Green Bay Packers rookie safety Ha Ha Clinton-Dix was apparently stopped by police either early this morning or late last night because he looked like a guy who stole something at Bay Shore Mall.
Clinton-Dix tweeted that out, but then must have thought better of it because the tweet has since been deleted.
This is what it said though, courtesy of TBL.
I fit the description of a guy stealing out of Bay shores mall wow. Stopped by police embarrassing.
It’s true. Everyone loves the cops.
Did you know that?
They’re going to track down that guy that stole a hat from the mall one way or another! Best detectives are on the case!
Leads, yeah sure…I’ll just check with the boys down at the crime lab.
They get his autograph or tickets for the game? Go Pack Go!!!
They got us working in shifts.
The cops should have choked him out, pepper sprayed him, kicked him in the head or shot him. They’re pretty good at that. Like that goon cop that assaulted that kid outside the bar in downtown GB a few months back. Protect and serve, you know. But you can trust them, because they wear uniforms.
Police description of the suspect : ” African American, 5’10 to 6’0 , 180-190 lbs ” lol.
In the words of Dave Chappelle, “Looks like I’m staying in tonight”
Lack of critical thinking, (police forces all over America have been sued by individuals because they were told that they were too smart to be a police officer) because they want malleable robots that shoot and ask questions later. Antiquated profiling as well! lol!
wasn’t it your demorats Clinton/s who started a campaign of federal money binge to get local law enforcement to hire more cops, right away! lots and lots of cops? instigated in response to a national drug war and spike in illicit drug related crimes/commerce? i remember that campaign going back to at least the clinton admin., but many of your posters here might be too young to remember where that problem stems from… federal govt. interference in local politics and issues…?
Correct, it was called the ‘100,00 More Officers Now’ program. Or something very close to that. Thats when any asshat, fresh out of high school who had an inferiority complex could go to a 2 year Tech school and suddenly get a badge, a gun, and crew cut, black gloves to wear even when its 80degrees outside and a “im king of the world” attitude.
Before that you had to actually have years of real world experience, a 4 year degree, or go to an academy.
You sorry bastard, the feds have nothing to do with how cops are hired, trained, or dealt with when they themselves commit crimes.
Amen . . .
Who said I was a Dem? Here is an interesting snippet Fritz . . . Shortly after Ronald Reagan became President in 1981 he delivered a speech on the topic. Reagan announced, “We’re taking down the surrender flag that has flown over so many drug efforts; we’re running up a battle flag.”[65] For his first five years in office, Reagan slowly strengthened drug enforcement by creating mandatory minimum sentencing and forfeiture of cash and real estate for drug offenses, policies far more detrimental to poor blacks than any other sector affected by the new laws. FURTHER . . . Reagan protégé and former Vice-President George H. W. Bush was next to occupy the oval office, and the drug policy under his watch held true to his political background. Bush maintained the hard line drawn by his predecessor and former boss, increasing narcotics regulation when the First National Drug Control Strategy was issued by the Office of National Drug Control in 1989. Well, I am certain Clinton follows, however it seems that he was not the progenitor of the situation, In fact Nixon was. each subsequent president since Nixon PLACED HIS “STAMP” ON SOME SHITTY PIECE LEGISLATION, so that by the time a Dem. got in there, there was already so much against all of us, it was a stacked deck.
Demorats! Ha, I get it! Did you think of that all by yourself? When’s recess?
What??
And the REAL REASON(s) for this? Penalties for drug crimes among American youth almost always involve permanent or semi-permanent removal from opportunities for education, strip them of voting rights, and later involve creation of criminal records which make employment more difficult. Thus, some authors maintain that the War on Drugs has resulted in the creation of a permanent underclass of people who have few educational or job opportunities, often as a result of being punished for drug offenses which in turn have resulted from attempts to earn a living in spite of having no education or job opportunities. PRETTY SHITTY EH???
Stop- the youth today aren’t getting into drug dealing cause they are homeless and have no food to eat. They want to make easy money and not work for it. I would say the majority of the “underclass” are not criminals. Just hard working people working legitimate low paying jobs so they can put food on the table- not taking the easy way out.
Amen!
Good points Pack, but remember that the other side of that coin is valid! There will always be laziness, but sometimes not everyone gets another chance after they screw up regarding opportunities. Choices for youth are very abstract, not just black and white (no pun intended!) It is a mine field for teenagers and sometimes they step on one . . . It would be nice if everyone had ample opportunities, but then we all know that is the exception (for the most part), not the rule.