drpvn

drpvn t1_j16oqkx wrote

A suspect in a burglary is being interrogated by police. He's waived his Miranda rights because he's very stupid. He denies any involvement in the burglary. The police tell him, look, buddy, the surveillance camera got you on tape as clear as day. Stop wasting everyone's time and confess and maybe this will go easier for you. The suspect confesses. But the police lied: there was no surveillance tape. Should the confession be tossed out because the police didn't tell the truth?

0

drpvn t1_j168con wrote

> Meanwhile, the early legal marijuana that’s harvested may not be what New Yorkers are used to getting from other legal states or the black market, especially in these early growing seasons. Most of what the Long Island farmer and others statewide have reared this year is biomass — plants that aren’t considered attractive enough or potent enough to be sold as smokable flower in the contemporary market.

😂

79

drpvn t1_j14p7zu wrote

I’m not a mind reader. My issue with honoring these five guys in particular—and there’s a gigantic difference between, on the one hand, apologizing to them on behalf of the city and state, paying them compensation, and condemning the miscarriage of justice that happened, and, on the other hand, honoring them—is that all the information I have strongly suggests that these guys were absolute pieces of shit, at least as teenagers.

What Trump voters think about this just doesn’t enter into my mind at all. Not every issue needs to be a fight among two warring factions for control over an overarching narrative. But that’s just me.

If Mark Wahlberg were unjustly convicted of rape and then exonerated, I would still think he was a piece of shit.

Taking a step back, though, this debate shouldn’t really be about these guys in particular. The gate doesn’t honor them specifically. It’s about people who have been exonerated. But it’s hard to separate them from the larger issue given that they always show up as the poster boys.

5

drpvn t1_j0sl7cv wrote

My understanding is that Texas sent the most migrants by a huge margin. The other states don’t amount to much in total. I could have said “other states” and the point would still be true—and the point is that shitty reporting appears to have created a widespread belief that all (or even most) of the migrants that have come to NYC were sent by red state governors. I’ve seen no evidence in any data that that’s true, and the data I’ve seen about how many Texas sent makes clear that it’s not true.

2

drpvn t1_j0r6et5 wrote

That doesn’t say how many of the 21k were bused from other cities.

This is from September, but note the large gap between the reported total number of migrants who had arrived in NYC (11k) and those who were bused from Texas (2.5k).

The point being, most of the migrants who have come to NYC this year were not bused from Texas. They came here through other paths.

Edit: I enjoy when people downvote me because they don’t like a fact I referenced.

2