In Gretna, Florida, Juanita Donald called the police to come assist her and get her 24 year old son to take his medication, as she had done in the past.
On Tuesday morning, around 9:30 am, she called the police to help her with her son Kaldrick Donald and one officer showed up, Sergeant Charles Brown.
Charles Brown ended up tasing Kaldrick Donald repeatedly, and then took him into the isolated bathroom in the family’s house and shot him multiple times, killing him.
Brown murdered Donald in the presence his pregnant sister and mother, and no one can even say why. He was completely unarmed, and somehow not completely sane.
His mother said “I heard my baby say, I want my mama after he shot him, and then I didn’t hear anything else.”
His mother said she was “expecting them to take him to the Apalachee Center like before”, but instead a single officer came and escalated the situation, murdering him in front of his family.
Juanita continued to say “It wasn’t but one officer. Instead of him calling for backup, he took things in his own hands and he goes in the house and he rush him and shoot him.”
She continued to say he “didn’t want to be bothered”, and that he simply walked away from the officer.
She says Sergeant Charles Brown “Just grabbed him and he tased him. Then when he grabbed him and tased him, he rushed my son off in the bathroom and I heard three shots. I was like, you shot my son and he was like, I had to. I said, no, you didn’t have to.”
Charles Brown is now on ‘administrative leave’, or paid vacation, and if this story doesn’t blow up then this officer surely will see no charges.
BRUH.. Come ON!!
Gonna keep a tally of messages I get from a) white feminists completely proving my point and b) people who think this comic proves feminism is worthless because I criticized one part of it. (Even despite me writing these words underneath the comic.) Then I’ll add them all up, see which column has more, and then drink myself to sleep either way.
Haha… this is why we can’t have nice things.
Rape is the only crime on the books for which arguing that the temptation to commit it was too clear and obvious to resist is treated as a defence. For every other crime, we call that a confession.
I’ve gotten more angry asks about this post than I have actual reblogs.
Let us sing the songs of our people.
Supernatural…we have no theme song :(
NYAAAAFWOOOOPP *annoying ringing in ear* eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEEEEENEGJIJEIOGWJ ORSGSOIGJJSKLVDLXDXSLVMGSLKGJRG *Static* *static* *silence*
Best interpretation of the supernatural intro ever
like hell we dont have a theme song
CARRY ON MY WAYWARD SOOOON.
THERE’LL BE PEACE WHEN YOU ARE DOOOOOONE
LAY YOUR WEARY HEAD TO REEEEST
DON’T YOU CRY NO MORE
ONCE I ROSE ABOVE THE NOISE AND CONFUSION
JUST TO GET A GLIMPSE BEYOND THIS ILLUSION
I WAS SOARING EVER HIGHER
BUT I FLEW TOO HIGH
THOUGH MY EYES COULD SEE I STILL WAS A BLIND MAN
THOUGH MY MIND COULD THINK I STILL WAS A MAD MAN
I HEAR THE VOICES WHEN I’M DREAMING
I have very tenuously tied my discussion of the Hobby Lobby decision to the theme of this blog through the clever use of Doctor Who gifs, so thank you to all of my followers for putting up with me for the past few days. This will (probably) be my last post about the case, but I just had to respond to two arguments that I’ve seen cropping up again and again in response to my posts.
Myth #1: Employers were being forced to pay for contraception, and people should pay for it themselves.
Let me show you how health insurance benefits work.
Let’s say a company has $100 dollars which they will use to compensate their employee in various ways. They’ll give $50 directly to the employee in cold, hard cash, $10 will go into a retirement or savings account, and $40 will go towards health insurance benefits (These numbers are made up to illustrate a point, so just work with me for a minute). It’s all part of an employee’s compensation. Employer provided healthcare is very common in the United States because consumers can usually get cheaper healthcare when they go into together in large groups, and so employers often group all of their employees together in a group, purchase a healthcare plan, and use the size of their group to negotiate better rates.
People use their health insurance benefits in many different ways. Some people need allergy medication, some people need hip-replacement surgery, and some people need insulin. The health insurance plans handle all of those individual transactions. But now, thanks to Hobby Lobby, closely held corporations can say, “Actually, we don’t want the insurer to provide these forms of birth control. So don’t pay for them.”
Sure, the employee has $50 in cold hard cash, but that cash is already being used to pay for rent, food, clothes, and health care (because you still have to pay a co-pay out of pocket for a lot of care). Many people simply can’t afford to buy that birth control out-of-pocket (that stuff is EXPENSIVE).
They were promised a health plan worth about 40% of their total compensation that would provide for their medical needs, including birth control. But those companies aren’t providing their employees with birth control or an extra bonus in cash now that they won’t provide those methods of birth control. Therefore, their employees are being unfairly denied their compensation.
This is not a person of faith being forced to pay for birth control. This is a company providing compensation to an employee, and the employee choosing to spend that compensation on their medical needs. If a company isn’t allowed to determine how I spend my paycheck, it shouldn’t be allowed to determine how I use my health insurance.
Myth #2: This decision only impacted a few forms of birth control. It’s not a big deal.
Nope, nope, nope. The Supreme Court didn’t just say that excluding those forms of birth control was okay. They established a legal precedent which could have devastating long term consequences.
First of all, this won’t just affect Hobby Lobby. 90% of all corporations in the U.S. are “closely held,” and they employ about 52% of the American workforce. Millions of Americans could be denied the birth control they need.
And we’re not just talking about a few forms of birth control. The Supreme Court has ordered several appeals courts to review cases in which employers object to all forms of birth control using the Hobby Lobby decision. Their legal precedent may allow some companies to refuse to provide all forms of birth control to their employees.
Furthermore, this decision could affect a myriad of things beyond birth control. The decision specifically says that their reasoning wouldn’t apply to things like blood transfusions and vaccinations, which some religious individuals oppose, but gave no particular reason why not. A future court could decide this distinction is arbitrary and allow employers to refuse to provide these services too.
The court also said this decision wouldn’t necessarily allow employers to discriminate against employees based on race, but what about sexual orientation or gender identity? The Hobby Lobby decision could provide the legal justification for 90% of corporations employing 52% of the workforce to request an exemption from non-discrimination protections by claiming those protections are against their religious beliefs.
I agree with Justice Ginsburg, the majority decision stepped into a legal minefield.
by Ursula K. LeGuin
On Tuesday night, the Sci Fi Channel aired its final installment of Legend of Earthsea, the miniseries based—loosely, as it turns out—on my Earthsea books. The books, A Wizard of Earthsea and The Tombs of Atuan, which were published more than 30 years…
I completely lost my shit at the monster named Vah-Coom.
please be courteous this 4th. of July if you have a veteran in your neighborhood
This is something very very important which I’ve never thought about until now
My dad used to have issues with mortar smoke - remember it’s not just the noise that can be a problem.
Yes, I’m afraid it’s true. /:
I wish I could fight for equality with them, instead of next to them. I wish there was an S for “Straight” in the acronym. The acronym means being proud for your sexuality after all, doesn’t it? Hm…
Well, I still have my straight pride! Even if those of the LGBT community do not want my identity in their acronym, I can still be a proud ally and heterosexual! :)
I know right it’s so sad what a struggle straight people have
“Why can’t STRAIGHT people be part of the LGBT?! I’m an ally.”
No you aren’t.
If you don’t understand why straight people are not part of the initialism, then you are so far from being and ally it’s a laughable concept.