While it is nice that she is passing blame to Congress, if it were only a "6 month low security setting" being discussed, why wouldn't Aaron have been told of this? Why the additional and ultimately 13 felony charges when he was MOST concerned with not being labled a felon. Why hold that 50 year sentence above his head with no HOPE in his own mind because he was left in the dark. "As a parent and sister", would you want your child to be stranded for two years with the full weight of the federal government and their impending punishment upon you hidden behind a dark veil? As a human, I both recognize that she is probably saddened and shocked that he took his life (and probably freaking out bc of the white house petition), but at the same time, it's clear that this shouldn't be allowed to happen, so if it means she loses her job - tough luck.
When cops come across otherwise nice young white guys who believe themselves invulnerable or above the law and are doing stupid, impulsive things, their usual practice is to "scare them straight." So they get tough on them, tell them all of the awful consequences they're in for, put them in a horrible, cramped cell, maybe throw them in with some real nasty characters, and, above all, get their parents involved.
It's a form of kindness. If you make them crush their self-confidence and make them feel like shit, they learn their lesson. They lose that blithe self-confidence and begin to realise they have to play by the same rules as everyone else. And then, they will hopefully turn into constructive, positive-minded members of society.
The practice varies with the character of the kid, the ugliness of their crime, etc. I'm not saying this is what Ortiz and co were thinking with Aaron necessarily but I wouldn't be surprised if it was an element. Aaron's behaviour was very removed from the situations I'm talking about, so the participants and response was very different. But he sounds like quite an... intense person, so maybe they decided they needed to put a lot of pressure on him to crush his spirit.
Of course, usually the kids don't kill themselves - but then usually it's not the justice department slapping them on the wrist. They should have realised that people like Aaron are very fragile. I won't apologise for that. A more delicate touch was required, because this outcome is just awful and a disaster for all parties. A real shame. But I do want to point out that their actions in frightening him were not necessarily without reason.
By the way, I have spent a night in a cold concrete cell sobering up and feeling like the world's biggest idiot. My escapade cost me $2700 and a lot of self-respect, and though it was awful at the time I am thankful and realise I learned my lesson very economically. Hearing Aaron's story is really painful.
Hey, I recognize what you're saying and agree with it. I too have been in that unfortunate and TERRIBLE cold cell once in my life and know what it feels like to have your freedom stripped from you (and mine ended up costing 10k+ in the end).
No one will ever know why Aaron killed himself fully, and that is unfortunate. Most of us only learned of him fully through his suicide. When I watch youtube videos of the guy, he seems so damn intelligent, eloquent, literate... It's hard to imagine that he wasn't smart enough or brave enough to truly ask the community for help.
That all said, one of the main things I've learned through my own past escapades and more so through tragic news like this, is that the justice system is inherently fucked up. It is designed to destroy the plaintiff. I have lived through this and it was the most miserable experience of my life (thanks ex gf I used to love for 5 years). Once you are in the 'system', or they are after you, if they have a reason (in their own mind), you are fucked.
Unless you are a multi-millionaire who can afford to pay your way out, and even still, you're most likely getting fucked from one direction or the other.
I think that is what this entire thing boils down to. Overreach of the Federal Government. Punishment does not fit the alleged and unconvicted crime.
Aaron might have had depression issues (a whole different beast in itself), but from all the empirical evidence available to the public, it seems like he was truly pushed into a corner and a high risk for suicide - and unfortunately he fulfilled that presumption.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. My experience is with the New Zealand legal system so I should probably not be commenting on the American situation in the first place. I'm sure you know these issues much better than me.
> If you make them crush their self-confidence and make them feel like shit, they learn their lesson. They lose that blithe self-confidence and begin to realise they have to play by the same rules as everyone else. And then, they will hopefully turn into constructive, positive-minded members of society.
I don't believe there's any evidence at all that this on average has the intended effect. If there is, I'd love it if someone has a reference.
USA requested the extradition of a young student[1] from UK over copyright laws, for sharing links. UK Home Secretary approved the order and the outrage ran the world. Without the attention the story got that young student would be in an American jail today.
Look, I guess you have no reason to believe me, but this is just not how the US government works. There's no staffer in the Administrative Office of the courts who's upset at Aaron and tells the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts to throw the book at him.
"If it were only a '6 month low security setting' being discussed, why wouldn't Aaron have been told of this?"
He was told. If you can even imagine that he wasn't, you need better news sources. This kind of anti-reality nonsense sounds an awful lot like Tea Party conspiracy crap. To effectively critique the law, everyone needs to learn how it works.
1) We put you away for the rest of your adult life.
2) You admit that you're a guilty son-ova-bitch and you do a small amount of time with a felony conviction that hangs around your neck forever.
3) ... There is no third option on the table. You don't go to trial on those odds and hope that the system decides in your favour, otherwise, LIFE (gavel drop).
Wow, I don't know how I'd react if I was led on by some gay guy and thought I was meeting a woman... Not because I'm homophobic but because I know that these types of people exist. When I was in college I used craigslist one drunken night and something similar happened and it creeped me out hardcore...
The worst story was a friend of mine who travelled over an hour on the premise of having a threesome with a swinging couple who he had met on a "casual dating" website.
He was given a home address but when he turned up he found a typical messy bachelor pad and a middle aged man waiting. He was told that the wife wouldn't be turning up for a while but to "make himself comfortable". Naturally he got the hell out of there.
It was a few years later before he actually told me the story, after I had finished laughing I asked why he had believed the guy. Turns out the guy had been copying photos from amateur porn sites and sending those as his "wife".
Naturally it should be pointed out that I'm sure the majority of gay people do not behave in such a way.
"Naturally it should be pointed out that I'm sure the majority of gay people do not behave in such a way."
They most assuredly do not. I am a gay engineer. I've never known anyone so blatantly deceptive, but if any of my acquaintances even thought about doing something like that, I would give them a dressing down that would make a drill sergeant cry.
Gay people are like any population sample. 95% of them are normal, decent human beings; 5% are wackos.
With a weak magnetic field, wouldn't something such as a solar flare, which the Earth has more sufficient protection against, possibly wipe out any part of the surface it touched on Mars?
Hah, I too got excited (and almost mad) when I just saw this as I just spent the past week building a django-based ecommerce solution for a custom project... This might have potential but I'm not convinced. It is interesting though. I'm also using stripe for my project and excited to try them out:)
I never said I don't like it, I just think it's a sham. It has no real value and it's been shown time and again. Targeted marketing doesn't work and that was their linchpin. They have 1 billion users but that is contorted, that is not active users. Even still, why should a company that has no regard for it's users of which it's entire value is established, have real legitimacy? The fact that they are now charging to "promote" posts is a clear sign of things to come.
> Nobody wants to go back through that process on an upstart network. Nobody has the energy or motivation.
I disagree. Firstly, you make it sound as if filling out some information about yourself (don't we do that all the time anyways?), posting some pictures, and updating your status is some overwhelming endeavor. For those of us old enough to have started on myspace and switched to facebook, it really was pretty seamless.
I'm not saying anyone should rush to develop the "next facebook", but I do think that the new entrants you speak of could easily become significant later on.
I agree that facebook seems pretty much stagnant when it comes to the user experience. I'm actually eager to see the new myspace once it debuts for that reason...
> Firstly, you make it sound as if filling out some information about yourself (don't we do that all the time anyways?), posting some pictures, and updating your status is some overwhelming endeavor.
But that's not what makes a social network. User profiles have existed since the beginning of the internet. A social network is a place to see and be seen. But this requires people--the more the better (usually). Facebook for better or worse, has already won this game.
I don't really get this idea of facebook being "stagnant". Perhaps they've already refined the concept of general social networking to its peak. It's an odd idea in SV that a site has to constantly roll out new "user experiences" to remain relevant. Facebook is a platform for attention-whoring. They do that just fine. The users themselves create the experiences.
Actually, they don't do that [attention whoring] just fine. They've actually severely diminished that experience with the new system that limits the exposure your updates get unless you buy a $7 promotion. This scheme is a disaster ... yes, charge Pages for it, but not regular individual users.
Why is it a disaster? As long as there is no feedback on how little exposure one's posts get, I don't see a downside to facebook with this. Being flooded with bad/uninteresting content was a real problem. Filtering one's stream was an important usability addition.
Well, I will say Google+ is pretty good, but for me it came too late. I already had social network fatigue and too much content already in facebook to do much useful with Google+ or to spend any real time with it. I kinda wish Google+ had come first.
I appreciate CSS frameworks for taking some of the complexities out of tedious tasks. Without pre-built frameworks, I would still be using my own half-baked custom boilerplates. I agree with your sentiment about the direction of design. Am i the only one who is already sick of all the metro copies out there? I have never wanted to design a web site/app that looks exactly like another brand, e.g. Microsoft's Metro.
