14-year-old Texas boy arrested for bringing homemade clock

[tabibito]

The stated offense dealt with a "hoax bomb". Even the kid has said that. That's been pretty consistent in this story. The concern was that the kid built a FAKE bomb to cause excitement or fear. In the "hoax bomb" scenario, there doesn't need to be "evidence of explosives".

I think that's what keeps getting lost in all this hysteria --- It's all about a FAKE bomb.

? What makes it a fake bomb? Who claimed it was a bomb? The young man said that it was a clock ... I haven't seen anything that says otherwise.

You and I don't have all the information available to the school officials and police at the time, so I'm going to do the reasonable thing and say I don't know. I think there are a whole lot of assumptions going on here on both sides.

And, actually, it's very common to take a person into custody without knowing that an offense had actually been committed - that's what "probable cause" is all about.

Someone makes a clock, says he made a clock, and according to one report, showed it to a science teacher saying that he had made it. In the event (even without the last bit, which may not have been known to the police) - where is probable cause? No threat, and no claim that it was a bomb. In fact - the claim was made that it was no such thing.

So - you walk down the street with a clock in your bag - someone thinks you're carrying a suspicious object - police get called - and you get arrested for carrying a fake bomb ... is that how it is supposed to play out?

[Cow Poke]

My point is that's what the counter-response to this event will be. One would hope that a couple days' reflection on the poor judgement of looking at a clock, having the kid tell you it's a clock and deciding that he actually made a fake bomb would be enough time to realize what a loser of an argument that is. Yet, here we are -- there's gotta be some reason this wasn't a massive failure of common sense, some way to put this back on the kid.

And the other side is - school officials and law enforcement should have just accepted the word of a kid who didn't have enough sense NOT to bring a hot mess of a homemade clock to school when other kids get suspended for drawing PICTURES of guns, or mom leaving a butter knife in a kids lunch box.

Schools have adopted this "zero tolerance" crap, and now the liberals are screaming, "but, wait, one of OUR guys got caught doing something stupid", so it's all on the school officials and police!

This is not a stupid kid, Sam.

[Irate Canadian]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ophobia-clock/

----------.

Reasoning like this has led to people like me repeatedly bullied.... You're justifying racial profiling to a level that it should not be. Let me ask you a question: I was born in India and have brown skin. If I was working on a circuit board/ motherboard/breadboard, would you be worried?

[Sam]

And the other side is - school officials and law enforcement should have just accepted the word of a kid who didn't have enough sense NOT to bring a hot mess of a homemade clock to school when other kids get suspended for drawing PICTURES of guns, or mom leaving a butter knife in a kids lunch box.

Schools have adopted this "zero tolerance" crap, and now the liberals are screaming, "but, wait, one of OUR guys got caught doing something stupid", so it's all on the school officials and police!

This is not a stupid kid, Sam.

It's on the school officials for calling the police and the police for arresting the kid. As I wrote in my first post on this thread, reasonable caution is commendable. Reasonable caution was not exercised.

I don't recall ever supporting disciplining kids for pictures of guns or butter knives in lunch boxes. I'm perfectly fine with criticizing stupid school policies and decisions in both directions. You seem unwilling to agree that the police, in this instance, made a totally disproportionate decision, though.

[RumTumTugger]

Aaaand sea's right about you.

I have an argument there. I made it nice and simple for you. You, as per the usual, have no idea how to actually react when it's not bandwagon time.

No, you gave a snarky reply to a reasonable post of CPs. Cp was right on about how that post made you look.

[Cow Poke]

It's on the school officials for calling the police and the police for arresting the kid.

Do you know what the school "zero tolerance" polices called for in this case, Sam?

As I wrote in my first post on this thread, reasonable caution is commendable. Reasonable caution was not exercised.

Unfortunately, reasonable caution goes out the window where "zero tolerance" policies are in place.

I don't recall ever supporting disciplining kids for pictures of guns or butter knives in lunch boxes.

But you're not on record as opposing "zero tolerance" polices, eh?

I'm perfectly fine with criticizing stupid school policies and decisions in both directions. You seem unwilling to agree that the police, in this instance, made a totally disproportionate decision, though.

No, Sam, I'm TOTALLY willing to agree if I have more information. This is yet another time where you pronounce judgment without knowing the facts. It's a big difference between us -- I'm totally willing to admit I don't have all the facts, and prefer to reserve judgment - you just assume you know what happened behind the scenes, and spew forth ignorance.

[Cow Poke]

Well, it took a couple days but it looks like we know what the line is going to be: the kid built a fake bomb to get media attention that obviously looked like a basic electrical engineering class project and kept calling it a "clock" in order to have plausible deniability that it was really a fake bomb. Once again, Pamela Gellar and Frank Gaffney show the way.

Sam, this really sounds like the tin hat conspiracy theory brigade.... if more facts come out that change the narrative, then it's necessarily a setup.

I fully expect that kind of dipstick reasoning from your colleagues here, but not from you. You're normally way smarter than that.

[tabibito]

It's on the school officials for calling the police and the police for arresting the kid. As I wrote in my first post on this thread, reasonable caution is commendable. Reasonable caution was not exercised.

NOT on the school officials - they viewed the object as suspicious, and acted appropriately. NOT on the police for taking precautions applicable for dealing with a suspicious object.
Criticism can be levelled only to the extent that the limits of "applicable precautions" were apparently exceeded by the police, and that increases risks in future incidents where objects are deemed suspicious.

On the site that CP directed to is a small video panel where a police spokesman declares that the young man "did not intend to cause alarm."

You seem unwilling to agree that the police, in this instance, made a totally disproportionate decision, though.

Normally I agree with CP's assessments ... this time, you have a case.

[Cow Poke]

NOT on the school officials - they viewed the object as suspicious, and acted appropriately. NOT on the police for taking precautions applicable for dealing with a suspicious object.
Criticism can be levelled only to the extent that the limits of "applicable precautions" were apparently exceeded by the police, and that increases risks in future incidents where objects are deemed suspicious.

I'm not sure if this is sincere or sarcasm.

On the site that CP directed to is a small video panel where a police spokesman declares that the young man "did not intend to cause alarm."

Yes, after investigating the situation, they came up to the conclusion that you cited. It was not evident at first.

Normally I agree with CP's assessments ... this time, you have a case.

Even a blind hog can find an acorn occasionally.

[Sam]

Do you know what the school "zero tolerance" polices called for in this case, Sam?

Unfortunately, reasonable caution goes out the window where "zero tolerance" policies are in place.

But you're not on record as opposing "zero tolerance" polices, eh?

No, Sam, I'm TOTALLY willing to agree if I have more information. This is yet another time where you pronounce judgment without knowing the facts. It's a big difference between us -- I'm totally willing to admit I don't have all the facts, and prefer to reserve judgment - you just assume you know what happened behind the scenes, and spew forth ignorance.

As I've mentioned before, though, you only seem to really suspend judgement when it comes to situations where suspending judgement is politically or personally advantageous. Your opinions on Clinton's decisions in the e-mail debacle, for instance, are pretty well-established despite not having all (or even most) of the facts. So I've got to call shenanigans on that.

I don't oppose zero tolerance polices on principle, no. I'm not aware of -any- zero tolerance policy, however, that states engineering students can't bring in engineering projects to school or any that impose punishment of arrest for doing so.

The only way to get around this is for the police to have credible belief that the device was intended to be used as a fake explosive and there's nothing to indicate that. It's a clock, it looks like a clock and I'm willing to bet that it functions perfectly as a clock (probably doesn't sync with the atomic clock but losing a few milliseconds every year isn't an arrestable offense). Anyone pushing the "fake bomb" argument, at this point, is losing the plot big time.

[tabibito]

I'm not sure if this is sincere or sarcasm.

cry 70.jpg How could you doubt me after all we've been through together. I am heart-broken, shattered by your lack of faith in me, I shall never recover ...
Oh look, a nice bit of cake. All's well.

[Cow Poke]

Here's an aspect of this that always amazes me, not than it means anything to anybody here....

Something like this happens, and a tidal wave of social media weighs in on it, sweeping up even otherwise reasonable people. Almost all the information comes from the accused and his defenders, because the police and school officials are limited as to what they can say due to protocol, privacy concerns, or possible ongoing investigations (though I believe this case has been declared "closed").

It's like the whole phony "hands up" meme --- it's based on a FRAUD, but that doesn't matter - social media has ruled it legit, and people will believe what they want to believe.

[Cow Poke]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]9823[/ATTACH] How could you doubt me after all we've been through together. I am heart-broken, shattered by your lack of faith in me, I shall never recover ...
Oh look, a nice bit of cake. All's well.

Ya done fine, son!

(this really gave me my first good laugh of the morning --- good on you!)

[Sam]

Sam, this really sounds like the tin hat conspiracy theory brigade.... if more facts come out that change the narrative, then it's necessarily a setup.

I fully expect that kind of dipstick reasoning from your colleagues here, but not from you. You're normally way smarter than that.

What facts have changed the narrative? The whole point of my post is that the spin is settling in. If you want the conspiracy brigade, Mountain Man is peddling Pamela Gellar articles. I'd start there.

[Cow Poke]

As I've mentioned before, though, you only seem to really suspend judgement when it comes to situations where suspending judgement is politically or personally advantageous. Your opinions on Clinton's decisions in the e-mail debacle, for instance, are pretty well-established despite not having all (or even most) of the facts. So I've got to call shenanigans on that.

The jury is still out on that, Sam. I don't like Hillary, I think she's a fraud, so, yeah, I'm prejudiced, but I don't pretend to be otherwise. Hillary has a history that is well known -- this kid, not so much.

I don't oppose zero tolerance polices on principle, no. I'm not aware of -any- zero tolerance policy, however, that states engineering students can't bring in engineering projects to school or any that impose punishment of arrest for doing so.

Obviously, you really don't understand zero tolerance policies.

The only way to get around this is for the police to have credible belief that the device was intended to be used as a fake explosive and there's nothing to indicate that.

You weren't there, Sam. You don't know the whole conversation, or what the teachers knew... you know NADA.

It's a clock, it looks like a clock

It looks like a hot mess - nothing, in my opinion, that a serious engineering student would design.

and I'm willing to bet that it functions perfectly as a clock (probably doesn't sync with the atomic clock but losing a few milliseconds every year isn't an arrestable offense). Anyone pushing the "fake bomb" argument, at this point, is losing the plot big time.

The police cited a "hollywood bomb" or "movie bomb" - indicating that they thought it was designed to look like that. Have you ever seen a hollywood "bomb incident" that did NOT include a clock display that actually ticked off time? EVER?



You don't know what the officials knew at the time, Sam - you only know what got reported and all they social media hysteria surrounding it.

I have a hard time believing that this kid had NO IDEA that his "clock" would not cause some raised eyebrows. He's not a dummy.