Odd story with a lesson
Home > Home Recording Forum > Talkin' Smack > Odd story with a lesson
Posted on Dec 18, 2007 07:52 am
dbmasters
Administrator Since: Apr 03, 2002
www.startribune.com/local/12578176.html
Short story, the local cops execute a warrant on a wrong house. They executed a few successfully, the last house on their list was erroneous.
They enter (by force) and the house is occupied by a hmong family with 6 kids. The dad, who does not speak english grabs his shotgun, shoots at the cops, gets shot at, nobody gets hurt...thank God.
Now, this brings up room for discussion. While I do not blame the father for protecting his family. They live in a Minneapolis Ghetto and thought they were being broken into...the dude can't speak our language and doesn't understand the police. He's protecting his own, God bless him for it.
The police made a terrible mistake, which sucks.
At the same time, this dude, if he really wants to protect his family, isn't part of that job to learn the laws, customs and language of the country? If he would have known English perhaps this event could have been MUCH less violent.
Discuss.
[ Back to Top ]
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 18, 2007 08:09 am One thing that may have prevented this, is to surveillance the house for a few days, before breaking in. Maybe the timeframe doesn't allow for this, i dunno.
I agree, 'police' should be one of the English words learned early on after coming here.
Dec 18, 2007 08:14 am oh, sure, there are lots of things the Police will be called on, that part of the convo could go on for a long time...as I understand it, they had 10 houses, 9 of them they got the job done...one was this one...the surveillance should have been done BEFORE the warrant issued, so who knows what it was, typo on the house number or anything.
It does appear he knows one US custom, he is going to sue the Police. I dunno man, I wouldn't move to a country unless I knew their language, laws and customs...not saying I'd totally sell out to them, but I would most definitely know them and understand them, not as much for respect for them as much for my own good and the good of my family.
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
Dec 18, 2007 07:46 pm Ironic that you bring this subject up. Especially after the democrats and a few republicans voted against english being the official american language.
Several of the negative voters are running for president.
I must agree that learning the language of the country you are going to live in is primary to being here. As dB stated as well, I'm not saying drop your heratige at the door when you arrive in this country, but at least learn the language.
We force our children to learn other languages of countries they may never go to. Why are these immigrants not forced to learn the language of a country they now wish to call home.
We as tax payers pay for interpreter's in courts, schools and all kinds of public places these people go to use so they can understand what it being said. Well, lets save some tax dollars and simply force them to learn the language.
Sorry to rant on this.
But I agree the guy had every right to shoot to protect. But agree that maybe if he understood even a little English that would not have happened.
And as far as sueing the police goes. I don't agree with that. They live in a bad part of town in a building known for this type of activity. What did they expect.
cruxTypo SzarMember
Since: Jul 04, 2002
Dec 18, 2007 10:40 pm I come from an immigrant family, and YES YOU SHOULD LEARN ENGLISH! Forget all the "retaining our heritage" stuff, if you wanna live in an area, learn the language. Thats my answer for that.
But to just balance out the two sides, being Hmong and living in the ghetto, well Hmong ppl have been oppressed and the father may not trust police or anything, even if he understood the word "police" vaguely, he may not trust it. Anyone can bust into ur house and scream police freeze at u, he could just be vary wary.
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Dec 19, 2007 12:05 am He needs to learn English and how to shoot if he is going to protect his family.
Happy to hear no one was hurt.
DiemusikString benderMember
Since: Unknown
Dec 19, 2007 12:14 am I'm 100% in agreement with you dB but for the sake of debate I'll play devils advocate here. One of the first arguments we would hear would be something along the lines of some immigrants being too poor for language lessons or possibly working too many hours to take them.
I'll just close this with saying almost nothing annoys me more than to have to listen to a set of instruction on the phone twice, once in English and once in Spanish.
glnflwrsHead KnockerContributor
Since: May 20, 2007
Dec 19, 2007 12:51 am Don't know if it is still enforced, but one of the requirements for naturalization to citizenship is you must learn English.
When I was in elementary and junior high, there were Latinos, Asians, Ruskies, etc. going to school. They sat in class along with us most of the day, listening to the teacher speak English. When we had our English class they went to another room and took lessons in English. In most schools they had one year to learn to speak and if not, they didn't advance to the next grade. Believe me, near 100% were speaking the Queen's English by summer, and their folks learned it from the kids in about the same time.
We are the only developed nation in the world that does not have a national language. Gomer Pyle said it best, "Shame shame shame shame shame."
cruxTypo SzarMember
Since: Jul 04, 2002
Dec 19, 2007 01:58 am Linguistically speaking it would be impossible for you to live in a totally immersive environment for 3 months and not pick up on simple things, like the word police. I'm sure that argument can be made but seriously, if the father had a job, he would have had to pick up some language.
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 12:45 pm I seriously do not agree with a national language.
I do agree that it is up to an individual to learn the skills that are required to be sucessful and safe in a society. If that means learning the dominant language than so be it. But if they can get along without knowing the language, then good for them.
You can hate on me for this next statement if you like, but I think people need to get off of their high horse.
Dec 19, 2007 12:49 pm I won't even get into the national language debate, because it's moot, really.
There IS a national language, like it or not, English is the dominant language, always has been, I would personally consider it my duty to learn it as the provider of my family it would be imperative.
I have had friends that have traveled Europe (can't say I have) and said that many of the people they encountered over there ride a MUCH higher horse than we do in terms of speaking their language...
when in rome...
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 12:57 pm True, english is the dominant language, but its not the official (stated on paper) language.
I also would want to learn the dominant language of where ever I lived. In most cases, that only makes sense in terms of giving yourself the most opportunity. However, I don't want to impose my thought process on others. If someone else is happy not knowing english, fine with me. I'm ok with letting people make the right decisions for themselves.
Edit: and those euros your friend was talking about can get off their high horse too.
Dec 19, 2007 01:00 pm Agreed, but obviously, knowing the language would have helped immensely in the situation. Not learning it isn't illegal, but it is a bad decision.
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 01:06 pm It might be one of those things, where you think its not that important until one day, it would've been good to be prepared...... like keeping a spare tire in your trunk.
Dec 19, 2007 01:09 pm ...or that darn clean underwear mom always said to make sure you wear...
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 19, 2007 01:30 pm Quote:
I'm ok with letting people make the right decisions for themselves.
I'm calling bull-pucky on that one (politely, of course). If it were not for morays, and accepted norms, society would be naught. You're saying that if something isn't written on a piece of paper (of course, dictated by governenment, who else?) then nobody should be expected to adjust to it?
That means that if there's no written law or ordinance about standing in line, then nobody should be expected to do so?
Our founding fathers had a statement: self-evident truths. These didn't have to be written down, and shouldn't have to be written down now.
As a collection of people, gathered to make a society, they themselves (without even trying) will start to form morays, or basic concepts of acceptable behavior. If someone doesn't like that basic behavior, then they would naturally gravitate towards a collection of people that better align with their expectations. Or, create their own.
I understand your concept, but to say it's open for any interpretation, will drive society to anarchy.
imho =).
Dec 19, 2007 01:42 pm just wondering here if the police were wearing uniforms. because if they were, there's no excuse at all here.
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 01:45 pm pjk, in my opinion, society is not constant. Meaning that while we all claim to belong to this same entity called society, some of the social norms that I practice around my friends would probably seem out of place or weird to you and yours. We all speak english, but if you were to sit in on one of our conversations, theres a pretty good chance you wouldn't understand half of what we're talking about, due to the way we treat the english language.
Yes, I agree that there are self evident truths. However, I'm not necessarily convinced that everyone needs to speak english is one of them. The founding fathers may have assumed that, and it may have even been a self evident truth for them, but in my mind, these truths change and evolve with time. Our society is not the same as that of the founding fathers.
I feel as though you've taken my argument to an extreme to make a point. Of course there are social norms and accepted behavior, that we rely on to function as a society. But does everyone speaking the same language fall into that realm, I say it does not need to.
I guess I should have clarified my sentence that you quoted, for I am OK with letting people make the right decisions for themselves, with the point of clarification being, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.
Dec 19, 2007 01:52 pm forty the officers and SWAT were wearing the standard raid body armor fully marked...
The guy shooting (get this) was in his bedroom and his wife was downstairs watching TV, when glass broke she ran upstairs to gethim he got his shotgun and shot THRU THE WALL AND DOOR at the cops sight unseen.
They did, according to the report I read, identify themselves non stop thru the raid, having been in raids myself a couple times, they shout "police" at top volume as they march thru the premises...as they did in this case.
It wasn't until his kids yelled at him that it was the police that he dropped his weapon and raised his hands in surrender.
Dec 19, 2007 01:54 pm by the way, about my 'uniforms' post there...
i too would want peeps coming here to learn english. i also believe that prospective presidents should have to have been born in the US.
Dec 19, 2007 01:55 pm ah, weird db. i see...
Dec 19, 2007 01:56 pm i live in LA, and sometimes my orders get screwed up because the people manning the stores don't appear to understand english very well. or if they do, there's something subtly wrong with it.
it bugs me.
Dec 19, 2007 02:02 pm Yeah, it pisses me off personally when I have to waste my time when I am talking to a clerk that can't speak my f-in language...ESPECIALLY true when I have recruiters calling about jobs and contracts...it's a rule in my house, if I have to struggle to understand the message on my machine, I delete it. I don't even deal with them.
I have told more than one recruiter to have somebody that speaks English call me, I don't have time.
High horse? perhaps, tough ****, learn the language of the land. I wouldn't expect anyone in France to hold up their day to try to understand me...and they wouldn't.
Dec 19, 2007 02:03 pm I don’t give a rip what language(s) anyone chooses to speak, but if they’re going to interact with me in a business context, it had better be English.
Businesses owners in the U.S. that are less-than-fluent in English or hire less-than-fluent employees in interactive service-oriented positions are only hurting themselves. How can you run a successful enterprise with such a profound communication barrier? That is, unless you have a thriving business in your own ethnic community (e.g., Chinatown). If so, and you’re happy with that, fine.
I’m not interested in passage of laws that will require anyone to speak English, but like Coolo alluded, refusal to learn it in America will only keep doors closed for you.
There’s a self-evident truth.
Dec 19, 2007 02:11 pm I thought that was an inconvenient truth...oh, wait, thats that fat bastard whining about the environment, my mistake. Anyone see Frank Caliendo rip on the fat bastard on Frank TV...a riot I tells ya.
I was gonna say kind what Herb just said...the only time I am OK with struggling to understand somebody will be in an authentic ethnic restaurant or something of that nature where one would expect to hear other langauges, or a seriously bastardized version of English...if I am talking business with anybody, or deal with them on a very regular basis, it'll be English, and clearly...I have worked with many immigrants and most all I know speak very fluent English and get pissed off at the lazy bastards that don't learn it and give them all a bad name...
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 19, 2007 02:23 pm Good points coolo, and well taken. I may disagree, with the overall picture you state, regarding required language skills, but your society evolution points are valid to me.
I may have jumped extreme, but not so much, I think. It's been stated on here that some members of society don't feel they have to stand in line, or be treated equally; they feel they deserve better than most, just because of a nationality.
So too, then, I think some people may think they don't have to fit into a society, but instead, demand that the society adjusts to them. E.G. making all state and federally funded institutions learn (or be capable of) every language possible. This could include hospitals, etc. So for every possible language, there needs to be a translator on staff, even if there's nobody in region X that speaks that language. I can see this happening.
It would make more sense to me, to mandate a minimum level language skills class, for incoming immigrants. Cover the basics, and help them to get better acclimated to the English (American) culture of language. This would be a cost savings in the long run, I would think (of course, I'm only armchair guessing).
Regarding your reference to your use ( er, or misuse ) of the english language, i'm all for it. But, you can speak pretty proper english when you need to. And, you can transact business, call local authorities, and understand when a cop shouts POLICE in a situation. Therein lies a big difference, i think.
Dec 19, 2007 02:27 pm Those rights work both ways. They totally don't HAVE to learn English legally speaking...I totally don't have to spend more time on them, hire them in my businesses, support their businesses or their families with my tax dollar going to them in the form of welfare and such.
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 19, 2007 02:33 pm ahh, but to not hire them because of their culture, then you're discriminating based on race/nationality.
Tis a difficult picture, to see clearly.
This is where I think a basic skills class would be a great benefit to all involved.
Dec 19, 2007 02:35 pm Tough ****, it's my business, I should be able to hire, not hire and fire who I want for whatever reason I want...just like people can choose to not support that business as well...a privately held company should not have such rules...
The free market works best without price controls, hiring controls and such other controls placed by gov't...in free market competition works it out...but the gov't has no competition so they can't understand such a thought process and swear they are doing good things by passing all these stupid-*** laws...
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 19, 2007 02:43 pm doesn't seem like 'by the people, for the people' holds much water anymore.
My boss-man, from NL says in NL, they have a law, saying that if person A works for a company for awhile, if person A feels that they are under un-warranted stress from the company (owner, staff, whatever) then person A can take a year off from work, and the company has to pay them full wage for that year. This happened twice in a row to a person he knows, running a small flower shop. She hasn't had help, or an assistant for two years, but has had to pay for them for two years.
She won't hire another person now, when this second term is over.
That's ill.
Dec 19, 2007 02:43 pm Quote:
ahh, but to not hire them because of their culture, then you're discriminating based on race/nationality.
Try getting a job in a Windows-based office environment and tell them, "sorry, I only know Macintosh, so you'll have to accommodate me."
No difference.
Dec 19, 2007 02:46 pm pjk, that is ****** up.
Dec 19, 2007 02:48 pm Where is NL?
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 19, 2007 02:49 pm Netherlands
Dec 19, 2007 02:50 pm sounds like a typical socialist law...
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 19, 2007 02:50 pm [quote]Try getting a job in a Windows-based office environment and tell them, "sorry, I only know Macintosh, so you'll have to accommodate me."
No difference.[/quote]
Great point Herb.
Dec 19, 2007 02:51 pm Wha, you'd think with all the grass over there, the stress rate would be pretty low...
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 02:55 pm Quote:
Those rights work both ways. They totally don't HAVE to learn English legally speaking...I totally don't have to spend more time on them, hire them in my businesses, support their businesses or their families with my tax dollar going to them in the form of welfare and such.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Each one should behave as they see fit. I don't feel anyone should be expected to learn any language they don't want to, but don't expect me to have much sympathy for you if you choose not to. But maybe you can make it work, and if you can, my hat is off to you.
Dec 19, 2007 03:50 pm A big problem in colleges, graduate schools in particular, is very intelligent students with very good knowledge/information to share with the rest of the world, cannot effectively share it because they don't know their english well though they could still pass the TOEFL.
I guess I'd have to say one person choosing not to learn english causes many other people lots of trouble and difficulty when if that single person would have learned english, there would be no problem.
Choosing "not to learn english" seems awfully selfish and stupid to me and I think it's lame if taxpayers have to foot the bill for those who choose not to learn english (i.e. multiple language textbooks, signs, etc). Many churches offer free guided conversational english classes. There's very little excuse for not learning something that will greatly increase your hireability and chances for success in the US.
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 04:06 pm One time when I think it is totally intolerable to not be fluent and articulate in the native tounge of the country: when you're a Teacher's Assistant or a Professor at a university. Several friends of mine basically failed math and computer courses because the teacher spoke such broken English that it was impossible to follow them. The University wouldn't do anything about it either.
But I work in a very diverse work force at my company. On my team alone, we have people from the Phillipines, India, Latvia, Britan and rural U.S. towns. Plus in our department we have people from China, Korea, Malaysa, Vietnam, India, India, more from India, and even a few from India. Plus telecommuters from India.
The language barrier gets in the way sometimes, but for the most part everybody who speaks English as a second language does so very well. There's just little grammatical errors but I can always get the gist of what they're saying (except the fellow from Vietnam, his English is horrible. It's always a challenge to speak with him either verbally or in email/instant messaging).
The only group I have trouble communicating with are our offshore workers from India. Hindi is such a fast-paced language, and that carries over to when they learn English. Thick accents and fast-paced conversation combine for a very difficult conversation. Even in writing its hard to get them sometimes.
The difference is that they live, think, and talk in Hindi all day and only speak English when they talk at work. All of the ESL people I work with directly live in the U.S. and speak English daily in their home lives. That makes a huge difference.
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Dec 19, 2007 04:13 pm I would be happy if I could understand the person working the drive through window.
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 04:32 pm Hahaha. That could be a fault of those incredibly low-quality intercom systems. You could put James Earl Jones behind one of those things and have him come out sounding like Keith Richards!
DiemusikString benderMember
Since: Unknown
Dec 19, 2007 05:46 pm The main problem that I have is if a person is not going to take the time to learn English or the dominant language as it was called above, then do not expect society to bend to your laziness. Don't expect alternate menus and messages. Its so incredible stupid or at the very least, irresponsible not to learn the language.
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 06:01 pm Ha ha, but alternate menus and messages from a business stand point make sense. You don't have to bend to those that don't learn english, but a company who stands to make money off of them gladly will. The companies that have the alternate messages don't do it out of the good of their heart. They're not worried about english first ideology, just make money.
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Dec 19, 2007 07:46 pm Alternate menus and the like don't necessarily cater to residents, either. Tourists would probably be a large percentage of the target audience. Especially in larger metro areas that are vacation destinations for people around the world.
TallChapAnswer:On a good day, lipstick.Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004
Dec 20, 2007 06:09 pm Most Americans don't speak English.
They speak American. It's different...
Anyway, the way I see things is that when one chooses to live in another country one should learn at least the basics of that country's main language (unless you go to Belgium, in which case you are f***ed).
I spent a lot of time in Italy in my younger days. I could not speak fluently in Italian, but I made an effort to learn some to get me by. It worked out very well. I personally cannot comprehend why someone would not learn at least the very basics. Even for a short visit.
Isn't the word for "Police" pretty similar in most languages? Even if in hmong it's different, wouldn't you at least have some inkling that it was somewhat official? From what I understand, the police don't usually go into a bust stealthily. Usually there's someone shouting "Police!"
Also, how can someone who doesn't speak/understand English get to buy a gun? Aren't you supposed to be licensed? Is there not some screening? I'm not buying someone citing second amendment rights without them at least knowing what it says...
I'm not being ethnocentric, I'm being practical. I'm an immigrant, remember? Luckily I speak English (and speak American as a second language) so it's a little different.
English speaking countries tend to be very lazy when it comes to other languages, so I'm somewhat empathetic.
If someone doesn't understand you when you speak English, speak louder!
DiemusikString benderMember
Since: Unknown
Dec 21, 2007 12:58 am Thats what I have been doing wrong TallChap. I have been forgetting to speak louder! :) Actually you have summed up some of what I was thinking. While I'm not personally an immigrant I'm only a couple of generations away from Germany.
The gun confuses me too. I mean I understand this is America and weapons all but grow on trees here but even to get one illegally you would think he would have to speak a little English. :)
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 21, 2007 09:42 am Shotguns and rifles can be purchased from chain stores, with just ID for age. Handguns need a check.
TallChapAnswer:On a good day, lipstick.Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004
Dec 21, 2007 10:58 am Quote:
Shotguns and rifles can be purchased from chain stores, with just ID for age
Sigh....
Dec 21, 2007 10:59 am Guns are easy to get...there should be a background check for all weapons in my opinion, but eh, what the hell do I know.
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Dec 21, 2007 12:25 pm but the criminals who get them illegally don't have to go through a background check...
*removes tongue from cheek*
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 21, 2007 12:33 pm They're considered hunting tools, so freedom shouldn't be restricted.
But, I do see the point, having crazy hank with 6 felony assault charges want to buy a 30/06 with bushnell, I think he should give up his right to purchase / own killing implements.
BB and Pellet guns only. =)
But back to the Hmong father, he may have performed correct procedure, even if there was a background check. The gun dealer may have spoken his language, etc.
The article didn't say any gun possession charges were being levied, so it probably was not a problem.
Dec 21, 2007 12:37 pm They can also kill, hunting tool or no, they are a weapon capable of terrible things when used improperly or by terrible people.
I am a huge gun fan personally, but then I am a responsible, reasonably sane person.
I do think weapons should require a background check, and proof of training I would even support.
It is a right to bear arms, but there is also a serious responsibility that goes along with it. Society also has a right to protect itself from it's worst members.
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Dec 21, 2007 12:45 pm Good points.
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Dec 21, 2007 12:59 pm Quote:
reasonably sane person
"Reasonably" - hahaha
Dec 21, 2007 01:01 pm hehehe, well, some would argue...
