• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Off topic- Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis

bradleyfan124 said:
I hope those people sue the hell out of Ardis and the city of Peoria
Click to expand...


which person...the guy who acted like an ***** with the fake twitter or the guy with drugs...?

I don't agree with what Ardis did by any means but lawsuits in this instance wouldn't be the answer....there are enough ridiculous ones out there already
 
I agree there are ridiculous lawsuits out there but using ones office to further ones vendetta against another is not one of them.
 
bradleyfan124 said:
I hope those people sue the hell out of Ardis and the city of Peoria
Click to expand...

Bfan, if they do i hope I'm on the trial. Maybe what the mayor did was puhing his authority to far but what they did was totally wrong in many ways. Those people don't want to look over to the jury box and see my smiling face.
 
lefty said:
which person...the guy who acted like an ***** with the fake twitter or the guy with drugs...?

I don't agree with what Ardis did by any means but lawsuits in this instance wouldn't be the answer....there are enough ridiculous ones out there already
Click to expand...


Are you serious? I literally logged in for the first time in YEARS to tell you to read the freaking 4th amendment. I'd also love to know where you got your Law degree to judge the frivolity of law suits.

Jesus Christ, WEED!!!! WEED!!! A CRIMINAL!!! DEATH PENALTY FOR WEED!!! DRUUGSUGUUGGGS!!!!

Get a grip and go outside, kids in high school are shooting heroin, and you are worried about some guy with a parody twitter smoking weed in his own house???

Do you get up and try to strangle Steven Colbert when his show goes on?

You used profanity in this post, I'm sending in the Swat team as we speak, bend over for the cavity search.
 
wily coyote said:
Bfan, if they do i hope I'm on the trial. Maybe what the mayor did was puhing his authority to far but what they did was totally wrong in many ways. Those people don't want to look over to the jury box and see my smiling face.
Click to expand...

You sound like a pompous ass. I bet your daughter smokes weed with the guys in question. She probably does other stuff with them as well. Did that taint your opinion of them?
 
let's not argue - I think we agree a lot of stupidity on both sides here...
but suing officials in authority will only cause them to be more hesitant to go after others perceived as lawbreakers...

the system already has plenty of safeguards in place and today's newspaper shows a few...
the state's attorney has declined to file any charges, and in time the pot charges might get dropped as well since then the probably cause argument is weak...

In the end - we will forget all this just like most have forgotten all the incredibly silly & overhyped charges against one of our former mayors.
 
In open reply to everyone supporting the mayor's actions, or at least speaking down on the guys who the mayor targeted.

Y'all need to get a grip on reality, go out and actually talk to people in the younger generation (that aren't your grandkids or children putting on a fake face to seem like angels). If you think that weed and a parody twitter are bad... If I showed you the stuff that goes down on dating apps like tinder, grindr, or even a photo-sharing app like snapchat, you would literally shit your pants. If you have a single female relative between then ages of 14-26 she has sent nude pictures of herself on the internet (If you disagree you are fooling yourself), chances are that she did it before she was 18. BAM! let's go arrest her for the distribution of child porn. You laugh, but that is literally the logic you are using with this twitter.

And what's even worse, they went into this guys house for one thing, and got him for literally the worst thing they could find (WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THEY CAME IN FOR, AND WASN'T EVEN THE RIGHT GUY). If this happened to your daughter because she pissed off the mayor's son, she could be looking at child porn charges when they seized her phone in this raid. God forbid you have a son who has no doubt asked for these same nude photos, he is going to do hard time for that 17 year old set of tits.

Your generation shows a shocking inability to differentiate between the so-called problems of the world (WEED) and the real stuff that is going on. We all have something in our home that a pissed off cop could find illegal, there are enough illegal things in the world. And y'all are ok with a personal vendetta that gets cops into the home????

HERP. DERP. But Gwright, I do nothing illegal and my daughter is a saint!!!!! Maybe, but I bet a cop could find something illegal if he looked hard enough. Turn this on yourself, a cop blasts into your house, and is doing all he can to find something illegal. He is going to find it.

Y'all pretend that this could never happen to you, so it's OK, but Jesus, stop this crap now before you are getting raided for some slight and all of a sudden you have child porn charges because your dumbass son has a picture of his (15 year old) friend's chest on a phone that you pay for. Don't tell me they have no right to you phone, because they do.
 
And to those of you who want to talk about hiding behind the internet.

My name is George Wright, I live in Metairie, Louisiana, and I think one of the worst things about this country is the constant crutch provided to law enforcement that is weed.

Do you know that now the "smell" of weed can trigger a raid? Guess what happens when they cop can't find any weed http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/04/man_cries_foul_as_video_of_his.html

This happened down the street from me. A man called his cop buddy to "get" his neighbor over some stupid neighborhood fight. Then the badge took over, and the situation escalated. (The cop later claimed he "smelled" weed).

Put yourself in that situation, I bet you have had a spat with someone you lived by, better hope they don't have a friend that is a cop.
 
Gwright said:
...If you think that weed and a parody twitter are bad... ....
Click to expand...

it may be common but I will not call it good --
it is a destructive force and more and more proof now supports that it damages young peoples' brains.
The fact that lots of people do it does not change those facts - and lots of people get STD's, get pregnant and have to raise kids in poverty, get drunk, do all sorts of drugs, waste their money on even worse and more self-destructive things - and even if 99% of people are doing those things - that does not erase how self-destructive it is and every parent wants their own kids to steer away from it.
if people know the facts and still want to do something that self destructive - then I really don't have a problem with it except that what it does to them greatly increases the odds they will be a burden to society.
 
amckillip said:
.....The twitter account was childish, but in no way illegal at all anyone who has taken a basic law and ethics class can distinguish that. The fact a search warrant was granted and this guys home was raided is outrageous. Talk about unreasonable search and seizure...
Click to expand...

Ok - I agree. Now it's time to get current with the times and change the law (PJS quote below):

A review of state law indicates the account holders of now-shuttered Twitter account @peoriamayor didn??™t break the law because the actual crime alleged, ???false personation of a public official,??? has to be done in person, not over the Internet or other electronic media, said State??™s Attorney Jerry Brady. ???At this time, no, because subsection (b) doesn??™t include the use of electronic media,??? he said.


Read more: http://www.pjstar.com/article/20140423/News/140429547#ixzz2zolnAg5X
 
Gwright said:
Are you serious? I literally logged in for the first time in YEARS to tell you to read the freaking 4th amendment. I'd also love to know where you got your Law degree to judge the frivolity of law suits.

Jesus Christ, WEED!!!! WEED!!! A CRIMINAL!!! DEATH PENALTY FOR WEED!!! DRUUGSUGUUGGGS!!!!

Get a grip and go outside, kids in high school are shooting heroin, and you are worried about some guy with a parody twitter smoking weed in his own house???

Do you get up and try to strangle Steven Colbert when his show goes on?

You used profanity in this post, I'm sending in the Swat team as we speak, bend over for the cavity search.
Click to expand...


Wow....we are a little testy today.....

I don't have a law degree but I don't need one to know there are stupid lawsuits every day.......

Did I say anything about the death penalty?

get a grip?....I'm not worried about the guy with weed...but it's still illegal

I could care less about Colbert

I didn't use profanity at all...so I don't know why it was deleted....ask the mods about that....I think I said jerk or something but it was not profanity

Glad you logged in though.....don't be a stranger.
 
 
The auto-censor removes certain words (and replaces them with asterisks) that are used commonly as insults and put-downs on message boards, like "ldiot" (it did not get censored this time because the first letter is actually a lower case "L"). I suspect that is what was censored in lefty's post. It was nothing vulgar.
 
A few things...

-If a lawsuit makes the police more hesitant to go after supposed law breakers in the future, great. Sounds to me like that's just what they need.

-Ardis didn't drop the charges; the SA did. In Illinois, the victim has no say in whether charges are brought. And the county's SA isn't under the auspices of the city mayor.

-I agree marijuana can ruin lives and hurt productivity. But so does alcohol, which is arguably even worse because it kills people. So if you're going to be consistent, advocate against that too. It won't get you very far though, because there is a double standard.

-The vast vast majority of "stupid lawsuits" are thrown out. You'll find the entities pushing this movement are large corporations, insurance companies or hospitals (often at the behest of the insurance companies, which end up hoarding most of the profits for themselves instead of passing it along to the hospitals) looking to boost their bottom line by not having to pay for the consequences of their actions, often by limiting the total awards for all cases regardless of the facts. What then happens is someone who needs lifelong support for their injuries has to go on Medicaid and SS Disability so every taxpayer has to foot the bill, instead of the corporation or medical group which caused the problem. A 2006 Harvard study found that fewer than 2% of all hospitalized patients injured due to medical error causing disabilities or extended hospital stays actually sued the doctor or hospital, and even those with the most costly or severe injuries were compensated 1/3 of the time. For every 1 person that brings a case, there are 49 who are hurt and do nothing. And 1/6 those who did file and were negligently hurt received nothing. The "everybody is getting rich with lawsuits but me" myth is just that. It's meant to choke off the average American's access to the courts and make the rich richer.
 
Mikovio said:
A few things...

-If a lawsuit makes the police more hesitant to go after supposed law breakers in the future, great. Sounds to me like that's just what they need.


-I agree marijuana can ruin lives and hurt productivity. But so does alcohol, which is arguably even worse because it kills people. So if you're going to be consistent, advocate against that too. It won't get you very far though, because there is a double standard.


-The vast vast majority of "stupid lawsuits" are thrown out. ....
Click to expand...


I would take issue with all three of these statements...

We have FAR more to fear from the lawbreakers than we do from the lawkeepers - I want actions that make it harder for lawbreakers to get away with what they are doing not actions that hinder law enforcement.

Both marijuana and alcohol can be destructive and I would speak equally against BOTH so there is NO double standard. I would have no problem with outlawing alcohol but I seem to recall that was tried and it was impossible to enforce.
If we are going to then allow marijuana using alcohol and an example then tax the heck out of it like they do to booze & tobacco - and reduce the taxes on the rest of us who are tired of paying for the damages intoxicated and self destructive people cause.

Lastly - no the vast majority of lawsuits are not thrown out - they end with negotiated settlements, how do you think Jay Janssen paid for that $25 million mini-skyscraper in Peoria?
 
tornado said:
I would take issue with all three of these statements...

We have FAR more to fear from the lawbreakers than we do from the lawkeepers - I want actions that make it harder for lawbreakers to get away with what they are doing not actions that hinder law enforcement.

Both marijuana and alcohol can be destructive and I would speak equally against BOTH so there is NO double standard. I would have no problem with outlawing alcohol but I seem to recall that was tried and it was impossible to enforce.
If we are going to then allow marijuana using alcohol and an example then tax the heck out of it like they do to booze & tobacco - and reduce the taxes on the rest of us who are tired of paying for the damages intoxicated and self destructive people cause.

Lastly - no the vast majority of lawsuits are not thrown out - they end with negotiated settlements, how do you think Jay Janssen paid for that $25 million mini-skyscraper in Peoria?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying we shouldn't be aggressively pursuing people we have probable cause to believe have broken the law, but it's absolutely important to use discretion and keep proportionality in mind. What sense does it make to send 7 officers with guns strapped to their chests to ransack a house because of a parody Twitter account with 50 followers (which had already been deactivated), and arrest the residents at their jobs? That's a violation of peoples' 4th Amendment rights and a waste of city resources. Yes, the charges will be dropped, but it sounds like one guy might lose his job over this. Their reputations have been tarnished. There's probably plenty of property damage to their house. I know Ardis and Brady and don't question their character but my God, this thing should've been dropped when the account was shut down. And someone should've read the law more closely to see it doesn't apply to the internet. We're a national laughingstock. Some restraint in the future is all I'm asking.

I wasn't referring to you re a double standard, just society as a whole. I just think we need to decide if we want these vices or not, instead of choosing which ones to outlaw buffet style because one is more ingrained in our culture.

As for Janssen, I said the stupid lawsuits are thrown out. He didn't build the Janssen law center with frivolous law suits. He has a big operation with workers comp, car accidents, product liability and med mal. (And actually, I believe he got millions when his son tragically passed.) His most recent big win was $13M in 2012 for a 19 y/o worker in Pekin whose leg was caught in a machine-- his femur exploded-- because a safety lever malfunctioned. The manufacturer refused to settle at any point. The big product liability lawsuits these days involve the Stryker metal hip implants, which rub against each other, release metal ions into the bloodstream and cause metal poisoning. These aren't "stupid" lawsuits and I doubt anyone complaining about them would want to trade places with the plaintiffs. You can complain about lawyers, but these corporations and insurance companies don't pay out of the kindness of their hearts. I think some tort reform proposals are fine, like the requirement to have an MD screen med mal cases. But on the whole, it's not the frivolous suits the corporations are afraid of-- it's the meritorious ones. That's why most of their proposals involve caps on damages, and not barriers to entry or filing. You being a doctor and me being a lawyer, we probably come at this from different perspectives, which is fine.
 
. The big product liability lawsuits these days involve the Stryker metal hip implants, which rub against each other, release metal ions into the bloodstream and cause metal poisoning. These aren't "stupid" lawsuits and I doubt anyone complaining about them would want to trade places with the plaintiffs.[/quote]


I had the recalled DePuy hip implant installed 5 years ago...so far it seems ok...I wouldn't want to do it again though
 
I understand not everyone has symptoms. I'd be sure to at least periodically check for FDA releases and recalls and consult with your ortho, and be careful not to sign away your rights if you agree to a replacement. I've read a few filed complaints and from what I gather the company dragged its feet with the recall which came 3 years after introducing the product after tens of thousands of complaints. Apparently they used a loophole in regulations to avoid having to seek FDA approval before putting the device on the market. It's very troubling.
 
Miko - if people pound on your door, they are in horrible pain and demand that you do something for them...
then you spend decades and $billions to develop a device that helps almost all of them. You give them all ample warning that nobody knows the future so something could go wrong - but they are in such bad pain they are willing to take the risk.
Then 10 years later you sue the he** out of them because a tiny fraction developed unforseen problems that were not due to negligence.

But - it's the way of the world...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top