523
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2026
523 points (99.8% liked)
News
37152 readers
2563 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Suspended with pay. Motherfucker got a paid vacation for this.
ACAB.
Paid vacation when his salary is well over 300k too
300k? Holy CRAP.
$340,000 and he claims to be working 80 hours every week (12 hours a day 7 day a week) yet still has time to go try and fight children on his 'time off.'
Its probably 26 hours a week paid at triple time for whatever crooked shenanigans police union BS reason. I bet this hero actually works more like 3 days a week for his 340k/year.
Well, they are teenagers or simply highschool students, not children - atleast not this time. Let's focus on the situation at hand without throwing discriminatory remarks portraying infantilization.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_(law)
They were children. There is no need to adultify minors here.
This conclusion doesn't follow the basic definition:
These where individuals past the pubertal age which is commonly stated as 13.
Only necessarily this paragraph relates to the scope. But as stated, minor is the word which should technically be used.
Isn't that essentially introducing straw men? The root point of this all was the word child not minor - as this is the correct term as you literally stated here.
Your proof doesn't necessarily state that these where children, rather that they where minors. Also that last sentence is completely out of loop, where did I state that they where adults? If you're going to throw made up accusations then do it somewhere else.
Chill Matt Gaetz, chill
In what way does this ad hominem have any relation to the inherent ageism and defiance to the definition which I have pointed out?
You can reply to Zombie's comment. Looking forward to your rebuttal.
Oh I already did. It seems there is a lot of confusion around the definitions of child and minor. Zombie's evidence highlighted that fact and it is necessary to point that out - such as I did within the following statement.
Along with the evidence, however, Zombie did include some strawmen which where completely unrelated to the root argument. But alas the evidence they supplied says its own words.
By making such a distinction without a difference, you are unnecessarily painting yourself in a bad light. But if that's an important hill for you to fight over, you do you man.
How is this a distinction without a difference?
Firstly, example1 states that:
This goes with the evidence that zombie supplied - supporting the fact that child and minor refer to two different things. So I don't necessarily understand where this distinction without a difference is here?
Secondly, there is no need for moving the goalposts as the definitions themselves are clear about differing aspects of those two words.
There is no goalpost. It was a child who was attending a protest at their school. That is perfectly clear. Then you come roaring in about "well actually" when there was no need to clarify — it accomplishes nothing and clears up no confusion. This is an internet comment, not a dissertation. People use casual vernacular here.
But do you know the sort of people that are super defensive about such distinctions? The crowd that likes to say "technically I'm a hebephile, not a pedophile." That's the connotation you are invoking.
You're putting yourself under a microscope here, not fixing the way people talk to your liking. I won't respond again because your obsession with standing on this hill isn't my concern — I'm simply trying to trigger some introspection. And if you refuse to see you're the problem in this conversation, then whatever your issue is, it's beyond my ability to help.
Good day.
SOP. If you're at a protest and you see some guy in a fitted cap, underarmor, and steel toed boots, you better fucking believe your event is being surveilled and infiltrated.
Don’t forget the telltale sign: an out of place expensive diving watch.
We investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong
That's a union thing. Unions are a good thing, until they decide they need to protect their own over the good of the populace instead of just against capitalism.
Any union that is a involved union busting shouldn't be a union, end police unions