Because Laker fans visit this site
by SinceRunTMC760 on Jun 3, 2009 12:41 PM PDT
138 comments
Do you whole-heartedly support any of the following examples of being a fan?
-Supporting players and their questionable marital infidelity, some have even called it rape.
- Your secondary superstar running the second greatest coach in the history of the NBA and his absolute beast of a center, one of the top five of all-time, out of town?
- Holding an entire franchise hostage while being vague and immature during free agent negotiations and once signing adding a player option to opt out in 5 years? Does that sound like dedication to a city?
- Killing a previous championship coach, Rudy Tomjonavich, half way through the year because a spoiled brat squashed any chances of signing or luring any prospective free-agents to L.A. with his ludicrous contract?
- That said spoiled brat demanding trade after trade from the city that he saddled himself with by demanding to wanting to win it by himself. The moping, the sad-puppy faces, incessant bus-throwing, aloof nature towards the media and his management didn't even start to slow until the acquisition of Paul Gasol.
Face it: You answered yes to every question and therefor if you are even loosely considered a fan you are a bad one at best.
Side note: Does Jerry West get a percentage of every Gasol L.A. jersey sold to the souless? What a brilliant retirement plan; we all know L.A. fans and teams love to toss their money at questionable purchases- see Ramirez, Manny.
The simple fact is casual, fair-weather L.A. fans and the masses of uninformed, ignorant Laker fans deserve each other. After Magic Johnson retired the Lakers realized they had lost the only identity they had ever had, a winner that finally toppled the Celtics and dominated for roughly ten years. The loss of a winning culture trickled down to the fans and without any champion to root for they all bought Chicago Bulls hats and quietly forgot about the Lakers and their lost glory.
Enter Shaq, a force so dominant that it took Ewing, Robinson, and Olajowon to decline before he even got a whiff of a championship. (Oh, and those Bryant airballs against Utah didn't help much either).
You guys had something to root for again, a team very much taking advantage of the talent lull of for it's era, after a lockout put the NBA on life support. Your identity was that of a team barely good enough to beat a Chris Weeber-led Sacramento Kings squad. A team that faced the likes of the senior citizen aged Smits and Mutombo in the back-to-back finals. A team that beat the New Jersey Nets, a squad that had no business even competing for a championship. A team that teemed with self-loathing and brooded with inner-jockeying for dominance and glory.
While this transpired you smiled and flew gay little Lakers flags from your Exteras, flags that disappeared about five years ago and re-emerged last year mysteriously. You sat in traffic in L.A. after leaving early from games you attended as nothing more that an exercise in showing everyone your social status by way of what seats you could afford. You left early and you'll always leave early, just like your team. Just look at game 6 of last years finals.
You truly deserve each other.
GO MAGIC!
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
3 recs |
138 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Can’t argue with that!
Go Magic!
by insanenthemembrane on Jun 3, 2009 1:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This.
Excellent user name btw.
Rafael Rodriguez: #8 on our list, n/a on a stat sheet.
BBk supports Sleepy's Law: "As a hoops discussion grows longer, the probability of an absurd trade proposal involving LeBron James approaches 1."
by BrianBokake on Jun 3, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Luck the Fakers!
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Jun 3, 2009 1:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice rant.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 3, 2009 1:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Supporting players and their questionable marital infidelity, some have even called it rape
Meh, I dunno its tough to really dislike Kobe or the Lakers on this alone. MJ and Bonds both cheated on their wives and it didn’t have much affect on how much I rooted for them. Some call it rape, yes, but frankly the charges seemed pretty suspicious from the start, the case fell apart completely, and he was never convicted. I think its important for Laker haters to remember this, would it not drive us crazy if it were a Warrior in that position? I’m not saying you have to like Kobe or respect him or even respect his game. The charade with him and his wife makes me pretty nauseous, and I gotta admit it is pretty tempting to scream “rapist” when he hits a big shot, but I think we should try to refrain.
Sorry to temporarily rain on the Laker-hating parade, the rest of your points are valid. Carry on. Make the world a better place, punch Sasha Vujacic in his ugly rat face!
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 3:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Katz used a high profile case to draw attention to and raise awareness for his very noble cause. So what?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
here's what
This is not a case of infidelity – this was a criminal case of a violent attack on a young woman by a rich celebrity. Prosecutors only reluctantly dropped the case – they had strong evidence and wanted to go to trial. It is completely fallacious to suggest the case was “pretty suspicious from the start” as it was one of the most thoroughly investigated crimes in the state’s history both by law enforcement and the media alike.
The victim was bringing the case despite strong media backlash and leaks of her name to the press at her expense, she was strong up to the point when the judge ruled her previous intimate relationships would be open to scrutiny in a public courtroom. So, rather than suggest “the case fell apart completely” we should do well to remember that only in order to protect her privacy, and the privacy of her family and friends, she backed down. In short, she was intimidated from taking the case forward because her family and friends were also going to be victimized by Bryant in the form of his well-paid lawyers. (Bryant spent over $12m in his defense.) That ruling is not consistent with rape trials throughout the states by the way, Colorado’s “rape shield” law would usually protect the complainant in a rape case from such disclosures. Kobe’s celebrity status and well oiled lawyers were the difference.
Here’s what Bryant had to say after the charges were dropped and he was safe from prosecution:
“I want to apologize to her for my behavior that night and for the consequences she has suffered in the past year,” the statement said. "Although this year has been incredibly difficult for me personally, I can only imagine the pain she has had to endure. I also want to apologize to her parents and family members, and to my family and friends and supporters, and to the citizens of Eagle, Colorado.
“Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52941-2004Sep1.html
He apologized and recognized it was not consensual – after he was safe from prosecution. You’re right, he was not convicted, he bought his freedom through intimidation after the fact.
What a man.
We can only hope our mothers, wives, sisters, daughters and friends are treated better than she was. The Bryant case makes that less likely however.
by hardcore on Jun 3, 2009 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Thank you for that
I always bring that up to the Laker fans up here that the statement:
"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did."
Means RAPE.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 3, 2009 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
We can only hope our mothers, wives, sisters, daughters and friends are treated better than she was. The Bryant case makes that less likely however.
well said. this isn’t a matter of being a lakers fan or a warriors fan. this is a matter of what money can buy you in our legal system and was a slap in the face of women and justice minded men all across the nation.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 3, 2009 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
She was a dirty whore looking to capitalize on his fame and money. It was all BS. By case fell apart he meant, she was found with a bunch of dudes semen/pubic hair DNA all over her.
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
she was a hotel desk clerk
… lured to a room by a rich, famous customer, where she was assaulted – by his own admission now, without her consent. The fact that she might have slept with her boyfriend or lover the night before does not rule out what Kobe did.
by hardcore on Jun 3, 2009 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
see I fall right in between you guys….an objective look at the evidence available to us really doesn’t look particularly great for either side, but are we not then obligated to assume innocence?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
acknowledging that she “did not view [the] incident the same way [he] did,” kobe is essentially admitting guilt. if one party believes the encounter was consensual, and the other does not, that is rape. there isn’t a vote on it, with ties to be broken in a court of law.
i understand that he was just delivering a canned apology in that situation, but if nothing else, his lawyers should have talked with him and made him understand the gravity of that statement and that it contributes to a culture that views rape as a misunderstanding rather than an assault.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 3, 2009 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
this was a pretty well vetted case in the media sam, you can read the article I provided or any other of copious articles detailing the assault – some even describe the details all the way to the type of chair he pinned her down by holding her neck in his massive hands … there’s plenty of evidence in the public realm whether or not the trial was ever completed, including his apology and acknowledgment that she did not consent
by hardcore on Jun 3, 2009 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
there’s also plenty of evidence in the public realm that Kobe’s “victim” had multiple other partners in the 24 hour period leading up to the incident and, by several accounts, had a rather promiscuous reputation. Again this does not prove her “guilt” in the same way that the “evidence” you’ve presented does not prove Kobe’s, but it does shed quite a bit of doubt on your portrayal of her as simply a “hotel clerk lured to a room by rich famous customer where she was assaulted.” Regardless of the details what occurred was wrong, I don’t want to get into a huge back and forth where I’m defending a man I despise, I just think the practice of throwing very serious and unproven allegations around can be a dangerous one.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
neither prior partners nor promiscuous rumors have any bearing on incident from a legal standing – either he sexually assaulted her or he didn’t, and the fact is he apologized and he acknowledged it wasn’t consensual after he was safely our of legal danger … funny how no one brings up his promiscuity to question his character or believability but you are quick to use rumors about the victim (no quotes) against her in the same case – saying it doesn’t prove her guilt (?!) … I swear, you never read anything I bring to your attention … suit yourself, believe what you want …
by hardcore on Jun 3, 2009 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well technically Kobe’s apology also doesn’t have any bearing on the incident from a legal standing…..I said Kobe is a scumbag, and I don’t trust him at all. That doesn’t mean he is a rapist. Does it not seem at least seem odd that a young woman who would consent to having multiple sexual partners in one day would be raped by a rich and famous celebrity that same day? I’m just saying that since there is some pretty damning evidence on both sides and he was not convicted isn’t it more than a little presumptuous for us to assume his guilt just as it would be to assume that she was guilty of making a serious false accusation?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Have you never heard of innocent until proven guilty?
The onus is on the accuser to PROVE something. You bring up Kobe’s promiscuity, yet none of those other incidents have resulted in a rape charge.
Promiscuity suggests that one often enjoys consensual sexual encounters. Whether or not Kobe has sex with 7 women a night does not have any bearing on the rape. In fact, it would suggest that Kobe has plenty of sexual experience and would be more likely to recognize a good “No” from a bad “No.”
If she was promiscuous, then she has sex often. If she has sex often, why is she only charging the rich celebrity with rape? There’s certainly motive for her to lie about it.
There’s this thing they have in court, where you can’t convict somebody unless you know they did something “without a doubt”. If she had indeed had sex with multiple other people within a 24 hour period, that would easily cast doubt on whether or not she’s being truthful in saying it was non-consensual, whether or not the bruises actually came from Kobe, etc.
Is Kobe a scumbag? Yes. Did he rape her? I don’t know. Would a jury have convicted him? Doubtful. But I’d rather have 10 “misunderstanding rapists” out there walking the streets than having 1 innocent man/woman behind bars for a crime they didn’t commit. Maybe that’s because I’ve never been raped. But people who’ve had family members murdered probably feel the same way about somebody getting off a murder charge. But would you really rather put innocent people behind bars or worse? That’s the way our justice system is built. If you don’t like it, go live somewhere where you’re guilty until proven innocent.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 4, 2009 6:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are so many posters here who prefer to argue and type than read it is almost mind boggling. Despite providing two links, several posters seem not to have any clue as to the type of crime rape is, the statistics which have been gathered, nor acknowledge the undue influence Kobe’s status and affluence made in intimidating the victim by threatening to expose her past lovers and her family in public. If we have any one on GSoM with experience prosecuting cases, perhaps that would be a more expert source for us to consult. That so few are willing to take a moment and become familiar with information so readily made available is disheartening.
DFiB, I agree: should any of us be accused of a crime, we all have the right to our day in court, face our accuser and be tried by a jury of our peers – no argument.
I believe we’d also agree that should any of us be the victims of a crime, we all have the right to bring our case to trial and accuse the perp.
Where we seem to part ways:
(1) we should also be held to no greater or lesser standard than the perp in terms of reputation for promiscuity. Whereas you cite Kobe’s promiscuity as providing him some type of wisdom for discerning a good no from a bad no, in the same vein the victim should be granted the same degree of wisdom and she said: NO.
(2) It is irrelevant that she had sex with someone else previously, just as it is irrelevant that Kobe had other infidelities – according yourself.
(3) Prosecutors were bringing a strong case to trial, they were confident. Usually rape cases never reach trial, but more often than not the ones that do result in guilty verdicts. On that basis, we can disagree that the conviction was doubtful.
(4) I am not convicting Kobe. This is not a courtroom, it is a blog. I am simply replying to sam23’s response to SinceRunTMC760’s post. I believe he is guilty and am basing my judgment based on the statistical facts concerning rape cases, the reports of the case and Kobe’s own apology. That is all any of us can do because he was successful in avoiding prosecution. You believe he is innocent until proven guilty, I believe he used his status and affluence to intimidate the victim and bought his freedom.
Your rapier wit and penchant for constructing other hypothetical arguments to support your case are neither instructive nor effective. It’s fallacious. It would be easy for me to do likewise, putting your sister or lover in the scenario for example.
Neither is your attempt to put words in other people’s mouths a tasteful tactic if your effort was to be convincing to someone holding an opposing viewpoint. These are tactics to deflect the argument from the facts and bully others on line.
By the way to any one who is reading, if you are ever in a similar situation you might listen to the NO.
by hardcore on Jun 4, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
(1) we should also be held to no greater or lesser standard than the perp in terms of reputation for promiscuity. Whereas you cite Kobe’s promiscuity as providing him some type of wisdom for discerning a good no from a bad no, in the same vein the victim should be granted the same degree of wisdom and she said: NO.
It’s not a standard. It’s how different things relate differently to a situation.
(2) It is irrelevant that she had sex with someone else previously, just as it is irrelevant that Kobe had other infidelities – according yourself.
This is simply not true. It does not constitute hard evidence, but it is certainly character evidence, or whatever you want to call it. It casts doubt on her statements because she has had sex with many people and has not prosecuted any of them for rape. What’s different this time? The fact that she had sex with a rich man.
(4) Kobe’s apology was a public statement in response to her public statement that it was rape. Publicly, she has said it was rape, thus if he continues to say “she knows it was consensual,” he’s calling her a liar and keeping the “who’s telling the truth” question open. By not further denouncing her, he’s letting the thing end. It’s PR, it is not an admission of guilt. Stop blowing it out of proportion. Do you really think Kobe said something like that without passing it by his PR team after spending $12M on a trial defense (and $4M on a ring for his wife and whatever he paid off the woman)? Making the statement the way he did was the quickest way to put the whole thing behind him. End of story. Don’t read anything more into it.
Your rapier wit and penchant for constructing other hypothetical arguments to support your case are neither instructive nor effective. It’s fallacious. It would be easy for me to do likewise, putting your sister or lover in the scenario for example.
Your “example” would include the rape of a woman as you imagine it occuring. That is something that A) Didn’t necessarily occur, and B) Neither you or I will ever know how it actually occurred. That’s kinda the definition of fallacy, isn’t it?
I’m sorry if you can’t see the correlations I’m trying to make, and I’m sorry if my attempts at humor are not received well on your part. I find this is consistent with people who disagree with the statements I’m trying to make and support. I’m used to it.
By the way to any one who is reading, if you are ever in a similar situation you might listen to the NO.
What similar situation is that? Do you know what happened? Do you know the intimate details of who’s telling the truth, who’s lying, and who misremembers? Unless you were there that night taking detailed notes, I’m guessing that you don’t. Stop assuming you know everything just because you read something that somebody wrote in a newspaper. Guess what? Newspaper writers/reporters/editors have biases too; their bias is to sell newspapers. Have you watched CNN recently? Fox News? It’s all about who’s got the scoop, who’s got the better details. Who cares if it’s backed up by multiple sources, if you waste time finding those you’ll lose the scoop to a competitor.
I’m sure Kobe lied about a number of things and I’m sure the woman lied about a number of things. The difficulty is figuring out who lied about what and neither you or I will ever know.
All I know is that she withdrew the charge, ostensibly because she “didn’t want her friends’ and family’s names dragged through the mud.” We’ll never know the truth, so stop acting like you do.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 4, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I read everything you linked, but nothing there that in any way proved Kobe’s guilt. There is still more than enough evidence available to cast enough doubt to presume innocence, so accusing us of not wanting to read seems a bit hypocritical.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 4, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
according to the best evidence available to us:
The material from the sheriff’s department included 354 pages of court filings; lists of evidence — mostly clothing, hair, fiber, blood and other bodily fluids; and transcripts of interviews with witnesses, Bryant and the woman. … The evidence includes a T-shirt of Bryant’s stained with the woman’s blood.
regarding whether there was enough to convict:
After the woman said she wouldn’t testify in the criminal case, prosecutors dismissed the felony sexual assault charge against Bryant on Sept. 1. District Attorney Mark Hurlbert said at the time he believed a jury would have convicted Bryant, but only if the woman was willing to testify.
regarding Kobe’s character and honesty:
Bryant also admitted to frequent similar encounters with another woman named “Michelle,” who could testify that he also held her from behind. Bryant, who had been married for two years and had a 5-month-old daughter, said his wife did not know about the other woman.
and, this:
During the interview, Bryant initially denied having sex with the woman, then changed his account, saying she initiated it after the investigators told him they had physical evidence indicating the two had sex. ….
regarding the woman’s character, and honesty:
The then-19-year-old woman said she and Bryant kissed for several minutes in his room before he became aggressive and began groping her.
The woman said he put both his hands around her neck and after bending her over a chair, removed one hand to pull down her underwear.
Regarding “NO”
The woman, who was a front desk employee and had given Bryant a tour of the Cordillera resort, said he put both his hands around her neck and after bending her over a chair, removed one hand to pull down her underwear.
“At that point I was just kind of scared and I said `No’ a few times,” she told the detectives at the sheriff’s office about 12 hours after the incident.
Investigator Doug Winters then asked how she knew that Bryant heard her.
“Because every time I said `No’ he tightened his hold around me,” she replied.
She said she cried during the encounter, and was scared he would hurt her. …
… Winters said Bryant grabbed the woman by the neck hard enough to leave a small bruise on her jaw, bent her over a chair and pulled down her underwear.
So, in addition to bruising her neck, and having her blood on his shirt, Bryant lied to investigators then changed his story when the physical evidence was presented. He admitted to holding her by the neck and over the back of the chair:
Bryant said he held her by the neck from behind, she lifted her dress and bent over a chair, and they had sex. He said he stopped after she refused to let him do something he requested.
When investigators told Bryant the woman had experienced bleeding, he said he was surprised because he hadn’t noticed any blood. The shirt he was wearing, which he gave to the investigators, was later found to be stained with the woman’s blood.
Winters has said the woman cried during the act and said “no” at least twice. He also said Bryant told her to go into his bathroom to clean herself up before she left, and that bellman Bobby Pietrack told investigators she seemed upset and her clothes and hair were disheveled when she left work that night.
as for who was looking for a quick settlement:
He told the investigators he was concerned about damage to his marriage, his career and his image if word of the rape allegation got out.
“Is there any way I can settle this, whatever it is?” Bryant asked.
“Well, what do you mean by settle?” Winters replied.
“If my wife, if my wife found out that anybody made any type of allegations against me she would be infuriated,” Bryant said.
DFiB & sam23, and anyone else who wants to say we can’t convict Kobe – you’re right. My guess is Kobe may have had a semi-regular experience with “Michelle” and when he tried to force that experience upon the 19 yr old, she said No and he went ahead anyway. You can parse it differently. DFiB, you’re right, we’ll never know beyond what the best evidence available tells us and Kobe’s a free man.
all quotes from: http://www.cbsnews.com
by hardcore on Jun 4, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Well that was a very fair presentation of all the evidence. Mentioning how Bryant changed his story but leaving out the parts where she changed her story. Mentioning the bellman who said she looked upset but not the hotel employee who said she looked normal afterwards. The blood “stain” was naked to the invisible eye, and there was expert testimony (either testimony or going to testify) that this could easily be consistent with her having multiple partners over such a short time period, etc. Bryant also claimed she gave him oral sex before they started having sex – she initially denied it then changed her story later that he made her kiss “it” after they were done. Obviously who knows how accurate that is, but if the oral sex is accurate that could suggest she did initiate it.
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
*invisible to the naked eye, got a little ahead of myself…
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
since you guys talked about it in detail...
my theory is that there was flirtation there. why would you go back to a professional athlete’s hotel room for any other reason? anyway, without going into details, i think the beginning was consensual. kobe probably got a little too aggressive during the encounter which was the girl didn’t appreciate. therefore, we got the rape case…
i oddly believe both sides. i believe that after a certain point, kobe still thought it was consensual and the girl thought otherwise. i don’t think either is lying about that. i think it’s more a commentary on kobe’s perceptional ability and social skills as much as anything.
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a lot of problems with this...
why would you go back to a professional athlete’s hotel room for any other reason?
Maybe Kobe called the front desk and said “Hey, bring me a cheeseburger and have [insert woman’s name here] bring it up.” Maybe she knew he’d give a good tip for room service, especially if she was nice and stuff. Who knows. There are more reasons to go to a guest’s room when you WORK AT THE HOTEL than to have sex with them.
i oddly believe both sides. i believe that after a certain point, kobe still thought it was consensual and the girl thought otherwise. i don’t think either is lying about that. i think it’s more a commentary on kobe’s perceptional ability and social skills as much as anything.
As cap’t hack pointed out: if, at any point, it because non-consensual, it’s rape. It doesn’t matter if he’s just being stupid about it and not “getting the signals.” If there were signals and he ignored them, it’s rape. Maybe it’s not “kept in an underground hole for 5 years” rape, but still rape nonetheless.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 5, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Supposedly she was giving him a tour of the hotel, so bringing him back to his room seems like it could be a normal part of that…
by Missing Barry on Jun 5, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There you go
A perfectly non-sexual reason to go to a client’s room.
Although, if she showed him around the hotel she was sending pretty clear “I want you” signals. At least, that’s how I used to show interest in a woman back in college, give them a tour of the frat.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 5, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i never said it was or it wasn't
i don’t want to be the judge of that. reading a wikipedia entry doesn’t give anyone enough information to judge that. im just saying that kobe has a lack of perceptional skills so i’m not calling out his apology because whatever you want to call it, i actually believe that kobe is telling the truth. he probably thought it was consensual. that doesn’t mean he did or didn’t rape her. it just means that i really don’t think kobe knew. it was a commentary on kobe’s social skills.
this is exactly why i didn’t want to comment on the issue cause it will just turn into a long winded debate that i don’t care to have.
but honestly, a young girl giving a professional athlete a tour of the hotel and then entering his room (nowhere says she was forced into the room) is just too suspicious for me. again, i don’t want to jump to any concrete conclusions, but i’m just saying. you’re making assumptions one way and i’m making assumptions the other way. either way it doesn’t matter. its over and really has nothing to do with the original post about fandom.
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
a young girl giving a professional athlete a tour of the hotel and then entering his room (nowhere says she was forced into the room) is just too suspicious for me.
I don’t see how it’s suspicious when she WORKS THERE. It’s her job to schmooze back at high profile clients if they start schmoozing with her. It’s her job to make sure they’re happy so that they’ll come back, give the hotel a good reputation, tell their friends, etc. It could have easily been purely a business dealing. Was it? Doesn’t look like it, but you can’t just paint a broad picture of “young girl goes into Kobe’s room” when that young girl works at the hotel.
I’m not making assumptions, I’m just commenting on your assumptions. I posed a few hypothetical situations, always prefaced with “maybe” or “if” that provided a single plausible instance where your blanket analysis of the situation would be false. The fact that my hypothetical situations are POSSIBLE means your statements suggesting that “she was up to no good and put herself in a bad situation” inherently wrong, unless of course, you know exactly what happened… in which case this is all moot.
If you think Kobe really believes that she doesn’t think it was consensual (consensual implies consent during the occurance, not afterwards, that’s called “regret”), then if he’s telling the truth when he says “I now see that she didn’t think it was consensual”, then that’s rape. As I said, not super-duper-extreme rape, but rape nonetheless.
Furthermore, yeah… Kobe Bryant, the man who’s been in the national spotlight for 15 years now and has had girls in LA and across the country fawning all over him during that period doesn’t have any social skills. Sure, I believe that. By the way, do you have any cousins that are Nigerian princes? The last few I’ve signed up with didn’t really pan out.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 5, 2009 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol i'm over this
yes, in a case where so many things are unclear you can make assumptions either way. i’m making assumptions that both kobe and the girl are responsible for the situation whereas you seem to think that the girl is not responsible. i personally thought it was suspicious she entered the room. i’m making an assumption there that she had an idea where that was going. you’re saying that it was part of the job description—so what? we each draw our own conclusions. i don’t understand why you’re trying so hard to convince me of your point of view. the incident was 6-7 years ago. nothing is going to change and i really don’t care too much about the incident as i don’t really care for kobe off the court and the incident didn’t involve my family or friends.
i keep saying—i never said kobe didn’t rape her. again i don’t want to be the judge of that. i don’t have enough information to know. i’m just commenting on his apology. there is the legal principle that states “ignorance of the law excuses no one”. i’m not saying kobe didn’t break the law. i’m just saying he was ignorant to it (not the law but the fact that he was breaking it).
finally, i mean social skills as in how to deal with situations and people tactfully and with charisma. i firmly believe that kobe is underdeveloped in this area and could probably talk about for hours. i really don’t think kobe, despite his fame has adequately adapted to being able to deal with the media, fans and his self image the way most other superstars do. just being in a social setting doesn’t automatically give you social skills. furthermore as a wealthy, talented, professional athlete kobe really didn’t need social skills to get by. in fact, it probably hindered that growth. he’s was used to getting what he wanted when he wanted it. in turn, this probably got him into trouble in eagle, co.
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree
i think it falls somewhere in between. i doubt kobe is innocent of anything in this case but i doubt the girl was honest either. i don’t really feel like going into theories of what happened as this is a basketball site not a crime site. however, it was probably a bad situation all around. there were mistakes made by both parties which just turned out to be a case of who could spin their side to make them look better.
i don’t fault kobe for his apology. he probably wanted to apologize in a way to where he wouldn’t be vunerable to further attack from media and fans. he tried to take the middle ground or a halfway point in his apology and it still failed. this just proves you can’t make everyone happy whatever you do…
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not disputing Kobe being a complete scumbag. I’m simply saying that given that none of us know what happened and there was never a trial to determine what happened, dismissing Kobe as a rapist on the evidence available is pretty unfair.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know what I hate about Kobe? Black mamba. What a stupid nickname, and who came up with it anyways? Kobe? When did we start letting players come up with their own nicknames, that’s lame as hell (unless it’s Shaq ‘cause he’s funny). I’m tired of the media trying to force us to recognize that as his nickname.
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yep
kobe is so weak that he had to give himself his own nickname. i agree with u totally. i mean the fans gave dwight howard the superman nickname. that show you who has the “real” fans.
49er faithful since July 11, 1985
by J2daZ on Jun 3, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know...
kobe is so weak that he had to give himself his own nickname
that actually never came up in my mind. i always thought it was the dumbest nickname ever, and i knew he gave it to himself, but it NEVER clicked in my head that it’s kind of sad to give yourself a nickname meaning that you’re hella deadly.
Azubuike? More like Azucutie!
by goldenstatelove on Jun 4, 2009 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've had this discussion with some frineds of mine
And it doesn’t matter. If one of my favorite Warriors or any Warrior for that matter pulled a Kobe or M Vick I would no longer support the team as long as that player was on the team, just because a person is on your favorite team does not excuse the act. Cheating and forcing your self on some one are two different maters. If you thing Kobe is totally innocent that’s one thing but just because hes on your team should not matter in the least if you think the man forced himself on someone.
My 2 cent rant has concluded.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 3, 2009 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think Kobe’s innocent. I would take Kobe on my team, of course. That said, if I really believed he was a rapist, gotta agree with you that there’s no way I could root for him even if he was on my team…
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 6:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
also
the charges levied against Kobe and those Vick was guilty of are on two very different levels. I love dogs as much as just about anyone, but viciously murdering some pitbulls doesn’t really compare to rape. I can’t imagine he would have taken the court for any team again had he been found guilty.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 7:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
also
vick was convicted of a crime…
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and kobe bought his way out of a conviction.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 3, 2009 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So these mixed views people here have made me go read the wikipedia article about the incident. Dunno if there’s any more important knowledge I haven’t read, but based on wikipedia, I don’t see how anyone can feel confident they’re correct on either side…
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
kobe admitted his guilt after the trial was over. here’s the quote one more time:
"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did."
if she didn’t think it was consensual, it wasn’t. he acknowledged that she didn’t think it was consensual; that’s rape.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 3, 2009 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eh, doesn’t do it for me, sorry.
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
does it for you or not
if someone does not think the “sex” was consensual, that is rape.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 3, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just saying, in addition to all the other evidence I’ve now read, that statement doesn’t convince me that it wasn’t consensual. I don’t interpret it as admitted rape.
by Missing Barry on Jun 3, 2009 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you don’t want to look at that as a confession, that’s your call, but what we’re left with is this: he made a statement that at a bare minimum implies that he raped a woman and considering how rare false accusations of rape are and the rest of the evidence at hand, make it likely that he did commit rape.
the best you can say about kobe in this situation (if you believe he is “innocent”) is that he made an exceptionally stupid statement that contributes to a gross misunderstanding of what constitutes rape in america and through the court case, made it more difficult for any woman to come out and say that she was raped by a famous person, because now the wealth of the man in question can be used as “evidence” that she is a “gold digger”.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 3, 2009 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
wow
why doesnt anyone read the statement correctly?
“Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did.”
In his statement, he said that at the time of the encounter, he believed the sex was consensual, i.e. at the time he believed what he was doing was ok and did not have the intent to rape her. Intent is usually an element of the crime, a pretty important one at that. The fact that he said, in hindsight after all the litigation, that he now believes that she believes that is was not consensual does not equate to rape.
Plus…if there really was such a strong case against Kobe, if this lady really did want to see her attacker put in jail, I’m sure she would have put up with the media attention. The fact that “public pressure” made it too difficult is B.S. She got paid….that was enough for her.
By the way, I hate the Lakers and am not much of a Kobe fan. But come on, stop trying to skew the statements and blame the media.
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 12:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
thanks for proving the point about the gross misunderstanding of what constitutes rape in our culture.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 2:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for proving the gross misunderstanding of what constitutes a crime in our culture
When you plan out a murder, torture someone for 5 hours while making their family watch, it’s totally different from hitting a 75 year old jaywalking pedestrian with your car.
Or like how there’s a difference between walkig out of a grocery store with a jim jim in your pocket and buying some guns and ski masks, holding up the local bank, and taking hostages.
There are levels of crime that should get punished accordingly.
You’re painting it in black and white, when it’s simply not applicable. I bet you’ve hit a dog on the nose with a newspaper, maybe we should send you to jail for animal cruelty?
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 4, 2009 6:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In all fairness, cap’n hack has a point here. It doesn’t really matter if Kobe believed it was consensual or not – it’s rape if it wasn’t consensual. Period.
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
it does matter….in fact its the most important fact about that statement and really about the entire case
capnhack just hates kobe and therefore is painting the picture the way he is
have sex with someone tonight as long as you believe its consensual… then let her cry rape tomorrow
bet it would matter then
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“have sex with someone tonight as long as you believe its consensual… then let her cry rape tomorrow”
That’s a pretty messed up thing to say. If it’s not consensual, by definition, it’s rape. It isn’t a question of whether the accused “believed” it was consensual or not – it’s a question of whether or not it WAS consensual.
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
aint that black and white
determining when its consensual and when its not isnt always that easy. The point of my statement is that anyone can cry wolf, anyone can say “actually…i was forced to do something I didnt want to” simply for attention, money, retaliation…anything. It does matter if the accused believed it was consensual. Say for instances this woman went up to his room, wore revealing clothing, was touching him, flirting with him, started kissing him and then, as he made an advance, she said no. But he continued to be assertive and she simply gave in to desire. Does the fact that she said “no” define it as not consensual and therefore define the man as a rapist? What does her actions say about her intentions? It may come down to a he said she said type of argument, but what validates those arguments is what the accused/accuser believes and why they believe it. What occurred and what was said to make one person believe it was consensual and one person believe it was rape? Its a pretty important question to ignore. Maybe you’re right…if one person said it was not consensual then it is rape
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it is rape. not every instance of rape is a back-alley attack. in your instance, it is definitely rape. a person being confused about what the word “no” means does not excuse them from the crime. it would still be rape if she didn’t say a single word, but felt forced into having sex with him.
i’m not saying that they are equal in degree, but this is not a vote. the victim of a rape can often feel powerless to say anything, and the rapist might not know it wasn’t consensual, but it wasn’t. she was too scared to speak up. imagine if you were in prison, and someone raped you, but you know that if you said “hey, stop!” you get stabbed to death the next day. that’s still rape, even though you didn’t say no. we don’t know if kobe became violent in other ways in that hotel room and the girl felt to terrified to stop the advances. the whole idea that the only rape that occurs is the when someone grabs a woman on the street and physically forces her into sex. there are a lot of degrees to this horrific crime. all of them count as rape.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
typo: “the whole idea that… forces her into sex is ridiculous and dated”
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
um
first i never said or implied anything about rape only being “when someone grabs a woman on the street and physically forces her into sex” or “rape is a back-alley attack”
second, based on your argument, pretty much any sexual encounter can be considered rape. The scenario I provided basically laid out that the women was ready, willing and able. The fact that she said no can easily be misinterpreted as a sign of playing hard to get or a sign that she wanted it to be physical.
“a person being confused about what the word "no" means does not excuse them from the crime”. False. It certainly does, especially when all other actions considered lead one to believe that she did want to engage in sex as much as the other person
And this person certainly did not feel powerless the following day when she made the public outcry against Kobe, or when she reportedly had a sexual encounter with another man AFTER the so called rape, or when she decided that she no longer wanted to help the prosecution in the criminal trial even though she kept going with the civil trial
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that trial was such a blatant miscarriage of justice that you cannot possibly cite it as evidence against her. she had her name leaked illegally in an effort to paint her as a whore (exactly what you are doing now) and used kobe’s wealth as evidence that he could not have raped her and that she was a gold digger. it was disgusting.
and if the word “no” doesn’t qualify as expressing that sex isn’t consensual for you, i hope that you never meet any woman that i am related to, am friends with, have dated, or that i know exists, or that i don’t know exists, because that is so flatly terrible that i don’t know what to tell you. if someone says “no” and then you have sex with them and they tell you afterward that they didn’t want to have sex with you, that’s a really clear cut example of rape, no matter how “ready, willing, and able” she seemed to you.
her feeling empowered the following day is very different than her feeling powerless the night of. kobe wasn’t following her around, telling her to not go to the cops, but we have no idea if he acted violently in the hotel room or coerced her into having sex with him in some other way. what happened the next day doesn’t change that.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The action of rape is completely black and white. Either it was consensual or it wasn’t. That said, determining rape can be a big grey area as you said. If both sides are claiming something different, there are a lot of shades of grey as to what to believe. If all accounts are consistent that the alledged victim was consenting, then that’s one thing, but if the victim ever said the word “no”, regardless of the rest of her actions, that’s a black and white case of rape. If both sides acknowledge she said that, the accused IS going to jail.
As far as the Kobe case is concerned, my own take on it is I see a lot of grey areas where we just don’t know the facts, and I don’t see enough evidence in either direction to feel comfortable with making a judgement either way. I do believe in innocent until proven guilty, though, so….yeah.
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“let her cry rape tomorrow” is a statement that is just ignorant to how rape is perceived in this country. false accusations of rape are almost unheard of, so if someone says that the sex was not consensual, then in all likelihood, it wasn’t. confusion doesn’t absolve you.
try going into a court of law and telling a judge “sorry, i thought she wanted it” and see how fast you end up in prison. then look at the statement kobe made; they’re pretty close to the same thing.
my hatred for kobe came out of this court case. i merely found him to be an irritating member of a team i dislike. now he’s a likely rapist who plays basketball for the lakers. i’m allowed to hate that guy. anyone who cares about ending violence against women should hate him too.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
really?
do you really think that false rape accusations dont happen?What about a person who was raped but misidentifies the rapist?
Do you think, despite how casually you put it, that the “sorry, i thought she wanted it” isnt a defense?
Go ahead and hate kobe…i dont care much for the guy myself. But im not going to sit here and buy your black and white versions of crime and violence in the world.
I would hate kobe for what he did too….if we really knew he did it. Instead, all we know is that she, in all likely hood, recieved a huge settlement in the civil case and couldnt give a sh*t about seeing here attacker put in jail
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
she didn’t misidentify KOBE BRYANT. of course, mistaken identity happens, but it didn’t in this case and when a rape is reported, it almost always actually happened. it’s very difficult to stand up and say “i was raped” in america. there’s a lot of stigma behind it. people don’t cry wolf about it.
and no “sorry, i thought she wanted it,” is not a defense. not even close.
i don’t know that kobe did it, but based on the evidence at hand, he probably did. that’s enough for me to hate him, even if it wasn’t enough to throw him in jail.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
and no "sorry, i thought she wanted it," is not a defense. not even close. = ignorant. It happens. It can be a defense. There is no conceivable way you can sit there and say that there is never an instance where this applies, or where it is successfully argued
“when a rape is reported, it almost always actually happened”….so are you saying that there are instances when it doesnt happen?
I really hope you dont get to serve on a jury one day
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the fact that it “happens” doesn’t make it not rape. it certainly applies in terms of degree of the crime, but it should never absolve you from rape. that statement acknowledges that the sex you had was not consented to. that is rape. to say that ignorance makes it okay is disgusting.
and once again, there probably are a few cases of reported rape that were made up, but all the evidence suggests that it is extremely rare and that this is not one of those cases.
i’m not saying that kobe deserved the max penalty for rape, but if he had come out, delivered that exact same apology that he gave after the trial, but at the beginning of the trial, acknowledged that what happened qualifies as rape and sought to make amends, i’d be more apt to forgive him. and hopefully, the sentence of a brief stint in jail (length tbd based on the details of the night itself), a fine and community service would be huge step forward for the movement to make rape of all types much rarer and more easily prosecuted and would hopefully convince future rape victims to come forward. what happened instead was a travesty that achieved the opposite of that.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The big problem
With your assessment of guilt is motive. Kobe din’t go looking for sex, this girl came to him and apparently initiated it ?
That makes a big difference in their individual creditability to me. If he was not Kobe and was just some guy do you think it would be so investigated?
Who knows what really happened but I think they are both to blame for showing bad judgment.
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 4, 2009 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if she initiated the actual sex, then she would need to have consented. if she was just in an nba player’s hotel room and making out with him, that might not be good judgment, but it’s not her fault if she did not want to have sex with him and he coerced or forced her into it. that makes it rape. this girl was 19 and 19 year olds aren’t exactly known for their good judgment, but in this case, bad judgment and blame are very different.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 4, 2009 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
19 year olds aren’t exactly known for their good judgment
Or for their knowledge of right and wrong. Or their ability to resist forceful people (whether they be NBA players or prosecutors).
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 5, 2009 7:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't se the word "believed" in the statement
He still believes it…. just like he said. He just realizes that, you know since she decided to prosecute, she clearly doesn’t believe it was consensual.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 4, 2009 6:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't equating the two
just saying that there is a level of heinousness in which I will without question drop my support of any given team or player.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 3, 2009 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yea totally, I just meant to say that as long as Vick has served his punishment I’d take him back.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree 100%
If we refuse to accept convicts back into society after they’ve served the punishment that we, as a society, have decided is commensurate with their crime, what exactly is the point of our prison system? We should just lock them up forever (or maybe just execute all of them because it’d be cheaper).
We need to forgive once the punishment has been served. If the punishment is not sufficient, then it needs to be modified.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 4, 2009 7:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Somewhere along the way a bunch of people got it into their minds that the prison system is to keep criminals off the street. It’s not. It’s a punishment for a crime a person is convicted of for the sentence that crime carries, like you said…
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats true but isn’t part of the idea of the punishment that they lost the privilege of being a part of regular society for a while? In that way it is kinda “taking them off the streets.” I see what you’re saying though, there is a significant difference between the way people use “get em off our streets,” now and what the intended purpose of the prison system is.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 4, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It also seems to me when I hear that from people the way they call people criminals it’s like they’re lifetime criminals and all they’re going to do is commit crimes forever, and so we need to remove them from society. On your time, yeah, I think taking them off the streets for a while is beneficial – the hope is we have a system that properly punishes them, teaches them, and then puts them back in society in such a way as they can integrate back into society successfully.
This whole post has turned into some interesting, very non-basketball related conversations – didn’t anticipate discussing any of these topics on a Warriors blog…
by Missing Barry on Jun 4, 2009 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
– didn’t anticipate discussing any of these topics on a Warriors blog…
you obviously weren’t around last fall …
by hardcore on Jun 4, 2009 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ohhhh i miss getting free chalupas everytime the dubs scored 100. those were the days.
by dubsfan510 on Jun 5, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
unless you posted after the 100 mark
then no chalupas for you
and back in the day it was free pizza for a 120 pt game… good times…
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 5, 2009 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Somewhere along the way a bunch of people got it into their minds that the prison system is to keep criminals off the street.
That’s the immediate concern, stop the bleeding in our communities. Then assess the damage and try to repair it with rehabilitation. Doesn’t always work as we can see by the number of repeat offenders.
Punishment is a secondary concern after public safety, if we could send them to outer space I would be happy to let them off without punishment.
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 4, 2009 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
" Punishment is a secondary concern after public safety, if we could send them to outer space I would be happy to let them off without punishment."
Such a terrible way of looking at things. They’re people, too, and it’s not like “sending them to outer space” is going to end crime. The focus needs to be on rehabilitation and transforming those who have committed crimes into members of society that can add to our society without committing further crimes. We’re failing miserably at that.
by Missing Barry on Jun 5, 2009 6:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Such a terrible way of looking at things. They’re people, too, and it’s not like "sending them to outer space" is going to end crime.
I think you missed the key part about stop the hurting then re-rehabilitate? The one’s who won’t change are the one’s who draw the attention of the “punishment” freaks, and that’s where I say I’m not interested in punishment but solely on making our communities a safe place to live. Doesn’t have to be outer space, send them to a nice secure privatized jail in South America if you want, just don’t leave them here hurting good people over and over again. If a criminal has to die to keep an innocent victim from dying at his hands then that’s a trade off I’m willing to make. Which side are you on?
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 5, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, as Dubs fan in Boston said, the whole point of punishment is to prevent the behavior in the future. I’m not into punishment for punishment’s sake, rather in punishment to most effectively prevent the crime in the future. As for sides, I’m not on a side, I just recognize it’s America and our legal system is set up not to prevent a specific crime from happening, but rather to punish the person who commits it to try to prevent it in the future. Even if a person has an intent to commit a crime, you can’t punish them for it before they’ve actually committed it, like your quote would suggest:
“If a criminal has to die to keep an innocent victim from dying at his hands then that’s a trade off I’m willing to make”
Anyways, the whole “taking them off the streets” mentality hasn’t proved effective at making our community’s safer in the long run for a variety of reasons, and produces a lot of negative side effects like a bloated/expensive prison system, and we need to get away from it. The goal has to be preventing crime in the long-term to improve public safety, and getting back to a prison system based on punishment and rehabilitation is one of the ways we need to take to do that.
by Missing Barry on Jun 5, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn’t have to be outer space, send them to a nice secure privatized jail in South America
How about Cuba?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 5, 2009 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about Cuba?
Haha, Cuba’s got enough problems without taking on usa corporate interests too. They been there done that.
Since we’re sending our good jobs overseas we might as well send our crappy jobs over there too, so maybe Haliburton China prisons? or how about the new republic of Iraq state run contract prisons? Maybe we could get some pay back for all the money we’ve spent on them?
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 5, 2009 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s the immediate concern, stop the bleeding in our communities.
That’s really the only concern, both for society in general and for the offender in particular. To do this, you have to figure out why the incident occurred and then figure out a way to keep it from happening again.
When you have two children fighting in 3rd grade, you send them both to “time out” to let them cool off. This helps because:
A) They don’t like sitting in a corner
B) It gives them time to think about what they did that put them there
C) It carries a stigma and acts as a deterrent for their classmates
The punishment is a means to an end. If the offender could be prevented from doing the crime again in the future by a means other than “time out,” that action must be taken. It’s why we have the “insanity” defense, etc.
There is no point in punishment for punishment’s sake. Nor is there much need for capital punishment, like sending criminals to outer space. They are members of your society, whether you like it or not, and furthermore our justice system is imperfect, as noted above in the Kobe vs. Colorado case. Sometimes crimes don’t even get solved for a variety of reasons.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 5, 2009 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You weren't much of a Giants fan then, were you
Bay Area fan going to UCLA.
by Yoyo on Jun 3, 2009 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is a text I got from one of my girls in LA
It read…
“The Lakers turned off the Jazz, Blew Up the Rockets, and ate some Nuggets. Now it’s time to make some Magic DISAPPEAR! Let’s go Lakers!”
My response you ask?
“F*** You, Go WARRIORS!”
I then proceeded to explain that it was the WARRIORS plan all along to train Pietrus and implant him into the Magic to shut down Lebron(uh..Kinda), and hold Kobe check. So if the MAGIC win, She’ll have the WARRIORS to thank!
by esco41510 on Jun 3, 2009 3:13 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Very true Sleepy...
What we would give to have a Kobe on our squad…man.
by esco41510 on Jun 3, 2009 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
never
in a million years would i take Kobe, even if it guaranteed us a championship. yes, people, i am that much of a hater… quoting justsomename “luck the fakers”
by Young Moolah on Jun 3, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would stop being a Warrior fan if Kobe was on our team
I mean I’d cheer, but I wouldn’t be happy for him whenever we win.
by Golden Boy on Jun 3, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what if we had drafted him and he had been a Warrior all along?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that were the case
I’m sure he wouldn’t get away with half the crap he does being a Laker. We’re the Warriors. Refs are meant to hate us.
by Golden Boy on Jun 3, 2009 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't get me wrong, I really dont' like the guy..
Kobe the person, though I don’t know him aside from the way the media wants us too, does not seem like the kind of person I would respect., HOWEVER, I respect his game on the court, the guys is in an elite class.
And again, I didn’t say we would want Kobe Bryant in particular, but which team wouldn’t want “a” Kobe.
by esco41510 on Jun 4, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so you are saying
we should root and support the Lakers?
by dungeness crabdribble on Jun 3, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
That’s exactly what I’m saying, Crabdrizzle. I thought I was just posting a funny pic exposing this whiny, childish, jealous, homophobic diary for what it is; now I realize, how silly of me, what I’m actually saying is that all of you should “root [sic] and support the Lakers.”
You are truly the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 3, 2009 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well put
I don’t think I could have ladled any more sarcasm if I’d written it myself.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 4, 2009 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we all know L.A. fans and teams love to toss their money at questionable purchases- see Ramirez, Manny.
Are you nuts? Manny single handedly won them the division last year. If you can’t appreciate one of the greatest hitters of recent times you should not be a sports fan.
and the Lakers go back a long way before Kobe and Gasol, read up on hoops history before dissing them.
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 3, 2009 3:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
and most Giants fans would’ve welcomed Manny to the bay with open arms.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
I doubt Laker fans would bother to visit this site. One good reason why they would? I can’t think of one. Give credit where it is due without letting your own allegiances fog your perceptions. I don’t like Kobe because he is smug, cold and probably underestimates the need to share the ball, but as a ball player … As a Warrior’s fan, I don’t think I have the leverage to criticize the Laker’s organization — you can hate them, but they’re doing something right, unlike the Clippers and that weirdo Donald Sterling.
by Str8baller on Jun 3, 2009 5:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Laker fans DO visit this site
Because a lot of bandwagon fans in the Bay Area switch between the two when it’s convenient.
by GoldenStateGuerrero on Jun 3, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know a single GSW fan who switches back and forth with the Laker bandwagon.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’m pretty sure he means that there are Fakers fans living in the bay area who join the Warriors bandwagon when it’s convenient.
by the evil monkey on Jun 4, 2009 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
when has it ever been "convenient"?
there have been about 4 years out of 60, and 1 in the past 30 years, that the Warriors were even better than the Lakers. So that is a ridiculous argument.
by LakerFan24 on Jun 5, 2009 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what he meant
was that lakers fans are pretty constant cause you guys are good most ever year. its the bay area laker “fans” that switch between the warriors, lakers and even kings. unlike sam23 i know some fairweather GSW fans who were on board during our 2 year run and are now back with the lakers. granted, those aren’t hardcore fans and most of them are female…
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1
(outta breath now) Dude… That is the best and realest statement ever
by Golden Boy on Jun 3, 2009 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
when keeping it real goes wrong....
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawk on Jun 3, 2009 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Warriors fans as Laker bandwagoners?
Maybe you’re referring to new Bay Area fans who jump straight onto the Lakers bandwagon (some of whom returned briefly in the WE BELIEVE year).
Quite frankly, there’s not a good reason for bandwagoners to cheer on our WE SUCK team in most years, so I don’t see how this is possible.
Bay Area fan going to UCLA.
by Yoyo on Jun 3, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a good reason
True fans stick with their teams through the thick and thin. My only exception is the one I had posted earlier… about if Kobe joined the Warriors, I wouldn’t be a Warrior fan again until he left.
by Golden Boy on Jun 3, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fakers fans who joined the Warriors bandwagon for 06-07 & 07-08.
most of them are Fakers fans from the bay (there’s a lot of them), but occasionally you had one who came from the greater LA area like Snoop.
by the evil monkey on Jun 4, 2009 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I absolutely love this post
I couldn’t have said it better myself. God I loathe the Laker organization and fanhood.
by Golden Boy on Jun 3, 2009 7:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
TL;DR
to sum it up…
kobe is a ball hogging, free agent discouraging, rapist who enjoys running his teammates and coaches out of town and i hate him so much.
am i missing anything?
by jchao204 on Jun 3, 2009 8:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Kinda funny
kind of stupid too…yeah kobe’s a punk and acted like a biotch during the hard times, and the casual bandwagon laker fans need to be called out…as well as the hardcore fans and how much love they’re team gets, i.e. the gasol trade…
but calling out the championship run because the nets suck or because chris webber was on the kings is ignorant. Calling out shaq as only being dominant because Olajowon, Ewing and Robinson were gone is also stupid. In the same thinking, you can call out Olajowon since he only won titles in between Jordan Era’s. You can call out Robinson since he only won a title when Duncan came to town. You can call out Ewing for never winning a title at all. Even calling out Kobe and his airballs against Utah is stupid. The guy was a 17 year old rookie and the only one with the guts to take the tough shots…even when they didnt fall.
Im not a Laker fan, but I know how to be real. There’s a time to hate and then there’s a point when you’re just reaching for stuff.
You’re reaching
go Warriors
by rtgunn on Jun 4, 2009 12:52 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
+1
Very well said.
When you find yourself trying to deny the dominance of Shaq in his prime, it’s obvious that your fanaticism has warped your sense of reality.
“Reaching” is probably too kind a word for allowing that to happen (even in a silly sports discussion), but props for being diplomatic.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 4, 2009 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
even shaq has said that about kobe
he was willing to take important shots and wasn’t afraid of the pressure that came with it. thats what makes him a superstar.
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rec to rtgunn--same idea but different thoughts
yes—definitely bandwagon fans and fairweather fans deserve to be called out. sure kobe is a polarizing figure and we can debate for hours whether or not he was guilty of rape.
still the fact remains that as warriors fans, we can’t really talk. the lakers are by far a superior team to us in every way. we don’t have a “secondary superstar” on this team, no less a superstar. there were kobe haters before the rape allegations. i guarantee there would be just as many kobe haters even if he had remained a faithful husband.
if kobe had been a warrior his entire career, i think 98% of the people would stay true to the team—perhaps unless you had a personal experience with sexual assault. i really don’t like when people play the self-righteous card when it comes to teams and athletes. if we pulled of a kobe for anybody on this warriors team trade, i guarantee that everyone would be estatic. i’m a fan of the warriors basketball team. i want them to succeed in any way possible. it is the uniqueness of sports that the laundry comes before any of the individuals. if your company hires a guy that you don’t like, yet makes changes that eventually increases profit margin (and thus your salary) you’d probably be okay with it. if you don’t like your personal trainer, but he helps you get in shape you’d probably live with it. if you didn’t like someone personally, but he helped you win the rec league basketball title, you probably wouldn’t mind either. there is a distinction between personal and professional bonds. i do not fault laker fans for rooting for their team dispite having a polarizing character such as kobe on their team. i would expect fans of any other team to behave the same way. if you’re a true warrior fan would you really dump the team if kobe were here? i admit there is probably a line, but i think i don’t think kobe has crossed it. its like what gary radnich always says about barry bonds. he cares when he has a bat in his hands, but otherwise doesn’t. similarly, i don’t personally like chris brown (anymore) but would listen to his music…
when we made the playoffs a few years ago, we had bandwagon fans too. snoop dogg, who is as LA as they come, came to watch warrior games. 2 years later, he was back at staples watching the NBA finals and will probably be there again this year. bandwagon and fairweather fans come with the territory. when you have them, it usually means you’re good. speaking of, i doubt any laker fans who take the time to read SB nation or have an SB nation account are bandwagon or fairweather fans. also, i doubt that they’re reading GSoM anytime soon as they are in the finals and we’re a franchise in shambles/flux (however you want to look at it). they have better things to be concerned about rather than what warriors fans think of them right now.
i ‘hate’ the lakers as much as anybody else on here. however, i also know when it is appropriate to give respect. as much as i dislike them, i also enjoy watching people do what they do best. watching kobe drop 18 in the 3rd yesterday is something you just have to admire for what it is.
and calling out the kings team is just ridiculous. divac, cwebb, peja, christie, bibby, bobby jackson, turkoglu, gerald wallace. that had to be one of the best and most exciting teams i’ve ever seen.
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 11:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For the record, Chris Webber has ruined this stat by playing one year too long, but not long ago there were 4 players in the NBA with a career 20+/10+ average. Shaq, Garnett, Duncan, and Chris Webber. So glad Nelson helped us run him out of town.
by Missing Barry on Jun 5, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Snoop dogg came to Warriors games?
You don’t say…
And those Kings teams got the short end of the stick a number of times… plus they were unfortunate enough to be good when Shaq and Duncan were in their prime.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
R Dizzle = Wannabe AB1
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 5, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is the most iridiculous post i've ever read on this site
You sit there and constantly bag on Laker fans for being “fair-weather” and “bandwagon,” yet say right afterwards that I, as a Laker fan, should not be a Laker fan because of things that happened in the past. Those were the dark, thin parts of the franchise’s past and I stayed loyal to the team throughout. Isn’t that what a fan is supposed to do? And how can you hate on Laker fans because the team won championships? You beat who you’re put up against, it’s out of our control who the Finals opponents were. And you would probably give anything just to see the Warriors get swept in the Finals. As a basketball fanatic, I respect Warrior fans for their loyalty to their team, and because I live up here I go to a lot of games. Why can’t you just do the same for Laker fans?
by LakerFan24 on Jun 5, 2009 5:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
read the rest of the posts dude
most of the posts that address the original post agree with you. the other 100 discuss the kobe rape case
by gogoldenbears on Jun 5, 2009 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see that
I just meant that the individual who started the post is being ridiculous. Not the other people who posted….with the exception of those who discuss the rape case
by LakerFan24 on Jun 6, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s just be honest here. As a Lakers fan, you’re pretty much on par with Dodgers fans. God hates you all, so just accept that you’re going to hell.
by Missing Barry on Jun 6, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you have any reason for saying this? Any factual basis? You’re making yourself and the wonderful fans on this site look ridiculous when you say things like that.
by LakerFan24 on Jun 6, 2009 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow...
How did I miss this epic discussion? This conversation is probably dead by now but it was a great read.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 5, 2009 11:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
this is what happens when we can’t talk about warriors ball. we have to either talk about real things or stupid things. this post hit both categories.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 6, 2009 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
