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

[Cow Poke]

Yeah, that stupid Muslim kid should have known that it looked like a bomb, duh! I mean, you and all of the other conservative say it looks like one, so it must be true.

Is it possible for you to discuss this in an adult manner?

[Cow Poke]

As I wrote earlier, it's plausible that the contents of the pencil case prevented it from closing flush enough to latch.

Look at the picture, Sam. There is ZERO evidence for that. You're really reaching. And if it was built in such a way as to prevent it being closed, you're suggesting the kid wasn't a very good designer.

And again, if you're going to make a factual claim about what someone else has said or done, it'd be appropriate to at least get the facts of the matter correct.

Look at the picture, Sam. Please point out the facts of the matter that would represent an obstruction to closing the case. You demand "evidence" for everybody else making an opinion, and you pitch a hissy when somebody is being inconsistent. So, how bout a little consistency here?

[Cow Poke]

You know what? I really don't care anymore. I've simply had enough and I don't think this site is a place for me at this point.

Anybody want to bet this is just drama, and he'll be in this thread anyway?

Hmmmm...

I really don't know why you bothered posting this; I'm not going to argue back.

I appreciate that you want me to stay, Teal, but I don't think it's a good idea at this point. I've kind of worn out my welcome in a lot ways. No matter what I find myself in some war of words with another person - and I've had enough of that. I'm sure you've gone to nontheist forums and gotten sick of arguing with people that are so far different in perspective.

[Mountain Man]

Yeah, that stupid Muslim kid should have known that it looked like a bomb, duh!

He did, by his own admission, though he thought that closing the box with a cord instead of the built-in latches would somehow make it less suspicious (I still haven't figured that one out).

[Cow Poke]

Can we PLEASE abandon the false accusation that some of us WANTED the kid arrested, or applauded his arrest, or believed he NEEDED to be handcuffed?
If you're going to make that claim, PLEASE use the quote function and provide the actual quote, so we can know who this is.
It's not fair to broadbrush indict all of us for this.

And, to be clear, the ONLY "justification" I offered was that MAYBE the protocols of the school REQUIRED the police be called. I don't know what the school's protocol on this is, and I don't think any of you do either.

NOT offering as a defense, but I wonder if the cops were familiar with Ahmed's father's activism, and that played any part (most likely unjustly) in the way Ahmed was treated.

Remember, there are a WHOLE LOT of things about this case that we're not privy to -- we're only hearing from Ahmed's side, and from Ahmed's supporters. Can we deal with those things we actually know?

[Mountain Man]

As for the kid being arrested, it's because he acted like a passive-aggressive dumbass when the police questioned him, and he refused to give satisfactory reasons for why he brought the "clock" to school or why the alarm was set to go off in the middle of class, answering only "It's a clock," regardless of what question was actually put to him. It was this suspicious behavior that landed him in handcuffs although no charges were ever actually filed.

It's almost like he was intentionally provoking the police. But, no, the low-information morons around here assure me that's just racist crazy talk, so there just has to be another explanation.

[Cow Poke]

It's almost like he was intentionally provoking the police.

Or, his sister wasn't there to tell him how to answer?

[Sam]

Look at the picture, Sam. There is ZERO evidence for that. You're really reaching. And if it was built in such a way as to prevent it being closed, you're suggesting the kid wasn't a very good designer.



Look at the picture, Sam. Please point out the facts of the matter that would represent an obstruction to closing the case. You demand "evidence" for everybody else making an opinion, and you pitch a hissy when somebody is being inconsistent. So, how bout a little consistency here?

You seriously don't even know what you're arguing for or why it would help your argument, at this point. If the kid wanted to make a "movie bomb" but didn't want it to attract attention while closed, why wouldn't he just use the already-existing latch? How does a cable tie make the container less suspicious than it's original latching mechanism? This is just a stupid hill for you to die on.

But since you insist: looking at the picture, it would be very difficult to get the button board, the circuit board, the transformer and that length of cable to fit into that small of a case without careful placement. If the circuit board has been attached to the back of the case like the display, it probably wouldn't close, since the interior height is about 1.5".

But for someone who wants to argue that it's totally plausible the kid intended to walk into school with a "movie bomb", you sure are chocking hard on the possibility that a pencil case with various electronic components might not sit flush.

[Sam]

Can we deal with those things we actually know?

Sweet merciful Cthulhu, if only.

[Cow Poke]

You seriously don't even know what you're arguing for or why it would help your argument, at this point.

It might help if you weren't so overly emotionally involved in this, Sam.

If the kid wanted to make a "movie bomb" but didn't want it to attract attention while closed, why wouldn't he just use the already-existing latch?

You're the ace of "dog ate my homework" answers, Sam. I'll leave that speculation to you.

How does a cable tie make the container less suspicious than it's original latching mechanism?

Ummmm... I don't believe I'm arguing that a cable makes it less suspicious, Sam. I think it's dumb that the kid brought that up at all, and he only kinda mumbled through that.

This is just a stupid hill for you to die on.

But since you insist: looking at the picture, it would be very difficult to get the button board, the circuit board, the transformer and that length of cable to fit into that small of a case without careful placement.

So, we're back to this genius kid wasn't such a good designer, eh?

If the circuit board has been attached to the back of the case like the display, it probably wouldn't close, since the interior height is about 1.5".

So, you're now agreeing with me that this is a hot mess, not a cool clock worthy of a White House invite?

But for someone who wants to argue that it's totally plausible the kid intended to walk into school with a "movie bomb", you sure are chocking hard on the possibility that a pencil case with various electronic components might not sit flush.

So, let's review ... the kid "invents" a "clock" by taking components out of a commercially manufactured alarm clock, falsely representing it as his own work, stuffs them into a metal case into which they will not fit without allowing the lid to close, and the display is on the INSIDE so the case has to be open to even SEE that it's a clock, exposing people to the dangerous 110v and unprotected loose components inside, choosing a case that's TOO small for the components.....

Sam, you're arguing that the kid is an idiot, and you don't even know it!

[Sam]

It might help if you weren't so overly emotionally involved in this, Sam.



You're the ace of "dog ate my homework" answers, Sam. I'll leave that speculation to you.



Ummmm... I don't believe I'm arguing that a cable makes it less suspicious, Sam. I think it's dumb that the kid brought that up at all, and he only kinda mumbled through that.







So, we're back to this genius kid wasn't such a good designer, eh?



So, you're now agreeing with me that this is a hot mess, not a cool clock worthy of a White House invite?



So, let's review ... the kid "invents" a "clock" by taking components out of a commercially manufactured alarm clock, falsely representing it as his own work, stuffs them into a metal case into which they will not fit without allowing the lid to close, and the display is on the INSIDE so the case has to be open to even SEE that it's a clock, exposing people to the dangerous 110v and unprotected loose components inside, choosing a case that's TOO small for the components.....

Sam, you're arguing that the kid is an idiot, and you don't even know it!

You're being disingenuous. You've repeatedly gone from arguing that there was no reason for the kid to use a cable to close the case, demanding an explanation of why the case could not be closed via the latch, only to shift to a different criticism of the kid when that explanation is given. You move freely from arguing that the evidence shows the kid intended to build a "movie bomb" to arguing that the kid's just a poor designer.

All you really want to do here is bash on a 14 year-old kid because you don't think he deserves the sympathetic attention he's gotten. You're being petty.

[Cow Poke]

You're being disingenuous.

Nope.

You've repeatedly gone from arguing that there was no reason for the kid to use a cable to close the case,

I HAVE? Care to quote where I argued that?

demanding an explanation

Demanding? Woah, Sam.... . back down the drama a bit, OK?

of why the case could not be closed via the latch, only to shift to a different criticism of the kid when that explanation is given.

No, Sam, that's flat not true. I'm ASKING why it was necessary to use "a cord", and you offered an explanation that would imply that the kid didn't plan ahead. Now you're getting testy because your own argument sucks.

You move freely from arguing that the evidence shows the kid intended to build a "movie bomb" to arguing that the kid's just a poor designer.

Nope. I think the kid intended to build a "movie bomb" - but YOUR incredibly weak defense indicates it's more of a case that Ahmed was a poor designer.

All you really want to do here is bash on a 14 year-old kid

That is a flat out lie.

because you don't think he deserves the sympathetic attention he's gotten.

Wow. That's just plain dumb. It is TRUE that I don't believe he deserves a trip to the White House for wrongly presenting a deconstructed clock stuffed into a too small box (by your explanation) as his own "invention".

You're being petty.

I'm being realistic, Sam.

So, tell me .....

Do you HONESTLY believe he deserves a trip to the White House for claiming he "invented" a clock that turned out to be a simple act of taking the guts out of a commercially manufactured alarm clock, stuffing it into a METAL box, placing the display on the INSIDE (which is incredibly UNclocklike) exposing the user to shock hazards?

HONESTLY?

[Sam]

I have read the entire thread - your posts included (at least the first paragraph of each - I admit a few I just couldn't read. Those were not ones I replied to). The evidence does not support you at all. Nothing you quoted even remotely resembles a categorical claim. The facts are you have grossly misrepresented CP's argument and neither he nor Adrift that I saw 'over reached', but you most certainly have.

I don't want to be rubbing it in, Teal, but ...

I think the kid intended to build a "movie bomb" - but YOUR incredibly weak defense indicates it's more of a case that Ahmed was a poor designer.

I think Cow Poke owes you an apology for standing around while you valiantly tried to assert that this was not, in fact, what he had been arguing and that I had therefore "grossly misrepresented" him.

[Teallaura]

I don't want to be rubbing it in, Teal, but ...



I think Cow Poke owes you an apology for standing around while you valiantly tried to assert that this was not, in fact, what he had been arguing and that I had therefore "grossly misrepresented" him.

He makes a supposition ("I think") on Page 33 and you take it for a categorical claim of the previous 32 pages. Seriously?!?!

You owe him an apology for the misrepresentation.

Now, quit pretending you didn't see his question and go answer him like a man.

[Sam]

He makes a supposition ("I think") on Page 33 and you take it for a categorical claim of the previous 32 pages. Seriously?!?!

You owe him an apology for the misrepresentation.

Now, quit pretending you didn't see his question and go answer him like a man.

I think I've proven my point well enough and don't see the need in continuing to argue with an insincere opposition. As I wrote:

You're too kind. Not to me, of course, but to the people who were most certainly not arguing the possibility of the kid having intentionally made his electronics project to look like a "movie bomb" but were, in fact, either arguing that he did intentionally do so (Cow Poke) or that it was highly plausible that he did so (Adrift).

in response to you writing:

Sam is off on some crazed tangent that can't admit the possibility that the kid made a pretend bomb just because it looked cool to him (Sam had a sheltered childhood or he's lost his mind, one of the two} and you egg him on. The hysterical part is CP is offering a plausible explanation to the kid's actions that doesn't involve him being a terrorist wannabe or a media hound, but Sam can't concede that maybe the kid didn't help himself, let alone that he did anything that might have been unwise.

Cow Poke has continued to argue exactly what I said he was arguing, that the kid intended to build a "movie bomb."

Like I said, I don't expect an epiphany here, let alone an acknowledgement that you had the story wrong from the start. This is just a really useful example of a disingenuous string of arguments to point out. Cow Poke was arguing exactly what I said he was arguing but didn't think it worthwhile to point that out to you when you were trying to say otherwise. Trying to micromanage the semantics does make you as culpable for the disingenuous nature of the argument, though. All arguments are "I think" arguments, as you know, and Cow Poke was indeed arguing that the kid intended to make a movie bomb, only acknowledging possibility in the scope of what the kid's motive for doing so was.

See it for what it is and avoid trying to railroad the wrong people in the future.