FOX News did it again. They aired the admittedly compelling story of a couple in richer-than-thou Minnetonka, who experienced a carjacking out of their own garage just before the noon hour.
The man said this is where he puts the blame, as far as how in the world, or at least Minnesota, this could happen: The Hennepin County D.A. does not prosecute carjackers, he claimed on national television.
So if you’re a crook, you know where to live … Of course, the man basically got his analysis wrong, even if he could say he was pressed by the TV interviewer. Much more on how to avoid the same, careful on what you repeat, fate is down below. Concrete tips for getting it right.
Thus, as in my clarification on his behalf: In the Minneapolis area, during a three-day sting on carjackers, 46 were arrested, but only five charged, and they all made bail. Why? It can take the courts months for the innocent-until-proven-guilty factor to move forward. I cite a friend who with our overworked courts — the real problem here — is waiting for most of a year to fix, in what should take a judge less then a minute, when the government screwed up and put a typo in his name on his ID card. Oh, they are holding onto his $200 court filing fee until then. I digress, but those who were let out were almost certainly those who do it in a nonviolent way — as if people give up their cars without a fight ensuing — or ones where there was just not that much stolen property money at stake.
That sting and its resulting charges, or lack of them, was reported on TV stations after only a three-week period had passed, it should be noted.
Of this playing out on your fingers, mainly drug crimes were targeted. Go figure. Just take up most of the court time and have it used to pinch those who smoked a joint or two. Oh wait a minute, that now is legal. Will the court backlog now ebb?
Should it really be a surprise that rich Minnetonka was targeted, not the inner city? Near the noon hour, when the working execs return for a long, as they can take it, lunch more than hour? People don’t steal beaters, rather killer Corvettes, as people with means can possess.
There is a fix, a solution, at least to the accuracy of the (bad) information that is repeated and repeated. And what is actually the case, regarding the Minnetonka case, became evident to me on easy google search of just a minute or two. That much time you have, for a quick fact check.
I will now reference two of my sources who are deep throats. Do we all have more than one?
This from Unnamed And In Confidence Source Close To The Situation 1, who works in both corporate and as a bartender, so both sides of the aisle, so to speak: Everyone, no matter how busy chasing the American Dream, has five minutes to spend. It probably took you longer to spew your misinformation?
And that Q source 2? (Much older but still keeping it together, and wiser than I). On my thesises she said, well duh, doesn’t everyone out there just automatically know such things? Guess it again, depends on which side of the aisle.
So as to what she said, to fix the carjacking lag in processing: We would have to hire more prosecutors, and/or have those there take a pay cut.
As it was, two straight years of five percent pay hikes were proposed for such workers, but was there a backlash, as it would be taxpayer money?
I’m sure the city’s resident average pay is much higher than that for prosecutors.
Their own municipal workers, in Minnetonka, make a lot less than many.
So is the message, that is it OK for you and yours to make six figures, but they should settle for five? And maybe a lower five, not higher five.
With that money of salaries being saved, the best (fiscally?) feasible outcome might be for people who can afford it to buy great home security. Sorry, I really am, that the realities of the court system make you further get out your wallet.
A cavaet …
I think that these days there is so much information out there, that it just isn’t possible to first fact-check everything you say to someone. So what to do?
If a leading figure is making claims that seem senseless, the listener probably leaped to what they wanted to here, reading more into it and making the actual truth conform.
The Osbourne factor.
First, another way music can showcase the problem. Do you really think Ozzy just plain bit off the head of a bat? Does that thought seem reasonable? Turns out there is much more to the story then that. And what is it? Its complicated actually. Or can’t be covered in a simple sound byte. And that is the problem. And problems result in our country because over here in the U.S. in such situations, lets call it what it is, we are just butt ass stupid.
Then I heard the song Stargazer by Rainbow, about a powerful wizard who enslaves the masses to build him a high tower so he can fly, but he falls instead of rising. (A Tower of Babel reference?) It didn’t end well. But brought the point home. (As coincidentally did the Ozzy Osbourne with Black Sabbath song, The Wizard.) Be careful in what (potentially preposterous statement or claim) you believe, or vouch for as truth.
A causal factor: Most think they can skim content well, but most do it very badly, with poor comprehension of the majority of the sentences and even more problems in their recall, and it shoots them and all of us in the foot. The information they put out there is tainted.
So if a leader is making claims that seem senseless …
We’ve all been there and done that. Its human nature, so don’t kick yourself too much. Just learn from it, for the next time. That insight becomes kick ass.
So this becomes the new golden rule: Does it pass the smell test?
What parts do?
With the conclusions made that drugs contributed to the above crimes, it was unclear, from what I read, if this was possession, use or intent to distribute, or all of the above. So the message inadvertently being sent to carjackers? Get sobered up and uncoked for a few days before going on your spree.
On these five, a few people got out on cash-free bail, it was reported. That could be a valid criticism of the system, and it should be noted it often just dumps very low-level drug offenders into the probation cycle and lets the P.O.’s clean up the remainder. It could be that mitigated by the idea that these people were first timers, non-violent offenders, the case was not clearcut, or even that they just needed money to survive on. Maybe crimes against property such as your Porsche, moreso than people, even though they too have owners staunchly effected.
I know, I will be painted as soft on crime, when I am actually just a realist, by those people where painting everyone with the same brush is their only intellectual recourse. Nuance? Schmuance.
The Minnetonka case appears to be different than some others in that violence was used. And there was one of the four suspects in custody quickly; I’ll watch with interest to see if the legal beagles cut him any slack.
So when to repeat …
Don’t quote what someone says as gospel unless you know them well enough to trust that they got it right — or at least all, or the most vital, facets of it. Go beyond if they present themselves well, since they could just be smooth talkers, although even that is not just automatically a crime. I for one, respect a very well-reasoned argument even if I do not agree with all of it. Do I find it logically formed in their mind? A therefore B therefore C, without making a leap of (lack of) faith and having there be a hole in their argument. It’s amazing how much (mis)information does not pass that simple test.
If you are not that far along with your source, and are repeating second-hand information, simply present it as so. No one these days can fault you for not verifying everything you hear. Its like using the overstated word “allegedly.” It leaves some room for doubt, or at least nuance. Make distinctions in the individual details when composing your elaborate justifications.
I will give you an example of my synopsis. It is a moderate Christian music reactor and social commentator named Vin. If he quotes anything from the Bible to Shakespeare to C.S. Lewis, I believe him. I may not go quite that far with his political commentary, although I would place myself largely in his same (pseudo-intellectual) camp. Again, distinctions.
These are things where my friend from Minnetonka failed on most accounts, with his blatant mischaracterization of the stance of the D.A. Again, and I have to say it, so Republican and/or conservative.
Or they can go to Kowalski’s less. But there has been a greater community benefit to the high-end chain’s production of better food, with great use of more ingredients and their preparation, such as in the deli. With that higher profit margin, in a relative way, allowed by its well-healed customers from ritzy areas, the grocer can afford to donate massively to food pantries.