He drove by a group of protesters with a noose made of an extension cord hanging off of the back of his truck.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/21/car.nooses/index.html
He also said that his family is in the Ku Klux Klan. I hope his parents are proud.
He drove by a group of protesters with a noose made of an extension cord hanging off of the back of his truck.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/21/car.nooses/index.html
He also said that his family is in the Ku Klux Klan. I hope his parents are proud.
the sad part is that if they are in the KKK then his parents probably are proud.
It is a semi free society. I think that he should not be arrested.
The truest test of freedom of speech and freedom of expression is allowing the worst forms of free speech and expression. If the worst forms are not allowed, then you do not have free speech. Who cares about this redneck? But what about the "next man"?
there is a difference between free speach and a death threat. I believe this is the latter.
saying you are in the kkk, not an arrestable offence.
displaying an exicution device as a statement may very well be. considering the current situation in jenna, let alone the long history of jim crow and lynching in america, it might as well have been a gun.
Given that the Supreme Court has determined that "Bong Hits for Jesus" isn't protected speech, I would hope that terroristic threats aren't OK either.
I would be shocked if driving with a gun drew any sort of reaction in that area. I know where I live it's legal and common to have a rifle in the back window of a truck this time of year.
I have to agree with the poster who said that while despicable, this probably falls under legal speech. I'm no expert but that's the case.
fgn we ,c sK wrote:
considering the current situation in jenna, let alone the long history of jim crow and lynching in america, it might as well have been a gun.
he had a gun too.
fgn we ,c sK wrote:
displaying an execution device as a statement may very well be. considering the current situation in jenna, let alone the long history of jim crow and lynching in america, it might as well have been a gun.
It was African American journalist Stanley Crouch who pointed out that twice as many African Americans were murdered by gangbangers in Los Angeles from 1980-2005 as were lyching in the deep south from 1887-1914.
Between 1882 and 1951 4700 lynchings occurred in the United States. From 1980 to 2005 10,000 blacks were killed by other blacks in Los Angeles alone. Nationally, during the same period, approximately 200,000 blacks were murdered, 94% of them (188,000) by black assailants.
anyone notice that the guy who took the picture of the noose's hanging from the trucks name was casanova love?
the pertinent offense was "inciting to riot." legally speaking, that's a pretty factual inquiry. considering the situation down there right now, there's a good argument for it - especially considering they were driving by protesters. as we all should know, there are limits to free speech/expression and incitement to violence is one of them. it's tough to know where to draw the line.
Just a thought.. wrote:
Given that the Supreme Court has determined that "Bong Hits for Jesus" isn't protected speech, I would hope that terroristic threats aren't OK either.
Feeble-minded fool. Your "free speech" has reasonable restrictions in schools.
FBI Facts wrote:
fgn we ,c sK wrote:displaying an execution device as a statement may very well be. considering the current situation in jenna, let alone the long history of jim crow and lynching in america, it might as well have been a gun.
It was African American journalist Stanley Crouch who pointed out that twice as many African Americans were murdered by gangbangers in Los Angeles from 1980-2005 as were lyching in the deep south from 1887-1914.
Between 1882 and 1951 4700 lynchings occurred in the United States. From 1980 to 2005 10,000 blacks were killed by other blacks in Los Angeles alone. Nationally, during the same period, approximately 200,000 blacks were murdered, 94% of them (188,000) by black assailants.
And your point is??...
FBI Facts wrote:
It was African American journalist Stanley Crouch who pointed out that twice as many African Americans were murdered by gangbangers in Los Angeles from 1980-2005 as were lyching in the deep south from 1887-1914.
Between 1882 and 1951 4700 lynchings occurred in the United States. From 1980 to 2005 10,000 blacks were killed by other blacks in Los Angeles alone. Nationally, during the same period, approximately 200,000 blacks were murdered, 94% of them (188,000) by black assailants.
you can't bring facts to an argument! it just offers legitimacy! what would al sharptongue and jessie hijackson do now? they can't blame whitey anymore.
wow. thanks for that info. i'll surely not care about racial violence ever again based on that. whatever was i thinking?
Is it free speech for blacks or everyone ? I find it disgusting and vile but having a noose hanging isnt and shouldnt be a crime. If blacks hadnt reacted with violence at the sight of a noose none of this would be in question.
Why is Al Sharpton dictating to the country what is ok and what is not ok to say in the USA ? If its not ok to say what Sharpton thinks is ok, your either run off the airwaves or if your in some inbred small town you get the hell beat out of you. That is the crime not some redneck idiot having a noose on his truck.
Ok let's also ignore that the kid was driving drunk. Can he at least spend the night in jail for that? Or should we let him off the hook for that too?
umm.... wrote:
And your point is??...
Lynching is irrelevant. The biggest threat to black has always been themselves.
FBI Facts wrote:
umm.... wrote:And your point is??...
Lynching is irrelevant. The biggest threat to black has always been themselves.
No lynching is NOT irrelevant because that is what these kids were implying with the noose. The biggest threat we as HUMANS have is other HUMANS, in that you are right, regardless of color. But to say that lynching is irrelevant, come on, what were they going to use the noose for? hang christmas decorations?
FBI Facts wrote:
Lynching is irrelevant. The biggest threat to black has always been themselves.
By your logic, terrorism is irrelevant, because far more white Americans have been murdered by other white Americans than have ever been killed by terrorists.
yeah, totally. if it's not the biggest threat, it's irrelevant and we shouldn't be concerned with it at all. stuff like that just solves itself.