“Your life is what you make it.”

Since: Aug 13

Location hidden

#99696 Jul 22, 2014
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
One vehicle is included. We had two, 50 dollars for each extra vehicle
Wow that sux!! You would have been better off parking off the grounds!

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99697 Jul 22, 2014
Cliff notes:
House has 2 pit bulls
Owner puts them in cage outside before 4 year old nephew comes over.
Mother and anther adult go into another room to talk, leaving 4 year old alone.
4 year old goes outside, opens cage, gets mauled.

In light of our discussion here recently, I found many of the comments below the story interesting.

many of them were from people who would never leave a 4 year old in a room alone.

http://news.yahoo.com/florida-boy-4-mauled-de...

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#99698 Jul 23, 2014

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#99699 Jul 23, 2014
What's up b!tches?

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#99700 Jul 23, 2014
Sublime1 wrote:
What's up b!tches?
The woof?

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#99701 Jul 23, 2014
PEllen wrote:
<quoted text>
The woof?
LOL

Hi P!

“"yes"”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#99702 Jul 23, 2014
Here is one for the regulars - check it out. A native Los Angeles transplant to the windy city. Sabina Ott and her front porch gallery. She was and is a great teacher.

http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/7-15-201...

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#99703 Jul 24, 2014

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99704 Jul 24, 2014
Straw poll:

Do you feel your employer has any responsibility to punish you for your actions outside of work hours and your job facility. Not asking if they have a right to, but if you feel they have a responsibility to.

I bring this up because of the Ray Rice story. For those that don't know, he is a football player who allegedly knocked his girlfriend out, then dragged her onto an elevator. Knocking her out was not caught on camera, so I say allegedly, but he is seen on security footage carrying her limp body onto the elevator. As far as I am aware, he has not been charged with any crime(feel free to correct me if I am wrong), though it certainly seems that he deserves to be charged with one. The NFL suspended him for 2 games.

I have no problem with whatever they do with him. 1 game, 10 games, 100 games. But I've seen some outrage on twitter at such a lenient punishment. There is this pervasive sentiment that the NFL has a RESPONSIBILITY to punish him more harshly. My question to that outrage is, why is it the his employer's RESPONSIBILITY to punish him for "crimes" unrelated to his employment? In any walk of life. If you work for Walmart, does Walmart have a responsibility to police your off the clock actions drop the hammer if you do something bad?

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#99705 Jul 24, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
Straw poll:
Do you feel your employer has any responsibility to punish you for your actions outside of work hours and your job facility. Not asking if they have a right to, but if you feel they have a responsibility to.
I bring this up because of the Ray Rice story. For those that don't know, he is a football player who allegedly knocked his girlfriend out, then dragged her onto an elevator. Knocking her out was not caught on camera, so I say allegedly, but he is seen on security footage carrying her limp body onto the elevator. As far as I am aware, he has not been charged with any crime(feel free to correct me if I am wrong), though it certainly seems that he deserves to be charged with one. The NFL suspended him for 2 games.
I have no problem with whatever they do with him. 1 game, 10 games, 100 games. But I've seen some outrage on twitter at such a lenient punishment. There is this pervasive sentiment that the NFL has a RESPONSIBILITY to punish him more harshly. My question to that outrage is, why is it the his employer's RESPONSIBILITY to punish him for "crimes" unrelated to his employment? In any walk of life. If you work for Walmart, does Walmart have a responsibility to police your off the clock actions drop the hammer if you do something bad?
Many high profile jobs (such as players in the NFL) have "ethics clause" in their contract that has to do with their conduct 24-7. I have no doubt that each and every NFL player has one in their contract.

As to what the proper punishment would be, I'm not running the NFL. The NFL is a franchise, as you know, and they have a responsibility to the franchise and keep it operational. One of the things that keeps it operational is viewers and fans.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99706 Jul 24, 2014
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
Many high profile jobs (such as players in the NFL) have "ethics clause" in their contract that has to do with their conduct 24-7. I have no doubt that each and every NFL player has one in their contract.
As to what the proper punishment would be, I'm not running the NFL. The NFL is a franchise, as you know, and they have a responsibility to the franchise and keep it operational. One of the things that keeps it operational is viewers and fans.
I understand that and have no problem with that. I am not questioning their right to punish him. When you break it down to the barebones, the nfl is his employer and the masses are outraged that his employer is not picking up the slack where they feel law enforcement failed. I don't feel that is an employer's responsibility.

If you get drunk and beat someone up outside a bar, but are able to avoid charges, do you think your employer has a responsibility to punish you?

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#99707 Jul 24, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text> I don't feel that is an employer's responsibility.
You don't think it's an employer's responsibility to protect their brand?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#99708 Jul 24, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
If you get drunk and beat someone up outside a bar, but are able to avoid charges, do you think your employer has a responsibility to punish you?
It all depends. Places that have drug testing, for instance. It doesn't matter if you smoked a joint on your own time; fail a drug test and you can be fired. I've told this story before, my coworker was involved in a domestic dispute where he fired a gun into the air (a gun he did not legally possess.) In that case, my employer had a responsibility for the safety of his employees. What was to stop him from bringing a gun to the workplace? He was let go

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#99709 Jul 24, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text>I understand that and have no problem with that. I am not questioning their right to punish him. When you break it down to the barebones, the nfl is his employer and the masses are outraged that his employer is not picking up the slack where they feel law enforcement failed. I don't feel that is an employer's responsibility.
If you get drunk and beat someone up outside a bar, but are able to avoid charges, do you think your employer has a responsibility to punish you?
Nope. I don't have a contract with them.

If I did and they could prove that I did it, then yes out of fairness to others they may punish over ethics violation.

But I'm not an ethic's lawyer. Who knows what the true answer is.
Zap Brannigan

Hollywood, FL

#99710 Jul 24, 2014
He was accepted into a pre-trial diversion program and the charges will be expunged if he completed the program. He violated the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy, so yes, they had an obligation to punish him.
Mister Tonka wrote:
Straw poll:
Do you feel your employer has any responsibility to punish you for your actions outside of work hours and your job facility. Not asking if they have a right to, but if you feel they have a responsibility to.
I bring this up because of the Ray Rice story. For those that don't know, he is a football player who allegedly knocked his girlfriend out, then dragged her onto an elevator. Knocking her out was not caught on camera, so I say allegedly, but he is seen on security footage carrying her limp body onto the elevator. As far as I am aware, he has not been charged with any crime(feel free to correct me if I am wrong), though it certainly seems that he deserves to be charged with one. The NFL suspended him for 2 games.
I have no problem with whatever they do with him. 1 game, 10 games, 100 games. But I've seen some outrage on twitter at such a lenient punishment. There is this pervasive sentiment that the NFL has a RESPONSIBILITY to punish him more harshly. My question to that outrage is, why is it the his employer's RESPONSIBILITY to punish him for "crimes" unrelated to his employment? In any walk of life. If you work for Walmart, does Walmart have a responsibility to police your off the clock actions drop the hammer if you do something bad?

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99711 Jul 24, 2014
Obviously I have done a poor job of phrasing my question because you are all arguing points that I don't disagree with.

My perception of the outrage of the NFL's weak punishment is that people feel like Rice has suffered no punishment by the hand of law enforcement(and he hasn't) and SOMEBODY needs to punish him. So they expect his employer to do so. They feel his employer has a responsibility to step up where law enforcement failed. This is my perception of the situation and this is what I disagree with. I have no problem if an employer chooses to no longer employ such an individual or levy some other punishment, but I don't feel they owe it to the community at large to be the de facto judge & jury in lieu of the percieved failure of the legal system.

Dog, if you accepted a job that included drug testing and being clean as a condition of employment, then yes, you can be punished for it even if you were not smoking up on the clock. This illustrates what an employer has a RIGHT to do in order to protect their own interests, not something they are doing out of responsibility to the community. I have zero issue with this.

Toj, you agree with me that your employer would not have any responsibility to punish you...but could do so if there was some clause written into your contrct. Responsibiity vs right

Zap. Again. No argument from me over what the NFL has a right to do based on the terms of the player's contract.(However I disagree that they had an obligation to punish him. Unless the specific act committed is spelled out, the punishment or lack thereof is up to the discretion of the employer.)

Sub. I agree. Employer has a responsibility to protect their brand. But that is a responsibility they have to themselves based on self interest. My question is whether or not an employer has a responsibility to un-involved/unffected 3rd parties simply because they have the power to do what those parties want.

I agree with all of you, but its not the question I was presenting. Hopefully I have explained myslef more clearly.

“What's it to ya?”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#99712 Jul 25, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
Obviously I have done a poor job of phrasing my question because you are all arguing points that I don't disagree with.
My perception of the outrage of the NFL's weak punishment is that people feel like Rice has suffered no punishment by the hand of law enforcement(and he hasn't) and SOMEBODY needs to punish him. So they expect his employer to do so. They feel his employer has a responsibility to step up where law enforcement failed. This is my perception of the situation and this is what I disagree with. I have no problem if an employer chooses to no longer employ such an individual or levy some other punishment, but I don't feel they owe it to the community at large to be the de facto judge & jury in lieu of the percieved failure of the legal system.
Dog, if you accepted a job that included drug testing and being clean as a condition of employment, then yes, you can be punished for it even if you were not smoking up on the clock. This illustrates what an employer has a RIGHT to do in order to protect their own interests, not something they are doing out of responsibility to the community. I have zero issue with this.
Toj, you agree with me that your employer would not have any responsibility to punish you...but could do so if there was some clause written into your contrct. Responsibiity vs right
Zap. Again. No argument from me over what the NFL has a right to do based on the terms of the player's contract.(However I disagree that they had an obligation to punish him. Unless the specific act committed is spelled out, the punishment or lack thereof is up to the discretion of the employer.)
Sub. I agree. Employer has a responsibility to protect their brand. But that is a responsibility they have to themselves based on self interest. My question is whether or not an employer has a responsibility to un-involved/unffected 3rd parties simply because they have the power to do what those parties want.
I agree with all of you, but its not the question I was presenting. Hopefully I have explained myslef more clearly.
Short answer: No.

Longer answer: I am the employer. What you do on my time is my business and responsibility. You do something off the clock on your own time that is sketchy/illegal/whatever, that's what we have police for. The police don't do an adequate job? Still not my responsibility just the roll of the dice of whether or not individual "x" is punished "properly" under the laws as they exist/in the opinion of the public.

In the example you cite, he "allegedly" did something. They have no proof ergo punishing him outside of the justice system creeps over into the area of vigilantism. If we're going to operate that way, pound of flesh because of public opinion rather than evidence, why even have a justice system at all? Even with proof, punishment outside of the legal system is unnecessary.

Getting into stuff like contracts with ethics clauses and stuff is another thing though. Ultimately though without evidence, even if we say the NFL should punish him based on contract agreements, punishment without proof seems a little gratuitous.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99713 Jul 25, 2014
Mimi Seattle wrote:
<quoted text>
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: I am the employer. What you do on my time is my business and responsibility. You do something off the clock on your own time that is sketchy/illegal/whatever, that's what we have police for. The police don't do an adequate job? Still not my responsibility just the roll of the dice of whether or not individual "x" is punished "properly" under the laws as they exist/in the opinion of the public.
In the example you cite, he "allegedly" did something. They have no proof ergo punishing him outside of the justice system creeps over into the area of vigilantism. If we're going to operate that way, pound of flesh because of public opinion rather than evidence, why even have a justice system at all? Even with proof, punishment outside of the legal system is unnecessary.
Getting into stuff like contracts with ethics clauses and stuff is another thing though. Ultimately though without evidence, even if we say the NFL should punish him based on contract agreements, punishment without proof seems a little gratuitous.
You and I agree. Further info Zap brought to the table, he WAS arrested, but got pretrial diversion. Basically a slap on the wrist from the courts, so people want their pound of flesh from the NFL.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#99714 Jul 25, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text>You and I agree. Further info Zap brought to the table, he WAS arrested, but got pretrial diversion. Basically a slap on the wrist from the courts, so people want their pound of flesh from the NFL.
There are always "people" who are unsatisfied with the outcome of almost anything. Sometimes I believe they have a valid point, other times I believe they are looking for their 15 minutes of fame or looking for a cause because they are bored.

In the case of the NFL, it's probably because they are tired of athletes getting away with crap.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#99715 Jul 25, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
Sub. I agree. Employer has a responsibility to protect their brand. But that is a responsibility they have to themselves based on self interest. My question is whether or not an employer has a responsibility to un-involved/unffected 3rd parties simply because they have the power to do what those parties want.
I don't think it's done primarily because they feel a responsibility to un-involved third parties. I think they want to discourage that sort of behavior by those who they are associated with because it doesn't reflect well on the league/brand. It not only sends a message to the player who is punished, but also everyone else in the league. While what doesn't reflect well on the league/brand is determined by public opinion, it's really about image, not feeling responsible. That's what I think, anyway.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 9 min Guru 182,156
Adult Nursing Relationships (May '11) 22 min Tim 146
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 28 min Teaman 1,156,200
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 28 min Mothra 49,360
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 30 min KiMare 51,296
Word (Dec '08) 42 min Breezy _Soul 4,797
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr RACE 4,924
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 6:00 am PST

Bleacher Report 6:00AM
Bears vs. Vikings: What Experts Are Saying About Chicago
NBC Sports 6:03 AM
Jim Caldwell: No concerns about starting a rookie center
Bleacher Report 8:46 AM
What Are Experts Saying About Vikings?
NBC Sports11:28 AM
Bears extend Roberto Garza through 2015
NBC Sports 7:32 AM
Full-blown Bears house-cleaning could be coming