Stupid People Doing Stupid Things Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Teenagers Decide to Test out a Bulletproof Vest, What Could Go Wrong

a8jnyhhu0c6tcdrcp7bi.jpg


A teenage girl is facing jail time after she shot at a friend wearing a bulletproof vest—and missed.

Police say 18-year-old Taylor Ann Kelly could spend up to five years in jail after she fatally shot 26-year-old Blake Wardell, who apparently asked her to help him test out a new Kevlar vest.

Police say they had been hanging out with friends in a garage when Wardell came up with the ill-fated plan to have Kelly shoot at him with a small-caliber weapon.

According to FOX, Wardell bled to death when the bullet struck him in an unprotected chest area of the vest. Other friends present at the scene apparently tried to give him CPR to no avail and medical workers were unable to revive him.

A deputy coroner told reporters that there did not appear to be excessive alcohol or drug abuse involved in the shooting.

Kelly faces up to five years in jail for involuntary manslaughter.

http://www.wptv.com/news/national/t...tproof-vest-shooting-of-blake-randall-wardell

I know in reality kids are smarter than they have ever been since the dawn of man but then you see things like this and it makes you wonder.
 
Stupidity and lack of common sense are the new (un)natural selection theories.
 
Want to test the vest? Simple. Stick it on a mannequin. I'd say stick it on a dummy but they already did that and it killed him.
 
Donald Sterling Won't Pay Fines, May Sue NBA

xftld8cycl1trq64c6qk.jpg


The ousted Donald Sterling will not sit idly as the NBA finds a way to fully remove his association with the Clippers. According to an SI report, Sterling has hired a lawyer, who has already sent a letter to the NBA rejecting their $2.5 million fine.

Sterling has reportedly hired Maxwell Blecher, an antitrust litigator with a background in sports. Blecher sent a letter to NBA executive vice president and general counsel Rick Buchanan informing the league that Sterling would not pay the $2.5 million which was part of Sterling's punishment, and hints at the potential filing of a lawsuit.

In addition, Blecher provides two defenses for Sterling, which Michael McCann breaks down well:

First, Blecher claims that Sterling has not violated any article of the NBA constitution. The letter curiously references Article 35, which governs players' misconduct, and several other provisions. The NBA is expected to argue that Sterling violated Article 13(d), among other provisions. Article 13 (d) bars owners from violating contractual obligations, including the obligation that owners no engage in unethical conduct or take positions adverse to the NBA. Blecher does not explain how he intends to prove Sterling's racist remarks captured on the secret recording — followed by Sterling's incendiary remarks to Anderson Cooper about Magic Johnson — do not give rise to unethical conduct or positions adverse to the NBA.

Second, Blecher argues that Sterling's "due process rights" have been violated by the NBA. A due process claim may sound superficially reasonable. After all, Sterling was banned permanently from the NBA after a mere four-day investigation, without any formal proceedings. If the NBA were a federal agency or a state college, Sterling might have a good argument, as those are public entities that must provide safeguards found under the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions. The problem for Sterling is that the NBA is a private association and is not required to provide due process rights. Sterling, moreover, contractually assented to the NBA's system of justice through various contracts, including his franchise agreement to purchase the Clippers and the joint venture agreement, which indicates the NBA has binding authority over the teams.

The letter apparently also claims that Sterling has done nothing wrong, which seems odd given his bizarre apology sitdown with Anderson Cooper earlier this week. And even if Sterling doesn't shell out for the fine, Brian Windhorst believes the league can take it from other sources.

Adam Silver's swift punishment for Sterling was admirable, but despite the commissioner's best efforts, the booting wasn't going to be that simple. Regardless of when the Clippers' playoff run concludes, the pieces are falling into place for a legal battle in the offseason.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140515/donald-sterling-nba-la-clippers-adam-silver/

The funny thing to me is $2.5 million to that guy would be like a $200 ticket for the rest of us. Ya it sucks a little bit but it wont destroy most of us. There are plenty of racist remarks he has made in the past and with AC360 for his "apology" that shows he really has no legs in this fight. The NBA has let him slide for as long as the possibly could
 
Couple Who Stole Luggage During Asiana Flight Crash Are Going to Jail

jrrhc1hubnlu6dbqm8w9.png


Two airport employees who used the confusion of the Asiana Airlines crash last summer as an opportunity to steal luggage from airline passengers are now headed to jail.

Sean Sharif Crudup, 44, and his fiancée Raychas Elizabeth Thomas, 32, were both working for United at the San Francisco International Airport when the Asiana Flight 214 crashed on the runway, leaving three dead and 180 injured.

As other airport employees raced to help—some doing more harm than good—Crudup and Thomas took advantage of the melee to steal thousands of dollars worth of luggage from diverted passengers.

According to court testimony, Crudup was captured on an airport surveillance tape removing a suitcase from the airport baggage office.

The victim's luggage apparently contained several pieces of jewelry and clothes worth about $30,000—some of which Thomas somehow managed to sell back to Nordstrom for around $5,000. The remaining items were recovered during a search of the couple's home.

Crudup was sentenced to nine months in jail and Thomas picked up a six-month sentence this week. The couple is also facing up to three years of probation and $5,800 in restitution to Nordstrom.

http://blog.sfgate.com/crime/2014/05/13/asiana-crash-luggage-thieves-sentenced/

What does that say about what kind of people they are when a plane crashes and their first thoughts are to steal passengers belongings? Horrible people right there, I think the sentence is too light IMO
 
Naked Couple Busted Having Very Public Sex Next to an ATM

blhprecj5twetkeebfto.jpg


Well that's one way to make a deposit.

A Spanish couple was busted in flagranti next to a cash machine in Oviedo this week, but not before a large cheering crowd gathered outside the bank.

Naked but for their socks, the couple's copulation quickly went viral as passersby posted photos and videos to Twitter. Although the windows apparently began to steam up, voyeurs were still able to take extremely explicit selfies with the naked duo in the background.

Unfortunately the cops came before the couple did, but the Sun reports they got off with just a warning and a very public walk of shame.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/couple-spain-caught-bare-naked-coupling-atm-article-1.1792101

So they couldn't wait to get somewhere decent and they guy couldn't be bothered to take his socks off? I mean, I know ATMs are pretty darn sexy but I have never been drunk enough to do that. I like how they get a warning though, that's Spain for ya I guess. Do this in America and you're likely to catch a sex crime charge
 
Donald Sterling Won't Pay Fines, May Sue NBA

xftld8cycl1trq64c6qk.jpg




http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140515/donald-sterling-nba-la-clippers-adam-silver/

The funny thing to me is $2.5 million to that guy would be like a $200 ticket for the rest of us. Ya it sucks a little bit but it wont destroy most of us. There are plenty of racist remarks he has made in the past and with AC360 for his "apology" that shows he really has no legs in this fight. The NBA has let him slide for as long as the possibly could

There is an irony to this being in a stupid person thread in which you say that he has no legs in this fight, because anyone with any legal knowledge, knows that he has a very strong position. Not regarding the fine, the NBA Constitution/franchise agreement gives the commissioner broad authority to fine NBA personnel for just about anything. But by the same merit, it does not give the commissioner the authority to expel him, nor does it give the owners authority to expel him FOR THIS. Sterling has a very good claim regarding the breach of contract and the anti-trust suit. I wouldn't be surprised if Sterling owns the Clippers until his death.
 
Well I'm pretty sure disparaging people of color, which is primarily most of the athletes involved, numerous times over the years is something the NBA would consider against it's best interest. This may get dragged out in court for a long time but he violated what the NBA has set forth and even did so in his "apology" so I don't see him winning this battle. There is more than enough evidence an instances of his racist behavior to warrant this action. I highly doubt the NBA would have done this if they can't back it up. They are a multi-billion dollar conglomerate and I'm sure they were fully aware of what they would be going up against with an old billionaire

EDIT: Also to force him to sell the franchise all that is required is a majority vote by the other owners and I'm sure they don't want to be associated with him. So this legal knowledge you speak of really doesn't matter
 
Of course the NBA would do this, it's called "CYA" covering your booty...

As Matt stated, the NBA can fine, and fine, and fine....

It all sucks, but in the grand scheme of things, unless it is in a written, binding contract somewhere, the NBA does not have a leg to stand on, BUT that does not mean that they shouldn't show the strong opinion and follow through as far as they can. That is for the advertisers, the players, etc....
 
Well the fine may be one thing they can't enforce but like I said all that has to happen to force him to sell the team is a majority vote by the other owners. I doubt any of them will want to stand on his side in the eyes of the public no matter what they think. And that is a binding agreement that he signed when he became owner of the team.

And thanks for stopping by my thread Kelly, always nice when you drop by! :)
 
Well I'm pretty sure disparaging people of color, which is primarily most of the athletes involved, numerous times over the years is something the NBA would consider against it's best interest. This may get dragged out in court for a long time but he violated what the NBA has set forth and even did so in his "apology" so I don't see him winning this battle. There is more than enough evidence an instances of his racist behavior to warrant this action. I highly doubt the NBA would have done this if they can't back it up. They are a multi-billion dollar conglomerate and I'm sure they were fully aware of what they would be going up against with an old billionaire

EDIT: Also to force him to sell the franchise all that is required is a majority vote by the other owners and I'm sure they don't want to be associated with him. So this legal knowledge you speak of really doesn't matter

Actually, it matters quite a bit. The franchise agreement and NBA constitution both lay out conditions in which the other owners can force an owner to sell. None of them are related to character. As such, this will be a matter of legal interpretation of the contract and whether or not Sterling's actions are covered by the part of the contract that allows forced sale due to acting in a manner that is financially detrimental (i.e. cannot afford to maintain a team). I don't think the NBA wins it because while a few sponsors dropped, Silver acted prematurely. It isn't enough for the NBA to say that Sterling's actions were financially detrimental, they must show it. Usually financial harm cannot be speculative, it must be actual. Therefore, the NBA cannot say, "We would have lost sponsors and fans." Its almost as if the NBA had to take the hit and then act, not act in anticipation of the hit. At least that is the way I read the contract and how I venture to guess 85 % of the District Judges (because this is definitely going to federal court) in the country would read the contract.
 
Well the fine may be one thing they can't enforce but like I said all that has to happen to force him to sell the team is a majority vote by the other owners. I doubt any of them will want to stand on his side in the eyes of the public no matter what they think. And that is a binding agreement that he signed when he became owner of the team.

And thanks for stopping by my thread Kelly, always nice when you drop by! :)

But you're wrong. The franchise agreement lays out terms in which one can be forced to sell by a majority vote. They are almost all financial and none of them are based upon character. In other words, Silver does not have grounds to call for a vote and if he does HE is breaching the contract, not Sterling.
 
The financial loss aspect is not at play here Matt. Here is an article I found that better lays out what is going on because, I must admit, I am neither a lawyer nor that big into the NBA.

A cadre of attorneys and a flurry of lawsuits could certainly slow down the NBA's plan to force Donald Sterling to sell the Los Angeles Clippers over his recent racist comments, but legal experts say the league would likely prevail in the end.

The NBA's constitution, which Donald Sterling signed as controlling owner of the Clippers, gives its board of governors broad latitude in league decisions including who owns the teams. NBA Commissioner Adam Silver is pushing for a swift vote against Sterling, which requires a minimum of three-fourths of the other 29 controlling owners to agree.
Silver also has imposed a lifetime ban on Sterling and a $2.5 million fine. The ban does not apply to Shelly Sterling.

SI.com and ESPN.com, citing unidentified sources, reported Thursday that Sterling's lawyer, antitrust litigator Maxwell Blecher, wrote a letter to Rick Buchanan, the NBA's executive vice president and general counsel, threatening to sue the league and saying Sterling will not pay the $2.5 million fine.

"Sterling's own signature will come back to haunt him," said Michael McCann, founding director of the Sports and Entertainment Law Institute at the University of New Hampshire. "You agree to certain basic understandings. That's what makes a sports league different from other businesses."

The key to the NBA's authority, attorneys say, is Article 13(d) of the league's constitution. That section says that, whether Sterling intended to or not, an owner cannot "fail or refuse to fulfill" contractual obligations to the NBA "in such a way to affect the Association or its members adversely."

There's plenty of evidence Sterling's comments, revealed in a recorded conversation with a female companion, affected the league adversely. They provoked threats of a player boycott, led sponsors to withdraw support and created a racially charged image problem in the midst of the NBA playoffs that even President Obama remarked upon.

If Article 13(d) was violated, the legal experts say the board of governors has solid grounds to force Sterling to sell the team along with any other owners, in this case his wife.

As long as the NBA meticulously follows its own constitution and rules regarding the Clippers sale, it will be difficult for Sterling to find a legal theory that would stand up in court, said Daniel Lazaroff, director of the Sports Law Institute at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

"This is not an antitrust issue. This is not a First Amendment issue," Lazaroff said. "It's a question limited to the interpretation of the NBA constitution and bylaws, and whether those terms are met."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-...ppers-ownership-reportedly-refuses-2-5m-fine/

The key to it that it cannot affect the NBA adversely. It doesn't state that the adverse effects in question have to be monetary. So all the things listed in the article clearly show that there has been a negative effect on the NBA as a direct result of his actions. That is all they have to show to bring it to a vote and as I said earlier I highly doubt the other owners are going to want to be seen by the public or their players as someone that sides with whom most consider a racist.
 
Once again though, law is generally not speculative. The NBA cannot say his comments MIGHT HAVE caused damage. Generally ACTUAL damage must be shown to enforce a clause of that nature. The players never ACTUALLY boycotted the league (in fact, Sterling's own team played after the fact). The sponsors aside from a handful never actually pulled support (and those that did, did so after Silver's promise to force a sale). In short, there was no actual damage. And it is my belief (as a lawyer) that the judge will require some actual harm before a sale can be forced.

Furthermore, there is something called the canons of construction. Not all judges use them, but a lot do (especially in federal courts because the Supreme Court since Rehnquist took over and the Court shifted to the right have been really big on them). They are used to interpret statutory and contractual language. There is one canon that has a Latin name that escapes me at the moment. It holds that if there is a list of items, conditions, terms, etc and they are all similar, open ended, vaguer items must be interpreted in a similar manner. All of the other terms that allow for forced sale are financial. I can easily see a judge saying that the open ended one requires some showing of financial damage also.

And none of that takes into account Sterling's anti-trust suit which is alleging that the league is actively trying to kill his competitive advantage in order to force sale (which is a fairly meritorious claim when the league commissioner goes on national TV and promises to make you sell). Lazaroff is just wrong when he says that this isn't an anti-trust issue. If Sterling is bringing an anti-trust complaint, it is an anti-trust issue. And as long as the complaint is meritorious, it will be able to be stretched out past discovery (which the NBA is TERRIFIED of because discovery could very well open Pandora's box).
 
Okay, well I'm going to have to partially agree with you after reading your last statement which is very insightful. I took a law class my senior year and loved every minute of it (also got an A even though a lot dropped it since it was hard) but I honestly don't remember to much from the contractual stuff that we went over. What you are describing does make sense to me though. I guess we will see who's high paid powerful attorneys end up winning in the end. As far as I'm concerned if the President is making statements about how the owner is an idiot and doesn't belong in basketball that should be enough of an adverse action but I'm no judge either.
 
Drunk Guy Steals Limo, Takes Passengers on Terrifying Joy Ride

xbqvd2unj91o6tivln8w.jpg


Early Thursday morning, a drunk man allegedly stole an idling limo, terrifying its five passengers as he took them on a brief joy ride through Manhattan before crashing.

DNA Info reports that the stretch limo, a white Lincoln Town Car, was parked in the West Village at about 3:15 a.m. when 24-year-old Marwan Elbordiny allegedly hopped in the driver's seat—the driver had stepped out for some reason—and drove off.

Elbordiny made it several blocks before crashing into a car.

From DNA Info:

When police arrived, Elbordiny smelled of alcohol and he was flushed, glassy-eyed and unsteady on his feet, the NYPD said. He blew a .181 on a blood alcohol test, more than twice the legal driving limit of .08, police said.
The passengers were, understandably, terrified but unharmed.

Bnwh3ctCQAAiWFe.jpg

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/201...steals-limo-with-passengers-inside-police-say

That is way over the limit and why he chose a limo of all things makes me think we aren't dealing with the brightest bulb in the box. I just imagine a bunch of scared rich people in the back freaking out and rolling down the partition to ask the driver what is going on and seeing some random drunk guy and it makes me laugh even though I shouldn't haha
 
​CNN Fires News Editor for Serial Plagiarism

hoz4aqi1wf44pyshj8h0.jpg


CNN announced on Friday that it'd fired one of its news editors, Marie-Louise Gumuchian, after discovering multiple instances of plagiarism in her work. According to CNN's editor's note, Gumuchian regularly covered news about Africa, Europe, and the Middle East.

From CNN:

An unpublished story flagged last week during our editing process led to an internal investigation that uncovered other examples in about 50 published stories, and our investigation is ongoing.

We've terminated Gumuchian's employment with CNN, and have removed the instances of plagiarism found in her pieces. In some cases, we've chosen to delete an entire article.
The note goes on to say that CNN "believe in letting audiences know when we've remedied situations that threaten to compromise that trust," though it fails to list any of Gumuchian's edited or deleted articles.

Daily Intelligencer notes that, before CNN, Gumuchian worked at Reuters, so there's a good chance we might see more corrections soon.


http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/16/world/editors-note/index.html?hpt=wo_c2

Why would you plagiarize stuff if you work at one of the biggest news outlets in the world? You have to know that they check on that kind of thing. I do believe they cover this topic in journalism classes
 
Well the fine may be one thing they can't enforce but like I said all that has to happen to force him to sell the team is a majority vote by the other owners. I doubt any of them will want to stand on his side in the eyes of the public no matter what they think. And that is a binding agreement that he signed when he became owner of the team.

And thanks for stopping by my thread Kelly, always nice when you drop by! :)


I wouldn't think anyone would want to stand by his side....he's a d-bag. My bringing up the team and advertisers was not to say, some will stand by them...I was saying that the strong stand of the NBA is FOR those two groups, to let them know that they will not stand by and let something like this happen without hitting it will all they have. But the only thing that is binding at this point is a fine. That is the easy part...what is "written" in the contracts is what is binding. So, if the NBA is thinking that the ground they have to stand on is simply a "moral ground" though we may agree with them, it isn't "legal grounds".
 
Operation American Spring, the Right's Crazy Copy of Occupy, Explained

y4xnjrbqwkeuoc6x20pj.png


You can feel it in the air, rising on a zephyr like a handmade sign depicting Obama as the Joker. Operation American Spring is on, people, in the streets of Washington and Baton Rouge and—that's about it, really. But here comes the nutty conservative impeachment revolution!

Compared to the Tea Party, Operation American Spring is... nothing, in truth. Like, literally tens of people sitting around being crazy. No, really, check out the photos below.

But revolutions have started as nothing before. And this nothing is really something: an attempt to impeach not only Obummer and Uncle Joe but John ***** and all them other colloborationist RINO-types and start all over with a proper constitutional government by the old white folks, for the old white folks. Here's what it is, according to Raw Story:

Operation American Spring aims to pressure those lawmakers who remain – or are replaced by officials of their own choosing – "to sponsor and pass very Constitutionally crafted State legislation to dissolve the size, powers, scope and spending of the U.S. Government by 2/3rds."

The activists say they expect 10 million to 30 million like-minded Americans to join them Friday in the nation's capital for a rally patterned after Occupy Wall Street and "Arab Spring" protests.

They also plan a sister event the same day in Bunkerville, Nevada, where militia groups have gathered to support scofflaw rancher Cliven Bundy in his dispute with the federal government.

Organizers also anticipate "incremental nullification" by state legislatures of "all withholding taxes, employment taxes, employer taxes, and income taxes."
Get your Gadsden flags and gas masks, people. It's happening! And according to OAS leader Col. Harry Riley, lots of militias and "high-ranking military leaders" are ready to rock this thing if tyrant Obama and his Sheriff Holder try to knock skulls:

I fought all through the Cold War and to me I've never seen a threat to the United States any greater than the internal threat that Obama and his administration and a Congress that does nothing reflect. We're in a serious, grave situation. It's a reason we're going to Washington to try, to try. I fear the next step, if this doesn't happen, is going to be something that not a combat soldier wants to see. We've been through the carnage, we've seen it, we understands what happens and that's the last thing we want.
So what's this sea change in American democracy look like? Glad you asked:

BnxCQVdIcAAri36.jpg


BnxFa3RCcAADewh.jpg


Here are some screenshots from video of the multitudes gathering now on the National Mall in Washington:

fdwbtkkqpxjzj78wosdy.png


uig19dbyacl9o6kg4ac6.png


But you have to understand, one of the reasons the crowd is so sparse is because of disinformation. You see, it turns out that some crazy paranoics who don't trust the government also think a rally such as this is a government-planted ruse to assemble America's patriots, unarmed, for easier killin':

[YT]XV7PVOS_lEA[/YT]

But the organizers assure you all that's not the case! This is a civil engagement, unless of course it turns uncivil. And also, don't believe anything you've heard about the venue changing:

urj25chmfzfqwh79sl0u.png


Geez. What's with all these birth-certificate-wanting secret-Kenyan-Muslim-fearing FEMA-camp-avoiding Holder-drone-dodging patriots spreading rumors like they're real?

But if the crowds don't impress you, don't write this thing off yet. They're willing to stay on the streets, protesting tyranny, for as long as it takes, or until the chocolate Wonderfall at Golden Corral has another Veterans Eat Free Day.

To paraphrase some lefty chick: Never doubt that a small group of militant white conservatives can change America; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/...from-office-this-friday/#.U3JS6Mxm1V0.twitter

Man these people crack me up. I guess they saw how much got changed from Occupy Wall street and they figured they could get at least that much change as well!
 
10-30 million like-minded? I think they're off by an order of magnitude around 10-30 million.
 
What a bunch of morons.They should visit North Korea to understand what actual tyranny is.
 
What a bunch of morons.They should visit North Korea to understand what actual tyranny is.
Ain't that the truth, and while they're at it, they can look up the words communist, socialist, fascist, and several other buzz words they like to call Obama and the current administration. Because they certainly don't know what those words mean either.
 
Ain't that the truth, and while they're at it, they can look up the words communist, socialist, fascist, and several other buzz words they like to call Obama and the current administration. Because they certainly don't know what those words mean either.

Im always telling someone around me off for calling him socialist. One of the unfortunate side effect of living in rural right wing baptist cuunchry.
 
Im always telling someone around me off for calling him socialist. One of the unfortunate side effect of living in rural right wing baptist cuunchry.
My favorite is when they call him completely contradictory terms. "Obama is an athiest muslim socialist nazi!"

Really? How exactly does that even work?
 
I have heard people call him those things, but not at the same time....strange.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"