Clock kid sues for $15 million

[Gauthier]

And notice the Schrodinger doublethink: Ahmed Mohamed is at once not really smart even though he disassembled a digital clock and custom intalled it in a pencil case AND deviously clever enough to deliberately construct a fake micro suitcase bomb to terrorize the school and then sue them for billions of dollars when they treated him like shit.

TBH, they blame his politics savvy dad for the last part

Not many did.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You did all that just to say "I am right, therefore you're wrong" when I take you up to task.

See, I don't believe that you wouldn't say the things you do if you don't necessarily believe these things to be true. I am not saying you believe in X because you belong in group Y. I am saying you believe in X because your statements say X in a less hyperbolic manner than I am doing it.

It might not be accurate due to my tendency of exaggerating the point, but the point still stands that the things you have said X lead me to believe that you believe in X. And it has nothing to do with association with a group, it has to do with how I perceive your conversations with me and other people in this thread.

Indeed, it is not necessary to be a communist to believe someone believes in violent revolution, but it is necessary for the speaker to profess a belief in violence and revolutionary movements to come to the conclusion that the person might believe violent revolutions are a thing they would agree with. Same here, it isn't necessarily the case that I believe you believe that an average person doesn't have any technical literacy because you are saying you think Ahmed made a bomb and that first impressions would tell you is a bomb, I believe you believe that an average person doesn't have technical literacy because of your own statements that you have failed to recognize a clock as the thing it was and then also suggesting that you didn't know what simtex is when all you need to know is an explosive. That leads me to believe that you are being deliberately obtuse, you didn't read properly and understood TED's thought experiment, or that you simply believe an average person should be determined by the reading comprehension of a first grader.

then it would be more responsible to say, ''I SUSPECT he might believe Y because some people who believe X possibly believe in Y'' or something to that effect

it's not so responsible to just say ''His logic leads to Y. He said X, so he said Y.''

I mean, it sounds like you know what you meant was really the first so I wonder why you insist on using such imprecise language

Why state that I believe in Y when I've only said X as opposed to stating the truth, that you suspect I also believe in X but can't be sure?

And for the record, no I don't believe that a reasonable person must have any kind of nexus of connection to technical illiteracy or the reading comprehension of a first grader; just that PLENTY of reasonable people possess less than stellar technical literacy (such that A reasonable person, not necessary all, may get a reasonable first impression that the clock was a bomb); I don't believe ALL reasonable people have certain tendencies that relate directly to technology or reading comprehension, just that SOME (at least one and certainly a sizeable group to be taken into the judicial calculus) don't have the sort of technological literacy to be able to immediately tell what is or isn't a bomb

I use the kind of language I do, deliberately, because I want to make people see their own points in a poignant manner. Honestly, trying to reason with people it's like using a mallet and disintegrating their head with logic so instead of wasting my time I'd rather use hyperbolic language to drive the point home. It brings better results from what I've seen here than trying to subtly let you know you're wrong in your conjectures.

Yes, but again, you only need a very passing degree of knowledge of electronics ("this thing goes in this socket" kind of knowledge) to know that it isn't a bomb. Shit, I hardly know any electronics and I could tell "well that isn't a bomb, what the fuck?". I'm not a fucking expert in hardware and electronic components. I'm IT, my schtik is literally working with software and shit like that; not how to assemble clocks and yet I could apply critical thinking to the situation and go "well this is a clock, what the fuck are people yapping about?"

See, I am not putting people in some impossible standard to meet. I am putting people on the most basic assumption they own a computer and are literate enough to understand basic electronic parts and assembly, really basic, so basic a 5th grader can understand what they are looking at.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

See, you could only make this claim if you were a mind reader. What says in point #2 doesn't match your assumption in #3

Again, are you a mind reader? And if you are, why are you here in NSG instead of doing something productive with that awesome superpower like catching terrorists or some shit?

You aren't saying why the student's plot is implausible. You're only character attacking anyone who disagrees with you.

Drawing a conclusion from the evidence doesn't require mind reading abilities.

There is literally no evidence other than your speculation that it was a carefully thought out plot, and you have continued to fail to link me to any of the posts that you claim to have written in which said evidence was allegedly presented. You have absolutely no leg to stand on, here.

I shouldn't need to elaborate on how suspicious it is for a student aware of zero tolerance protocol to bring a hoax device that looks like an IED to school and then demanding $15 million dollars afterwards.

It is conspiratorial to suggest every one of the school officials are lying. The evidence here is against the student.

It's ridiculous to assume that a child of his age, with no record of anything beyond some minor mischief and fights with bullies, would come up with this on his own.

It's conspiratorial to think that his family would all be in on it.

It's not conspiratorial to think that a school would attempt to vigorously defend themselves from civil action.

Also, it didn't look like an IED.

If that's your "evidence", then I have a have a Princess Bride quote in mind: "You keep on using that word..."

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Infected Mushroom made the claim that his opinions are reasonable. He brought his character and judgment into the argument, therefore it's relevant to question how reasonable a man he actually is. The fact that he has consistently presented unreasonable positions on NSG suggests that he is not a very reasonable person (or at least he does not behave as such here) and we should not trust his self-evaluation that he is.

Even if that's somehow a valid debate tactic (I don't think so),

A sizeable number of posters, not just myself have said that their first impression is that it looks like a bomb/could be a bomb or that they can see how it's possible for others to get that impression.

Trying to discredit each and every single one isn't exactly a productive route to go down.

Well, this is the internet. You can't seriously make the claim they are the average person.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

tbh, I think it's impressive for a 14 year old to disassemble and reassemble some electronics such that the end result is in working order.

I mean, the kid's 14. That's pretty good, imo.

Eeehm,no. "Make your own radio" kits, which are quite a bit more complex than what this kid did, are meant for ages 8+. At age 14, he should have been able to do much, much better.

But I blame schools for this lack in their education

Well, yea, in a way we're not raised to tinker with shit in schools, so there's that.

[The Alma Mater]

Eeehm,no. "Make your own radio" kits, which are quite a bit more complex than what this kid did, are meant for ages 8+. At age 14, he should have been able to do much, much better.

But I blame schools for this lack in their education

I assume that the radio kits also come with instructions where as Ahmed did not have such instructions.


Anyway, I'm not saying that it's some super impressive feat of engineering, but it's certainly more than most teenagers (and apparently a lot of adults) can do, so that's something.

And that is very, very sad. Where are the times that a boy makes his own alarm system to detect the unauthorised presence of his sister in his room ?
Where are the times that boys install sensors to detect an approaching mom or dad when they are having quality time with a swimsuit magazine or.. if lucky.. an old playboy ?
It just saddens me that nowadays even transferring something from one casing to another seems to be considered a sign of brilliance

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I assume that the radio kits also come with instructions where as Ahmed did not have such instructions.


Anyway, I'm not saying that it's some super impressive feat of engineering, but it's certainly more than most teenagers (and apparently a lot of adults) can do, so that's something.

And that is very, very sad. Where are the times that a boy makes his own alarm system to detect the unauthorised presence of his sister in his room ?
Where are the times that boys install sensors to detect an approaching mom or dad when they are having quality time with a swimsuit magazine or.. if lucky.. an old playboy ?
It just saddens me that nowadays even transferring something from one casing to another seems to be considered a sign of brilliance

Wait, people used to have sensors to detect that?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I assume that the radio kits also come with instructions where as Ahmed did not have such instructions.


Anyway, I'm not saying that it's some super impressive feat of engineering, but it's certainly more than most teenagers (and apparently a lot of adults) can do, so that's something.

And that is very, very sad. Where are the times that a boy makes his own alarm system to detect the unauthorised presence of his sister in his room ?
Where are the times that boys install sensors to detect an approaching mom or dad when they are having quality time with a swimsuit magazine or.. if lucky.. an old playboy ?
It just saddens me that nowadays even transferring something from one casing to another seems to be considered a sign of brilliance

What are these children doing hanging around with old playboys? WHAT ARE THESE AGED PLAYBOYS DOING WITH THESE YOUNG CHILDREN? Shouldn't they be out at the swankiest clubs and hot spots instead?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And that is very, very sad. Where are the times that a boy makes his own alarm system to detect the unauthorised presence of his sister in his room ?
Where are the times that boys install sensors to detect an approaching mom or dad when they are having quality time with a swimsuit magazine or.. if lucky.. an old playboy ?
It just saddens me that nowadays even transferring something from one casing to another seems to be considered a sign of brilliance

Wait, people used to have sensors to detect that?

Yes, though mostly in Danny Dunn books and other boys' adventure novels.

[The Alma Mater]

And that is very, very sad. Where are the times that a boy makes his own alarm system to detect the unauthorised presence of his sister in his room ?
Where are the times that boys install sensors to detect an approaching mom or dad when they are having quality time with a swimsuit magazine or.. if lucky.. an old playboy ?
It just saddens me that nowadays even transferring something from one casing to another seems to be considered a sign of brilliance

Wait, people used to have sensors to detect that?

I did
(and so did just about all my friends for that matter...)

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Wait, people used to have sensors to detect that?

Yes, though mostly in Danny Dunn books and other boys' adventure novels.

I will be honest, the most (creative) tinkering I have done with electricity has been creating simple closed circuits to have something work temporarily. I've never really assembled anything on my own from scratch that I can recall.

The rest of it has been, for the most part, work with mechanical levers that use my body force to move.

[Infected Mushroom]

then it would be more responsible to say, ''I SUSPECT he might believe Y because some people who believe X possibly believe in Y'' or something to that effect

it's not so responsible to just say ''His logic leads to Y. He said X, so he said Y.''

I mean, it sounds like you know what you meant was really the first so I wonder why you insist on using such imprecise language

Why state that I believe in Y when I've only said X as opposed to stating the truth, that you suspect I also believe in X but can't be sure?

And for the record, no I don't believe that a reasonable person must have any kind of nexus of connection to technical illiteracy or the reading comprehension of a first grader; just that PLENTY of reasonable people possess less than stellar technical literacy (such that A reasonable person, not necessary all, may get a reasonable first impression that the clock was a bomb); I don't believe ALL reasonable people have certain tendencies that relate directly to technology or reading comprehension, just that SOME (at least one and certainly a sizeable group to be taken into the judicial calculus) don't have the sort of technological literacy to be able to immediately tell what is or isn't a bomb

I use the kind of language I do, deliberately, because I want to make people see their own points in a poignant manner. Honestly, trying to reason with people it's like using a mallet and disintegrating their head with logic so instead of wasting my time I'd rather use hyperbolic language to drive the point home. It brings better results from what I've seen here than trying to subtly let you know you're wrong in your conjectures.

Yes, but again, you only need a very passing degree of knowledge of electronics ("this thing goes in this socket" kind of knowledge) to know that it isn't a bomb. Shit, I hardly know any electronics and I could tell "well that isn't a bomb, what the fuck?". I'm not a fucking expert in hardware and electronic components. I'm IT, my schtik is literally working with software and shit like that; not how to assemble clocks and yet I could apply critical thinking to the situation and go "well this isn't a clock, what the fuck are people yapping about?"

See, I am not putting people in some impossible standard to meet. I am putting people on the most basic assumption they own a computer and are literate enough to understand basic electronic parts and assembly, really basic, so basic a 5th grader can understand what they are looking at.

Then I guess we simply have a very different intuitive understanding of what a ''reasonable person'' standard (with respect to technological literacy) ought to look like when we're trying to decide if someone is negligent or not. I think that because at least some reasonable people could reasonably perceive it as a bomb (given the widespread media influence of how bombs and small IEDs look like and given that there's no reason to assume untrained people necessarily have a certain threshold of technical proficiency/literacy with respect to bombs)... that the teacher, if they made a bad call, shouldn't be held liable in any sense because their behaviour falls within the spectrum of possible reasonable responses to something that could have looked like a bomb to them.

[Dakini]

Infected Mushroom made the claim that his opinions are reasonable. He brought his character and judgment into the argument, therefore it's relevant to question how reasonable a man he actually is. The fact that he has consistently presented unreasonable positions on NSG suggests that he is not a very reasonable person (or at least he does not behave as such here) and we should not trust his self-evaluation that he is.

Even if that's somehow a valid debate tactic (I don't think so),

A sizeable number of posters, not just myself have said that their first impression is that it looks like a bomb/could be a bomb or that they can see how it's possible for others to get that impression.

Trying to discredit each and every single one isn't exactly a productive route to go down.

Whoever said NSG was reasonable?

Look, I know that a lot of people here like to be all "NSG is so much smarter than all the other message boards" but... no.

[Al-Quaedag]

Lol

[Gristol-Serkonos]

Huh.

Looks like you can be arrested for terror charges just for bringing a clock.

I think we need to set the terror panicky mode lower.

[Sun Lands]

I think this is a case of power going to this kid's head. In other words. Give em an inch, they take a foot and before you know it, you don't have a leg to stand on.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

Huh.

Looks like you can be arrested for terror charges just for bringing a clock.

I think we need to set the terror panicky mode lower.

No! We need more panic! The country needs to be in a constant state of panic! Keep fear alive!

[Gravlen]

was all the shit from Microsoft and college offers and a visit to the white house not good enough?

No. It would be silly to think that the generosity of third parties would make up for the civil rights violations committed by law enforcement.

[Gravlen]

Nobody cares about your sympathy.

I care. Therefore, you are mistaken.

I don't believe you.

[The Archregimancy]

KID
CLOCK
COOL

[Gravlen]

Err, no, it is simply far more likely that the parties will settle with something and, if they don't, they go past small claims. Why do you think 15 million dollars are being asked? Just for shits and giggles?

With the current evidence, as it stands, it really doesn't make sense for people who come here and say "the kid's a fucking dirty opportunistic sand nigger" like some kind of mind reader than what it is to go with the present evidence: that the kid got his civil rights violated, and that there wasn't any bomb to speak of, and that they are seeking damages to the tune of 15 million so it stands out more that this is a serious issue that the school district should take care of.

Clock kid has already benefited immensely, having received a scholarship and other such things as a result of the incident.

Doesn't change the fact that he's owed compensation by the offending parties if his rights were violated.

The evidence is that this was a nefarious plot to leverage for personal gain.

"Nefarious plot"? Really? They plotted to have the kid arrested and then reasonably expected that his civil rights would be violated so they could sue?

Frankly, as I've said before, if they tricked everyone and maneuvered the kid into a position where his civil rights could be violated, and the authorities then chose to violate his rights... Well done them. Good plot, well deserving of compensation, because it is unacceptable for the police to violate anyone's civil rights for any reason.

Interesting how you seem unaware that the school district did nothing wrong.

I am unaware that the school district did nothing wrong. The arguments presented by the family is compelling, and strongly indicates that the school district actually did something wrong. It will be interesting to see how they respond.

The school is forced to follow zero tolerance policies.

There is no zero tolerance for clocks. Ahmed at no point claimed it to be a bomb, presented it as a bomb, pretended that it was a bomb, or in any way gave rise to the idea that it was a bomb, real or hoax. Therefore, zero tolerance doesn't apply.

If you want to take issue with how the situation was handled you should apply your blame to the police, not to the school.

I do mostly place any blame with the police, as does the family.

[Ifreann]

I use the kind of language I do, deliberately, because I want to make people see their own points in a poignant manner. Honestly, trying to reason with people it's like using a mallet and disintegrating their head with logic so instead of wasting my time I'd rather use hyperbolic language to drive the point home. It brings better results from what I've seen here than trying to subtly let you know you're wrong in your conjectures.

Yes, but again, you only need a very passing degree of knowledge of electronics ("this thing goes in this socket" kind of knowledge) to know that it isn't a bomb. Shit, I hardly know any electronics and I could tell "well that isn't a bomb, what the fuck?". I'm not a fucking expert in hardware and electronic components. I'm IT, my schtik is literally working with software and shit like that; not how to assemble clocks and yet I could apply critical thinking to the situation and go "well this isn't a clock, what the fuck are people yapping about?"

See, I am not putting people in some impossible standard to meet. I am putting people on the most basic assumption they own a computer and are literate enough to understand basic electronic parts and assembly, really basic, so basic a 5th grader can understand what they are looking at.

Then I guess we simply have a very different intuitive understanding of what a ''reasonable person'' standard (with respect to technological literacy) ought to look like when we're trying to decide if someone is negligent or not. I think that because at least some reasonable people could reasonably perceive it as a bomb (given the widespread media influence of how bombs and small IEDs look like and given that there's no reason to assume untrained people necessarily have a certain threshold of technical proficiency/literacy with respect to bombs)... that the teacher, if they made a bad call, shouldn't be held liable in any sense because their behaviour falls within the spectrum of possible reasonable responses to something that could have looked like a bomb to them.

Of course, if the teacher did believe that the clock was a bomb, then she did behave negligently. She handled the "bomb", failed to sound the alarm for an evacuation, did not call the emergency services promptly, but instead brought Ahmed and his "bomb" to the principal's office.

[Gravlen]

3) You realize the student himself admitted it was a hoax weapon?

Untrue, and a position your source doesn't support. In fact, your source claims the opposite. The source, which is based on the letter the family sent, says the kid only said “It’s an alarm clock. It’s only an alarm clock.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/11/23/ahmed_mohamed_demands_15_million_for_texas_school_hoax_bomb_clock_arrest.html

- It says that during the questioning, Ahmed’s principal threatened to expel him if he didn’t admit that his clock was a hoax bomb—though he had never claimed it was anything but a clock.

- School officials insinuated that Ahmed wasn’t telling reporters the truth about his arrest, and publicly pressured his parents to let them release his private student records.

So it's either each and every one of the school officials are lying, or the student is.

Based on the available evidence, it's probable that the school officials are lying.

[Dakini]

I think this is a case of power going to this kid's head. In other words. Give em an inch, they take a foot and before you know it, you don't have a leg to stand on.

Where "give em an inch" = deprive them of their civil liberties, run their family out of town...

[Ifreann]

I think this is a case of power going to this kid's head. In other words. Give em an inch, they take a foot and before you know it, you don't have a leg to stand on.

Where "give em an inch" = deprive them of their civil liberties, run their family out of town...

But they got to visit the White House, what more could they possibly want? Actual redress from the state bodies that wronged them? Pure greed, that is.