

Did you ever just think, Susie and Becky are crazy?

Yes, McLean, VA. I don't think Susie or Becky are crazy. I think Susie is the type described by a poster up thread. She doesn't want to fight anyone else's fight. She just wants to have a party for her little girl with no drama. My DD's presence might cause drama. She didn't call me back to say it was a misunderstanding, Becky didn't clarify today with DD or ask her if she was coming. Such is life. My point was that it was no big deal to her to basically dis-invite my DD because she is AA, and some of her pool members might say something. Party went on as planned. That's cool. But now I have to deal with the fall-out. And there already is. I have received 4 emails asking why DD wasn't at the party when we originally said we would be there. But that might be because I was supposed to bring deviled eggs and everyone loves my deviled eggs.

I would tell everyone EXACTLY Why your daughter wasn't at the party. Susie didn't want black people there.

I know it seems like I am living on this thread waiting to post and I kinda am, just bored today. I was supposed to be at a pool party.

I don't think "Susie didn't want black people there". My DD was originally invited to the party (and asked to bring deviled eggs) weeks ago. The dis-invite cam after all the Texas stuff. She didn't want to have to stand up to someone, have her DD party ruined if something popped off because of what happened in Texas. Does that make her a racist? Maybe. Do I think she is of poor character? Yes. But I try really hard not to judge people.

I admire your ability to handle this situation with grace. Personally, I would have exploded beyond description (the posters accusing me of being emotional would have seen what the truly emotional side of me looks like). Perhaps you need to address this more directly with Susie and Becky? Let them hear how the situation made you and your daughter feel. Maybe ask Susie directly how she thinks you should respond to those asking about your daughter's absence? She seems to think that her actions were justified, so let her offer an explanation to the others.

I honestly don't understand why either of the adults feel the situation in TX would even be a concern of anyone in McLean.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if your child had a friend who was a minority, you would not invite that child to a party because there is "potential" trouble inviting that kid to a private pool? See...here is the issue. I do not see what trouble could arise other than some busybody making a comment. Which, if this is my child's friend, I will stand up and respond to. I do not care what color they are. What kind of example are you setting for your child? Keep quiet if one of your friends is treated unjustly? You may be able to live in peace, but your child is the one who is going to have to face her friend everyday in school. And these are just children! No way I would put my own child or her friend through that. Belonging to "the club" is just not that important to me (and I DO belong to a private pool that, thankfully, has a number of AA families).

This is where we part. I don't have a private pool. I don't belong to a private club. I live among many black people, not 'a number of AA families'. Where I stand, it's more important to keep your nose clean and avoid any blemish on your personal record the best way you can. We, the great unwashed, have to keep it real. We don't have lawyers on retainer to deal with potential civil suits from angry moms of allegedly mistreated kids.

I oversee a very diverse group of people at work. Racial conflict is not common, but it surfaces once in a while. Not once have I heard a substantiated claim from a black employee who complained about 'racism'. I have to deal with the fallout, because it's my job. But I want to spare my kid this insanity. Go ahead, judge and label me all you want; it is irrelevant to me. Because my child is a white male, it doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do. When push comes to shove, he will be deemed the root of all evil by default. I have to teach my child to stay away for his own sake. I have seen too many lives practically ruined over false allegations. My child deserves better.

White males, apparently the most oppressed group on earth. I've said it before, but DCUM truly has become the Onion.

Jeff, if you know the previous PP is a troll, please tell us.

If you don't, I'd say your response above is inappropriate and racist. PP's opinion is as valid as everyone else's, and to have DCUM's God himself descend from the skies to make an unwarranted attack resembles bullying. IMO of course.

My response is inappropriate and racist? You are taking the "DCUM has become the Onion" suggestion a little too seriously. Did you bother to read the post? It was insulting to previous posters, full of denial of the impact of racism, and concluded by claiming that society considers white males the "root of all evil". My response was, if anything, restrained.

The incident involving the swimming pool -- if it happened as reported here -- is about as clearcut case of racism that you are going to see these days. "You can't come because you are black" is about as basic as you can get. Responding to that with a tale of racial discrimination complaints never being true and white males being unfairly considered evil is pretty ridiculous Of course, it's her opinion and she is welcome to express it. But, I don't have to be silent about it.

I am the PP and not a troll

I wouldn't call your response racist, but it is a typical 'Jeff' reaction. Jeff has little to counter and resorts to humor. I don't mind. As I said, this is irrelevant. I, however, am curious as to what in my message exactly points to:

1. Insult of previous posters;
2. Anything regarding the impact of racism.

Today's society does consider white males the root of all evil. (I can phrase it differently, I guess, but I'm too tired to bicker about semantics.) My kid, like every white male in the country, is better off not touching race with a six-foot pole. This may be news in McLean, but the rest of us have been informed accordingly.

What was insulting to previous posters was your entire first paragraph:

This is where we part. I don't have a private pool. I don't belong to a private club. I live among many black people, not 'a number of AA families'. Where I stand, it's more important to keep your nose clean and avoid any blemish on your personal record the best way you can. We, the great unwashed, have to keep it real. We don't have lawyers on retainer to deal with potential civil suits from angry moms of allegedly mistreated kids.

You seem to be saying that it is reasonable and understandable to disinvite someone based on her color because if she became a victim of real or imagined mistreatment, she would be apt to sue you. You are viewing black children as little more than potential legal liabilities. You also appear to suggest that because the mom in this instance is a person of reasonable means, she likely has legal help lined up to pursue "alleged" mistreatment. So, while the children are potential liabilities, the parents are potential legal threats. Do you believe that the previous poster would not find such suggestions insulting?

Your second paragraph discusses the impact of racism:

I oversee a very diverse group of people at work. Racial conflict is not common, but it surfaces once in a while. Not once have I heard a substantiated claim from a black employee who complained about 'racism'. I have to deal with the fallout, because it's my job. But I want to spare my kid this insanity. Go ahead, judge and label me all you want; it is irrelevant to me. Because my child is a white male, it doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do. When push comes to shove, he will be deemed the root of all evil by default. I have to teach my child to stay away for his own sake. I have seen too many lives practically ruined over false allegations. My child deserves better.

According to you, you have never heard of a claim of racism by an employee that was substantiated, suggesting that all such claims are frivolous. Moreover, you are left to "deal with the fallout" of these frivolous allegations. You conclude that white males are seen as the "root of all evil" and are not given fair defenses when facing racial allegations. So, the impact of racism, as you see it, is false accusations, more work for you, and a host of wrongly-convicted white males. Though, in your defense, you might not consider this to be the "impact of racism" because you don't seem to acknowledge the existence of racism in these instances because it is all fabricated.

When your white male son is routinely followed through department stores, is reported to the police because he is walking down the street, can't catch a taxi cab, is shot on sight while holding a toy gun, or is disinvited from a swimming party because of his race, then maybe we can discuss how society views white males.

But it's not illegal and doing it does not magically confer to the cop the right to manhandle and throw down the smartass!!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't this guy get suspended then he resigned. Obviously he did something wrong.

Not necessarily

Necessarily.

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local/collin-county/2015/06/09/mckinney-officer-resigns-from-the-force/28760035/

"The actions of Eric Casebolt are indefensible," police Chief Greg Conley told reporters at a news conference late Tuesday afternoon, saying the officer was "out of control during the incident."

This is what happens when you know the score - behave as planned or have your police department in Federal crosshairs. Doesn't matter if the girl was trespassing. Doesn't matter that she mouthed off to an officer. Doesn't matter that she resisted arrest. She has the right to do all that because she's being protected by liberal idiots and the New Black Panthers.

Sounds like a great future for these youth. Let them keep being disrespectful assholes, believing they are above the law. The only future they have is working for the Feds.

1. She did not resits arrest. She resisted having her hair pulled and thrown the the ground roughly. The cop was clearly rough with her from moment one.
2. If she was trespassing, which we do not know yet, it is moot because the officer told her to leave. Her "arrest" was not for trespassing it was for pissing the cop off .
3. She was in fact leaving but mouthed off. Sorry, but we do not get arrested for that in this country.

Finally, she has the right to mouth off and not be manhandled because she is an American citizen, and a minor to boot.

I agree with much of this. But we have to be careful to understand that "mouthing off" to an officer (not at all saying that happened here) is not a "right."