Of course The Duckfucker can say anything he wants because FIRST AMMMENDMUNT FREEDUMBBBB!!!!11!!ELEVENTY!!!, but we need to take people's children from them because they said bad wordsies.

And here are way too many people defending the indefensible. Did the police act wrongly by posting the video and using "thug" to describe them? Yes.
Are there grounds for the removal of both the child and his mother from that apartment? Yes
Are those "adults" (used loosely here) endangering the welfare of that toddler? Yes, yes, yes.
Unlike most of you I grew up in this kind of environment and kids who were submitted to that same "schooling" tended to become the worst bullies in the community and in school - which most didn't get to finish. The guys filming the video are the same ones who are going to give drugs and put a gun on that child's hand when he is ten or twelve.
I know this because I have lived it. Where are most of the people who grew up with me? Dead or in jail but it was pretty "funny" when their parents or older relatives taught them to curse, to punch and kick others, to fire a gun and to take what they wanted when they wanted.

"Court documents detailed how the toddler's adult relatives allowed known gang members into the home. In addition, the court documents state, the toddler was injured by gunfire in October when someone fired shots through the front door."

Read more: http://www.ketv.com/news/lo...

By that logic shouldn't the court put all the children in high crime gang areas in foster care effectively punishing all patents for living in that environment?

Twice the state has paid to relocate them because of gang activity, and yet they repeatedly have had gang members in their house. This does not seem to be a case of drive-by shootings, or innocent people being caught up in gang activity. I am not sure who was responsible, as the grandmother went to her caseworker to complain about the relative who posted this video(video was posted two days after the complaint). So it does seem she might be a victim too. It does not say who this relative is.But no children should live in a home with that activity going on, who-ever that relative is, he needs to be removed.

So why aint these kids taken away from their parents and sent to live in a foster home?

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Oh, I know: They're white. While there's no excuse for the kid's parents teaching him to cuss, there's also a racist thing going on. White kids cuss? Cute. Black kids cuss? Gangsters.

Although there did not seem to be any adults around in either of those videos, the big difference would be there has been shootings at the home of the black child. Four children were removed from this house, and one had been injured from shrapnel in the past, if you read the article, it said there had been gang activity. If there are shootings going on the houses of those videos, than those children need to be removed too. I don't know what the hell is wrong with parents that find this amusing.

My personal feelings are that I'm glad the kid and mother are out of there and reunited, but I don't like the way that the police went about it. Forget about white kids cussing on Youtube. Let's talk about white children brought up in KKK families where they are taught to hate other races. The KKK is the worst domestic terrorist organization in America. Do the police consider that continuing the circle of "thug culture"? Do they initiate investigations in those situations and see what pops up that may warrant removal? Do they post videos of those families online? At the opposite end of the spectrum, somehow I don't see that affluenza kid, or the others like him, and their families being ridiculed by police in an online video for perpetuating a criminal lifestyle.

Correct there has been a shooting and a bullet went through the front door and unless it was done by the parents wouldn't the logical criteria that you're condoning be to remove all the children from this crime ridden gang area?

I wouldn't ordinarily defend a removal, but it does read as if the video may have triggered an investigation, or at least a "welfare check." Upon checking, they seem to have found that one of the children had been injured in a "shooting" at the home, related to "gang activity."
That's a little vague, but it may well be that there was good reason to get the minors out of the house.
Sadly, the usual practice is to remove rapidly, lest something happen and the child welfare agency be blamed for *not* removing the child.

actually, the usual practice is to remove quickly....if it's a minority family. if they're white, the kid the cops find high on crystal meth gets counseling, rehab, and returns a month later. the only exception 'authorities' make for whites is when it's poor 'white trash' types, and even then, not always. the racism drips from every single aspect of this bullshit story. get a clue. if the video 'triggered an investigation', where is the task force that is checking every youtube video of a kid swearing? another post on this thread links to 'cute' white kids doing the same thing the little black kid was doing. where are those "investigations"?

My history with CPS backs your theory up. CPS was called in the night I was born, and several times over the first 1.5 years of my life, but I didn't actually get removed until my grandmother showed up at an ER with me naked, in a drenched diaper, sporting a 105 degree fever.

My biologicals couldn't remember when I'd eaten last, and all they cared about was that I wouldn't stop crying. It was ruining their high. Maternal DNA donor finally called my grandmother, and when she showed up, I was laying next to an open window on the second story of the house.

That entire mess was finally enough for CPS to remove me, and even then they started with "temporarily." My DNA Donors just didn't care enough to fight to get me back.

take heart young raptor, my dad skipped when i was but a hatchling, tho my mom was awesome, so i know a bit of this first hand (tho clearly not as bad as your tale). i choose to think of it this way: had my biodad stayed, i would have been saddled with a sperm donor who didn't care enough to take care of his 14! other kids. when parents are like that, we're usually better off (in a case like yours perhaps more so). anyway, that's how i've coped with that particular thing, and i'm guessing from your post that you found a similarly effective way of dealing. :-)

I'm glad that the boy and his mother are able to stay together, although I have doubts whether a foster home would be appropriate. How is repeating profanity enough grounds to take a child out of his home? It is unrealistic to expect that children must grow up in a profanity-free culture, especially when mainstream media is feeding us a constant stream of profanity. It's just a word, it is only as much power as we give it.
If it is proved that the grandmother's house is an unsafe environment, go ahead and remove the boy and mother. But profanity is not adequate basis for judging a home as unsuitable.

It's beyond profanity at this point. Most parents curse when they stub a toe, etc., and are chagrined to find their little sponge repeating it. These folks were actively encouraging behavior that will make the child incorrigible and unable to attend school. So I suppose they could home school him, but we've already seen the likely curriculum and indeed I think the title "Thug Cycle" is apt.

Omaha's population is 3/4 white. Regardless of the conditions the child was living in, the police labeling the video that way (not to mention doing nothing about the child until there was a public outcry) is simply inciting racism.

Yes, I would have to agree with you that the police should have done something sooner about removing the child to a safe environment. Their failure to do that is troubling. And they should have blocked out the child's face to protect his identity.

Well since you think, as you said in the other thread, that anyone who has a child is a monster, I'm not sure why you aren't arguing for the execution, or at least the life-long imprisonment, of the 17-year-old mother.

Because I am not a monster. What good would that serve? I don't generally believe in execution. There is too much corruption and racism involved to give that kind of power to the Government. Too many death row inmates have been exonerated by DNA evidence. Execution should be extremely rare if done at all.I also don't believe Obama should be able to kill US citizens without due process. Life long imprisonment would serve nothing and would cost the State more than this 17 year old mother and her child already are. The whole situation is sad. It's even sadder that this child is just one of thousands born into such toxic circumstances. Like I said, in the other thread, it's cruel to birth a child and there is no denying it.

You said anyone who has children is a monster. Why would you want monsters walking the streets?

"These folks were actively encouraging behavior that will make the child incorrigible and unable to attend school" <~~see that? that's what a racist would say. in fact, your position is so laughable that it's almost beyond responding to. how many of the wall street bankers that made off with millions, and how many presidents, senators, business people, and billions of other successful people the world over heard and repeated supposedly 'foul' language? from your position, the answer would have to be none. you're a joke. and a bigot.

Are you serious, did you watch the video? It is perplexing that you do not see the abuse here.

I really shouldn't respond to you because I don't think you have a clue. What in my position leads you to think I'm a bigot or a racist? Is it okay to teach a 2 year old to say "Suck my dick" and "You a ho"? (I'll leave the N word alone since I think that is "reclaimed" in the same way gays have "reclaimed" queer.)
When he gets to school and tells his fellow kindergarteners "Suck my dick" and when the teacher intervenes he says "You a ho?" how's that going to work out for him?

1st: you make the assumption that the child is going to say 'suck my dick' or 'you a ho' to a teacher. that is to say,you assume that b/c the kid's parents speak to him in that way, that he would do that to others. your assumption requires, not only that the child be raised by parents who use that type of language, it also requires the assumption that the child is so stupid as to not understand the difference between contexts--i.e. you're making an assumption you don't make with yourself, or anyone else in your ethnic group. which makes you a racist. what makes you a bigot is quite simply, your inability to imagine that someone might be raised in an environment where that language is common, and yet be perfectly capable of having a conversation, attending a school, or ordering lunch at a diner w/o saying 'fuck' or 'shit' or 'bitch' or 'ho'---see, cuz all us coloreds, weez 2 dumm fuh liek....knowing the proper settings in which to use the proper language.

moreover, you make the ethnocentric (and therefore by definition bigoted, and usually racist) assumption that your way is the best way to be--not b/c it is, since there is NOTHING ON EARTH to which you can point and assert "my way of speaking is better than yours" since that's an a priori assumption of linguistic, and in this case, cultural superiority, but also b/c you make the assumption that it WILL always be that way. there is at least one hypothetical situation where it wouldn't be - supposing that child grows up well, despite assholes such as yourself, i'd be a helluva lot more likely to hire him where i work than i would be you, since i won't assume that he is stupid, or ignorant, or damaged b/c of the way he talks, and given the fact that i hate racists and racism, especially the soft racists that claim they aren't, (but make racially motivated decisions instead of non-biased ones), than the most foul mouthed motherfucker you can find, he stands a better shot at getting my money, and my support, than some asshat like you.

i've already learned that you are prejudiced, ignorant, bigoted and racist, and yet, i've no idea what that kid is going to be like just b/c he's trying to impress the guy making the video.

so, supposing where you work the person making decisions is someone like myself, how is it going to play that you're a racist, who assumes that kids that speak like this kid does in the video, are somehow 'less than'? how do you think it will shake out when someone cogently and patiently explains why you are a racist and a bigot, and that the person with the power to hire and fire people decides that i'm right, and you are these things, how's THAT going to work out for YOU?

and for the record: the only person in this conversation who's suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect is you. you think you know some shit, when clearly, you don't, so feel free not to respond. i don't usually have time for self-righteous bigots who claim moral authority when their position clearly lacks merit, and i won't be wasting any more of my time on the likes of you. be happy in your ignorant little world. just keep in mind that it's shrinking rapidly.

You and your sophistry... a perfect example that a fool can be educated and become an educated fool. You should be careful with cultural relativism because its reductio absurdism argument leads you to a path where you have to justify/condone things like female genital mutilation (or male for that matter), stoning the victims of rape, etc. I honestly didn't know a thing about the Dunning Kruger effect, but I do know about a ego defense mechanism called "projection." Lastly I think it is ironic that the person here, meaning you, defending this situation where a toddler is being abused as a "cultural thing", cannot himself engage in a discourse about it without resorting to ad hominem attacks. Calling myself and Harry asshats and dumbass, etc Why not just call us crackers? Ho's? Why not just tell us, "Suck my dick."?

For crying out loud, children are unable to make such distinctions- hence they repeat everything they hear. Your argument is so flawed it is borderline stupid. The child in the video clearly has no idea what his words mean. And that is why, if you grow up in an environment in which you are taught to curse in front of a camera for fun you are going to engage in the same behavior everywhere- they never get the context- especially because they are being taught that such cursing is the norm and something to be celebrated. JFC is basic sociology,

and for the record: you said "children are unable to make such distinctions" which is correct (don't pat yourself on the back, dumbass, even a stopped clock is right twice a day), i would point out a tiny, itsy bitsy little problem with your 'argument' (such as it is). adults ARE able to make such distinctions, so either (a) a child that hears such language as in the video remains at least an intellectual child throughout the entirety of their life span, or (b) when they become adults, they realize that saying 'fuck you' at a job interview isn't a good idea. if you hold to 'A', congratulations you're not only stupid, you're a racist bigot, or if you hold 'B', the entirety of your initial 'argument' is so profoundly stupid, i for one am amazed that your brain actually has enough power to send the signals to make your heart and lungs work.

You are so laughable but here we go.
It shows that you know nothing at all about these communities and that you have never been in one of them. Ever ventured beyond your White suburban castle? It is not the same to hear your parents say fuck when they get frustrated and having too irresponsible adults teaching you how to curse- and to celebrated.
You can make your own stupid multiple choice test but hey, news flash- they are completely disassociated with what is being said (unless we count the voices in your head).

so....every molested child will molest children. every child that plays violent video games kills people. every child that is indoctrinated into religion stays in their religion. every girl that plays catch with dad grows up to be gay. every little boy who plays with his sister's barbie doll grows up to be gay. there is no 'borderline' here. you actually are stupid.

"so....every molested child will molest children. every child that plays violent video games kills people. every child that is indoctrinated into religion stays in their religion. every girl that plays catch with dad grows up to be gay. every little boy who plays with his sister's barbie doll grows up to be gay. there is no 'borderline' here. you actually are stupid."
WoW U R slow. Children of abused parents tend to abuse their own children or to engage in abusive relationships (sometimes as the abuser sometimes as the abused), Homosexuality is not a choice, no one can make another person gay- in case you did not know. The children of ultra religious parents tend to be among the most abused kids in the world (as they are denied of free thinking)- it seems to me that you are but a mouth breather completely unable to present a logic argument so you present straw men that exist ONLY IN YOUR HEAD. Learn how to do an analogy is grammar school stuff.

no harry, you're the slow one. i am not making any of those claims. those are what people who know how to read call a 'reductio ad absurdum', which is to say, they point out, in extremis, why the position they are against is flawed. that you missed that completely is testament to the veracity of the Dunning Kruger effect's work in your brain.

what 'seems' to you doesn't concern me. i have offered you the opportunity to learn something. you've rejected it in favor of reinforcing your own ignorance, and that being the case, i will not waste more of my time discussing anything with you. i would suggest that you return to school, since really, you're not well equipped to handle this type of discussion. googling wikipedia for terms is not sufficient. there is a reason we have grad school. that reason is that practicing things makes you better at them. graduate school is for thinking.

and for the record--i did not present straw men at all. i followed your pattern of illogic and presented different but related illogical relationships based on the one you presented. i'm well aware of the science behind homosexuality, and the psychology behind abused children. the fact is, you just aren't aware of the ethnocentrism inherent in your position, and the blatantly racist nature of the rationale behind the initial posting of the video in question.

i wish you well in your pursuit of more educational experiences than what i've been able to offer you.

enjoy

Don't you need to know a term so you can actually Google it? You see, you are completely unable to present a logical argument- especially when you are throwing a tantrum. That you decide to add straw arguments to a post does not make them true either.
About ethnocentrism- LOL_ the only one here operating from white privilege is you. As for learning from you- I doubt that you learned enough in grad school to actually teach anyone anything about any of these subjects- so I bet you were in sciences not humanities or social sciences.

Labeling someone a bigot just because they have an opinion on the ignorant behavior exhibited in this video goes a bit too far.

one more thing, maybe you missed it: the asshat above said this: ""These folks were actively encouraging behavior that will make the child incorrigible and unable to attend school". the leap of illogic it takes to go from a kid saying something one doesn't like, to saying that the child won't be able to attend school, requires something that only racism or some other ignorant form of bigotry can provide.

not to mention the fact that there are billions of people who use this type of language and are wildly successful. look at bill o'reilly, who famously is caught on video saying 'fuckit, we'll do it live' (or words to that effect, but the word 'fuck' was in there). again, you can't get to 'incorrigible' or 'unable to attend school' w/o, in this case, the racist component.

perhaps instead of knee jerking your way to a conclusion with what is clearly an uninformed position, perhaps you'd care to read the explanation above. or not. i care not. i will leave you with this: when you defend a clearly bigoted position, don't be surprised when you yourself a labeled a bigot.

You're crazy funny. No scratch that...you're not funny. Who cares who you label. Threatening to call me a bigot only illustrates how poor your "knee-jerk" assessments are. You're quick to label and quick to make excuses for how Black folk should live -even if the standards are low as hell. Why excuse this behavior at all? It's almost as if that's what you expect of us. I want better for my people. I expect better. Who's the bigot here?

He won't get it and soon call you a racist or a self-hating African American- then he will call you ignorant and offer no proof of your ignorance or his superior intellect- then from his white privileged position he will call you ethnocentric. Wait for it....

lol...trust me. i know. i watched in amazement as cats like him bashed cosby last year. hilariously tragic

"perhaps instead of knee jerking your way to a conclusion with what is clearly an uninformed position" How is your position informed, in any way? It seems like a super quick knee-jerk reaction.

No but you can label them a bigot if that opinion includes supporting the courts removing him from his mother. How would that person be able to tolerate 30 minutes of YouTube without calling child protective services a dozen times?

So you would never call child protective services, no matter what?

Don't be stupid Harry. You'd face a lawsuit if you call child protective services just because a child lived in a dangerous low income area. Don't strawman me again btw.

have you ever heard of the false dichotomy fallacy? i didn't think so. maybe a bit of an education would help.

Right, you are bragging of your superior intellect and education? LoL, what? Aare you- attending grad school and procrastinating on assigned readings?

actually harry, i'm done both with grad school, and with assigned readings. thank you for your concern. and btw, i'm not bragging about anything. i asked if you knew what a false dichotomy was. leave it to a functional illiterate to understand a question as braggadocio. it's quite reminiscent of the time sarah palin became all exercised by the 'gotcha' question 'what magazines do you read?'.

enjoy o_0

"have you ever heard of the false dichotomy fallacy? i didn't think so. maybe a bit of an education would help" Plz read your own words again and note carefully how you answer your own question and then prescribe a "bit of education" . Bragging much? And by the way your posts show you to be one of the most tautological posters on this site- so maybe you should go back to grad school.

oh by all means, point out the tautologies. i'll wait. in the meantime, i suggest you read my words again. after that whole question mark thingie? there are two, count 'em! two! sentences. one is an answer (to what should obviously have been noted as a rhetorical question--go ahead, you can look it up--the second sentence is a mere suggestion, clearly unheeded. but thank you. i'll be waiting for a list and breakdown/explanations of those tautologies.

oh by all means- avoid the use of logic, build straw men, and then cower behind what you perceive as your "superior intellect"? Please apply to Fox News, they like people like you. Funny you mention Palin- you sound just like her.

Did I miss something? I thought they removed the child and his mother who is also a child from the home of his grandmother who is a gang banging thug and has been arrested on gun charges. The child and his mother are together in a foster home.

So just so I'm clear, because I've seen these videos and they make me cringe because I care about my people and my community, I can't object to the fact that these clowns reinforced every negative stereotype of us through a child who knows no better and will apparently know no better? Is that what you're saying? Turn it around and have a white child portraying what others think Black culture to be (and we both know that will be all of the idiotic, vapid mess we've bought into), have that child portray us at the behest of someone white in the background and tell me we wouldn't be up in arms. Calling this what it is, isn't bigotry on it's face.