I think you need to go back and read the definition of ad hominem (now I'm getting closer). I attacked your argument, which was a lack of one. You called me a "blockhead" and worse, which are ad hominems because you didn't address the argument at all.

I see why you "work with lawyers" and are not one since you managed to completely misinterpret most of what you are claiming to be errors.

I really appreciate how your comments are all ad hominem and conclusions without actually identifying direct things you disagree with. Conversations always work best when only one side is talking and the other side just says "you are wrong just because." Thank you for adding to the conversation in such a constructive…

wow, did you read my comment at all or just looking for another thing to pick a fight about? Please check your offense since you basically just laid out exactly why I said we could talk about shoplifting from a non-emotional standpoint. You just illustrated the point perfectly yet missed everything I said.

I may not agree with your take on this, but I do appreciate that you want to apply the rule consistently. Not consistently how I would apply it but nonetheless consistently, which is far better than a lot of people who pick and choose which circumstances in which to apply a given rule/punishment. Look, we both think a…

These are fair points.

I'm glad you are capable of a civilized discussion

pot meet kettle

so many comments, so little content

assume much?

If you were reading carefully you would note that I continually said this person was bad and was arguing the general principle of due process before suspension. Why is that so hard to understand?

I don't think you know what specious means or at least not how to analyze an argument. I wonder if your contention that a year suspension is of zero harm would hold if it were your kid suspended. Note earlier this week everyone railing about how suspension was going to have terrible consequences for Atiya Haynes in…

due process is invalid now huh? Guess we can send you on the next flight to China

oh, attacking a typo, aren't you special

then how did you miss that discussion? The point is there was a case of a zero tolerance policy suspending a person for a year for bringing a knife to school. People rightly commented that there shouldn't be automatic suspension for violating the rule and that they didn't consider her particular circumstances. People…

It is called an ANALOGY. No schools can't do whatever they want, they are state actors and actually do have limits on what they can and can't do.

In most cases they put up 10% for the bond. Sure some people can't pay, but the bail amount is set to compel the accused to come to trail not to punish them. They also get it back when they show up for trial. Thus, if they put up bail, and don't flee, they are made whole. Pre-trial confinement is pretty limited in…

please point out an error or STFU

I couldn't care less about football, though I agree that the schools decision here was based in large part on it. But you are right, my problem is with schools doling out punishment for things they can't really provide due process for, which particularly involves off campus activity. As you noted, they don't have a…

I'm glad you can analyze me so well based on comments and have determined that I'm probably not a rapist. Look, I know you don't see much of it as an LEO, but some of us are actual people of honor. Some of us are consistent in railing against the lack of due process (or at least nuance) yesterday with respect to the…