The Jena Six

[King Kashue]

Several things:

The 1st Amendment has come up. The nooses are potentially not protected speech for two reasons: One, minor students are not afforded full protection of speech on school grounds. Two, the first amendment does not protect speech that incites.

The latter is the more significant issue.


As for the situation in general, it's horrible on both sides.

The School telling black students "Oh, that tree is for white kids" is beyond the pale.
The white students hanging nooses is clearly a threat that goes beyond benign symbolism.

However, they deserve to go to jail. They stomped someone in a six-on-one. They're not victims here.


The racial tensions and previous threats are mitigation, not justification. They make it easier to understand why they did what they did, but they're not an excuse.

They did not stomp the guy in self-defense. They were not acting out of the need to provide protection to someone in eminent danger. They undertook a "preemptive counterstrike", and unlike in international military politics, that is not a legal justification for aggravated assault.

[burdizzos]

 

and who is pissed usually?

 

 

The idiots.

 

The white idiots bitch about how the black people get special treatment, while the black idiots bitch about the white idiots' racist remarks. It's a vicious circle.

 

Meanwhile, the thinking people, tell them all to STFU and get back to work.

[beginner01]

The idiots. The white idiots bitch about how the black people get special treatment, while the black idiots bitch about the white idiots' racist remarks. It's a vicious circle. Meanwhile, the thinking people, tell them all to STFU and get back to work.

 

 

there is truth in that remark:D

[burdizzos]

 

there is truth in that remark:D

 

 

There's a lot of truth in that statement.

 

The only part that isn't true is the part where black people get special treatment. Stupid ass white people claim they do so that they have a reason to be pissed.

[King Kashue]

There's a lot of truth in that statement. The only part that isn't true is the part where black people get special treatment. Stupid ass white people claim they do so that they have a reason to be pissed.

Hey man, you're full of crap. In the US, disadvantaged people get all the {censored}ing breaks!!!

[beginner01]

but........minorities DO get special treatment

[burdizzos]

Hey man, you're full of crap. In the US, disadvantaged people get all the {censored}ing breaks!!!

 

True, that's their incentive to be all disadvantaged and stuff.

[beginner01]

theres truth in THAT remark!

[beginner01]

[King Kashue]

You ate a lot of "wall candy" when you were a kid, didn't you?...

[misterhinkydink]

There's a lot of truth in that statement. The only part that isn't true is the part where black people get special treatment. Stupid ass white people claim they do so that they have a reason to be pissed.

 

 

They get helped out of the car and to the ground when stopped by the cops.

[burdizzos]

 

They get helped out of the car and to the ground when stopped by the cops.

 

 

 

Valid point. They often get shock therapy administered by those same cops at taxpayer expense.

[Mudbass]

They get helped out of the car and to the ground when stopped by the cops.

 

 

 

Chris Rock has a self help video for just this problem.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4961165717378550511

[Zebra]

then what is a hate crime exactly?

 

 

A crime where prejudice is the motive behind the crime, at least that's what I figured the definition was, and from what I can look up about hate crime legislation in the US, that's basically what the definition is.

So in the case of the bank robber-- no, that's not a hate crime, because the motive behind the crime was stealing money.

It may be skewed in other ways, but to me the idea of "hate crime" is pretty straight forward with the above definition.

[Crescent Seven]

Honestly, this sounds like my hometown when I was in high school, except everyone was white.
I've had my ass beat by 6+ dudes more than once. Our answer was to get 6+ of our own dudes together and go beat up one of their dudes. Eventually, all the dudes from both sides rumbled, everyone got their asses beat, and now, 10 years later, we all laugh about it when we run into each other.

Of course, there were no nooses. The {censored} Kickers would fill the beds of their Ford trucks with horse {censored} and dump in in the Jock parking lot so they'd have to drive their Mercedes' through it, so the Jocks would slash all their tires. That afternoon, we'd go with the {censored} Kickers and carry the portajohns from the soccer fields and tip them over at the entrance to the parking lot for the football practice field.

Where was Al Sharpton when the Jocks at Golden High School were getting terrorized with feces for semesters on end?
C7

[beginner01]

Honestly, this sounds like my hometown when I was in high school, except everyone was white. Where was Al Sharpton when the Jocks at Golden High School were getting terrorized with feces for semesters on end? C7

 

 

 

 

there-in lies teh answer:poke:

[Mooska]

I read the entire thing. No one died. Very disappointing.

[beginner01]

there's still time...........

[hawkhuff]

Several things: The 1st Amendment has come up. The nooses are potentially not protected speech for two reasons: One, minor students are not afforded full protection of speech on school grounds. Two, the first amendment does not protect speech that incites. The latter is the more significant issue. As for the situation in general, it's horrible on both sides. The School telling black students "Oh, that tree is for white kids" is beyond the pale. The white students hanging nooses is clearly a threat that goes beyond benign symbolism. However, they deserve to go to jail. They stomped someone in a six-on-one. They're not victims here. The racial tensions and previous threats are mitigation, not justification. They make it easier to understand why they did what they did, but they're not an excuse. They did not stomp the guy in self-defense. They were not acting out of the need to provide protection to someone in eminent danger. They undertook a "preemptive counterstrike", and unlike in international military politics, that is not a legal justification for aggravated assault.

 

 

Again, before anyone calls me racist I predicate my post by saying there is plenty of blame to go around in this fiasco.

 

Two things.

 

So, burning or stomping the flag is not inciting behavior?? But putting the nooses up would be? If the laws are written this way, it supports my point that there is, in fact, a double standard in this country perpetrated by the activist court system.

 

Second, I didn't read anywhere that school officials said it was a white kids tree. The principal said anyone can sit anywhere on the school grounds. In my view the black kids who initiated this knew full well it would incite. This is right?

 

Jesse and Al Not-so-Sharptons appearance is not inciting? They had to lock down the entire town for the demonstration, which is BS.

[beginner01]

see?.........you DO understand!

[burdizzos]

Again,

 

Stomping an American flag is a form of protest against the gov't. Hanging a noose at the scene of a racially charged incident is a threat.

 

There's a huge difference.

 

 

Also, it is at the discretion of the school board to determine the severity of the punishment for disruption.

 

 

I still don't see the problem with the black kids wanting to sit under the tree. Pointing out voluntary segregation is a good idea. When the kid asked the principal about sitting under the white tree, he was joking. In my opinion, it was a harmless exercise in pointing out the folly of each group keeping to itself. The hanging of the nooses marks a point of significant escalation.

[Westsailor]

I inherited a small farm not that far from Jena. My grandparents settled in that area in the late 1800's and worked the cotton fields. I've known that area of LA pretty much all my life. It's Appalachia without the hills. Nothing has changed in that neck of the woods for as long as I can remember. It's like a time warp to the 1930-40's. Interestingly (and what I hate about the area, among other things) is NO ONE really wants it to change.

It is dirt poor. Mostly dirt/gravel roads. 50-60% unemployment. Farming is a way of life. That and hunting/fishing is virtually the only means to put real food on the table for most of the population. Town buildings on the 'main streets' are from early/mid 19th century. Any new commercial construction is metal pre-fab or trailers. New meaning in the last 50 years. I've often thought Hollywood could do a period movie and the only thing they'd have to do is pick up the trash and apply a little paint. I can take you to the exact spot (not too far from my farm, even closer than Jena) where Bonnie & Clyde were finally gunned down.

Multiple generations of entire families live in the same house their great Grandparents built and have never traveled outside a 50 mi radius of the house they were born in. The biggest leap into the 20th century in my town (Coushatta) was a Burger King about 10 years ago. Nothing like it since.

We are talking Deep DEEP South here. The vast majority of white males are still Confederates in the strictest sense of the word. I have a cousin there called 'Bubba' that is a civil war reenactor. Rebel flags are flown proudly in the front yard by the blue collar majority. The more respectable 'town fathers' are just as staunch, just more covert. The N*****'s are tolerated (due to sheer numbers) but are viewed on the whole as a lazy, shiftless people. There is, however, a respect for those (generally older blacks) that serve as workers to help on the farms... bring in the hay, clear the fields, etc. (e.g., those that still know their place)

Even in this rural environment younger blacks have discovered crack and its become a real problem. Increased crime rates only reinforces the beliefs blacks are 'good for nothing'.

Those kids knew exactly the message they were sending when they hung those nooses in the tree. The excuse that it was a "naive prank" and "didn't know the fact of what it meant" is laughable. Probably the only reason there hasn't been a few murders along the way is the national attention they're getting. While they may be complete rednecks they aren't stupid when it comes to things like this. They learned their lesson in the 60's, not to do anything rash to 'put them in their place' when the feds are watching. Nevertheless, I'm also sure the blacks know the consequences if they get too 'uppidity'.

[King Kashue]

So, burning or stomping the flag is not inciting behavior?? But putting the nooses up would be? If the laws are written this way, it supports my point that there is, in fact, a double standard in this country perpetrated by the activist court system.

 

 

Burdizzos said it already, but no, the two are not the same.

 

Burning or stomping the flag is a statement against the government, and entails no inherent threat of violence against anyone.

 

Hanging nooses at the site of a racially charged incident holds a clear threat of violence.

 

 

"Incite" doesn't mean "really piss you off", which is how you're using it in the case of flag burning. "Incite" means "drive forward to illegal or dangerous action".

 

 

Speech that incites is not protected. Threats of violence are not protected speech.