Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-09-2014, 11:40 AM
 
Location: southern kansas
9,127 posts, read 9,369,412 times
Reputation: 21297

Advertisements

I didn't know any of this about Mark Wahlberg until this thread. But that's normal for me because I don't follow celebrities and couldn't care less about them one way or the other. But this thread makes me wonder if Wahlberg's recent appearance in the Wounded Warrior Project (IIRC) commercial has anything to do with him trying to get this pardon. Trying to boost his image perhaps?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-09-2014, 12:02 PM
 
78,385 posts, read 60,579,949 times
Reputation: 49663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydive Outlaw View Post
It is a state issue (not federal). The governor of Massachusetts is the only one that has the authority to pardon him.
Thanks for clarifying, I wasn't sure if his offenses were just state. My point still stands....he needs to start shelling cash towards the ruling party and then wait for a govenor on his way out of office not seeking re-election or closing out his term after losing re-election etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Savannah GA/Lk Hopatcong NJ
13,404 posts, read 28,726,919 times
Reputation: 12067
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLVgal View Post
I agree. He can't give his victim back his eyesight, but he has the means to make the guys life a little easier.

The fact that he hasn't bothered to seek him out and do so speaks volumes.
Agree!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 05:04 PM
 
Location: Westside Houston
1,022 posts, read 1,973,301 times
Reputation: 1903
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLVgal View Post
I agree. He can't give his victim back his eyesight, but he has the means to make the guys life a little easier.

The fact that he hasn't bothered to seek him out and do so speaks volumes.
^^^Simple and true.

Marky mark was a wanna be thug at one time. You moved on.

Can't give the victim back his eye sight, his vision is forever lost.

Can't turn back time. The consequences hold for as long as the victim is still alive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 05:52 PM
 
3,749 posts, read 4,966,204 times
Reputation: 3672
Well his rhymes made him wealthy, so you know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2014, 07:39 PM
 
1,385 posts, read 1,523,861 times
Reputation: 1723
Certainly you know what the drug trade entails. It's inherently violent. The individual convicted for possession or trafficking may not have committed a violent offense, but he's supporting a system that has resulted in the murder of hundreds of thousands of people, has caused the deaths of many millions more. The "industry" also fuels many other societal problems and this results in millions being exploited in one way or another. Why not just legalize these drugs, then, I'm sure you'll say. Well, legalizing won't make the problem go away - just like it hasn't for alcohol. Major source of revenue for organized crime. Drugs would be different - do you think these kingpins and everyone else who makes millions off of it will simply move on to something else? If anything they'll get even more violent in trying to eliminate the "legal" competition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradPiff View Post
And to think there are guys do life for non violent drug offenses While he walks free
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2014, 02:57 AM
 
Location: Purgatory
6,387 posts, read 6,276,723 times
Reputation: 9921
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzy24 View Post
Yeah, that should excuse Wahlberg's behavior.

That was not my point in the least. My point is that there was Dorchester was a mess 25+ years ago when it came to racial relations. I'm curious as to whether Wahlberg had any of the same experience that my white Irish-Catholic family did during the same time in the same place.

If a certain group of people dislike you and cause you harm, you tend to not like them. If this group is black, you are automatically labeled a racist. What if EVERYONE you ever met from Germany beat you up and stole from you? How would you feel about Germans in general?

Although it would not excuse his behavior, it might better explain it. And the N word was common in that area at the time. Hard to believe today, but it just was not seen as the worst thing that could come out of someone's mouth like it is today. (This is why i a don't look too harshly on Paula Dean who grew up in a dif time.)

Of course even if Wahlberg WAS ever attacked by any black people in Dot, he is likely not ever going to come out and say this because that would make him look "racist" and he already looks like it from the reports.

And it sounds like he WAS racist. But doesn't mean he still IS racist. And i question if him, like my family, only had negative interactions w black people in Dorchester up through the point of throwing rocks at black kids. But of course, i will never know because, unfortunately, he would look racist to tell ANY story of black on white crime . . . .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2014, 10:29 AM
 
17,815 posts, read 25,634,677 times
Reputation: 36278
Quote:
Originally Posted by phonelady61 View Post
years ago a studio would not touch a guy like this with a rep like this either but now it seems they don't care ...give me the good ole days when an actor or actress had to maintain a great moral character or else they were history as far as the studio goes call me old fashioned but I still think moral character and content should count for something .
Apparently you don't know much about old Hollywood...LOL. When stars were under contract to the studios they were protected. The studios worked closely with the police to cover things up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
Those days never existed. The studios only wanted their stars to appear righteous and holy, no bad PR...keep your dirty laundry private. Scandal was rife, but largely only whispered about until Confidential magazine began to really dig the dirt and regularly publish it. Tab Hunter posed prayerfully with this mother in a Photoplay article about his wholesome religious beliefs to put the kibosh on rumor of his homosexuality, Loretta Young adopted her own illegitimate child, Hollywood PR worked fulltime to keep Rita Hayworth's alcoholism out of the press, Rock Hudson was pressured into marrying his agent's secretary to cover up rumors of his preference for men,..........and on it went.

Now no one bothers because public morality is largely no better than that of celebrities, and studios are not the big players in the industry that they used to be so their incentive to protect their investments simply isn't there.
This, and in the 1920s it was even wilder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2014, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Texas
9,189 posts, read 7,599,094 times
Reputation: 7801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris V View Post

Marky mark was a wanna be thug at one time.
Wanna be?? He WAS a thug. If what he did wasn't thuggish behaviour, I don't know what is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 07:39 AM
 
Location: Wonderland
67,650 posts, read 60,914,057 times
Reputation: 101078
Quote:
Originally Posted by catdad7x View Post
I didn't know any of this about Mark Wahlberg until this thread. But that's normal for me because I don't follow celebrities and couldn't care less about them one way or the other. But this thread makes me wonder if Wahlberg's recent appearance in the Wounded Warrior Project (IIRC) commercial has anything to do with him trying to get this pardon. Trying to boost his image perhaps?
Mark Wahlberg was 15, 16 and 21 when he committed the crimes. He is from a very poor and crime ridden family (all of his siblings have been arrested and convicted numerous times for a wide range of offenses). He was a member of a gang, as were most teens from his poverty stricken neighborhood.

When he was in his mid twenties he decided to turn his life around. A few years ago he married the woman he had been involved with for years. He now attends daily Mass. He is actively involved in numerous charities.

While I commend his apparent turn around, I don't think he should be pardoned for crimes he did commit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:32 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top