Wear Black Today - Support the Jena 6

[Aqualung]

It most certainly won't be broken by charging these black kids with aggravated second degree battery, it will cause more anger among the black citizens and a higher sense of entitlement and power in white kids. The cycle isn't one of "hate", it's one of white kids getting off with a slap on the wrist while black kids get ridiculous punishments and no justice. I can't believe you are excusing the actions of the law enforcement officials. How much can you miss the point.

Nooses were motivated by racial supremacy, the beating was motivated by anger, not hate.

At this point, what's the alternative? They already missed their opportunity to punish the white kids. Should they let the black kids off scott-free, because two wrongs make a right?

 

[Smoke]

This isn't about supporting violence, this is about supporting justice.

No, it's not. Letting those kids off the hook for beating and kicking another kid till he was unconscious is not about justice.

It's about saying that racism is an excuse for absolutely anything black people do. It's about pretending that black people can not be held culpable for their actions. It's about saying that it's okay if black kids behave worse than animals, that that's all we can expect from them under the circumstances. What kind of moronic message are you people trying send?

You want justice, you prosecute the white kids, too. I'm not saying there's no racism, and I'm not saying there's not a serious problem here. But pretending that black on white violence doesn't matter, that black on white violent is understandable and even justifiable, is morally retarded. Rally for hate crimes legislation, and hate crimes prosecutions. Rally to prosecute the other criminals. I'm with you on that one.

But rally to support a loser with four previous convictions for violent crime? It's insane.

 

[kateyes]

!!!! That's not the "living ****" out of someone, he was fine by that evening. And unlike the nooses, they had understandable (arguably not excusable) reason.


::Sigh::, no one is "ignoring" it. You're missing the entire point so much I think you're doing it on purpose. The nooses is definitely assault, that threat isn't "implied" it's as blatant and clear as day--sit under this tree again and we will lynch you. Do you realize how powerful that is? How scary that is to be 14, 15, 16, 17 years old and have to see that sort of message? And don't forget, it's not just the noose kids, it's the kids who beat up the black student, and the kid who pulled a gun on black students.


No one is saying the Jena Six should be unpunished (providing they are even guilty, which hasn't been remotely proven). What they are saying is that the racist attacks by white students should be punished, and that the punishment for the Jena 6, provided they are even guilty (after being tried fairly) should suit their crimes. No reclassifying their shoes as "deadly weapons" in order to get a aggravated, or appointing ridiculously biased juries, or not even taking into account that some witnesses say they weren't there. Can you not see the absolutely huge difference here? Or do you just not want to see the difference?

First I greatly resent your implication that I am willfully ignorant--or worse that I am racist. I am well aware of the issues in this story, I was attempting to indicate it was a matter of proportion. Neither side in this story is ALL right or ALL wrong. I agreed that the nooses were wrong (and the students involved were suspended-should the punishment have been greater--yes!) The white student who hit the black student over the head with a bottle was charged with a misdemeanor and put on probation--should he have been charged with a felony, aggravated assault--yes! Should the black students who took the gun have been charged with robbery-definately not? Should the black students who are alleged to have beat up the white kid who was bragging about the incident have been charged with attempted murder and charged as adults---of course not?

The problem of course is based in racial prejudice, the problems/issues have been mishandled from the beginning. Being thrown to the ground and being kicked including in the head-does indicate to me a serious intent to do bodily harm(and yes I would still consider it as having the **** kicked out of you whether he was able to do something that night or not),--and does deserve to be punished. Just as the white boy who hit the kid in the head with a bottle should have been punished more severely.

Is anything any of us on this forum have to say going to make a difference--not a bit!

 

[Grappleberry Punch]

Should they let the black kids off scott-free, because two wrongs make a right?

Derk, no one is saying they should be let off the hook for starting a fight at school (if they are even guilty). If one more person posts that ridiculous ******* strawman, or any variation of it, I will post this:slap:. Because I think it's funny.
----------------------

No, it's not. Letting those kids off the hook for beating and kicking another kid till he was unconscious is not about justice.

Midnight,
:slap:.

It's about pretending that black people can not be held culpable for their actions. It's about saying that it's okay if black kids behave worse than animals, that that's all we can expect from them under the circumstances. What kind of moronic message are you people trying send?

And your side is about pretending that white people can't be held culpable for their actions. It's about saying it's okay if white people behave worse than racist pieces of absolute ****, because that's all that they are. What kind of moronic message are you trying to send?

But rally to support a loser with four previous convictions for violent crime? It's insane.

A "loser"? You don't get punished because you have previous convictions, he's done his time for those. And look at how ridiculously easy it is to get mf attempted second-degree murder if you are black. How easy it is to get second degree robbery? Acting like this sort of blatant justice is somehow "ok" because this kid has a record? Are you kidding me? Justice should be served no matter what this kid's history is.
-----

The white student who hit the black student over the head with a bottle was charged with a misdemeanor and put on probation--should he have been charged with a felony, aggravated assault--yes! Should the black students who took the gun have been charged with robbery-definately not? Should the black students who are alleged to have beat up the white kid who was bragging about the incident have been charged with attempted murder and charged as adults---of course not?

Kateeyes

Good, then you should be protesting too. Believe it or not, if these kids had been charged with simple battery, and given fair trials, there wouldn't be a protest. This isn't about letting black kids get off scott free, regardless of what a few desperate Jena apologists might say--its about justice, plain and simple. I pray things continue to get done.

 

[Smoke]

And your side is about pretending that white people can't be held culpable for their actions.

No, it's not. If I were the principal or the sheriff, I'd clean house at that school, and I'm all in favor of a rally for that. Not a rally in support of violent teens.

A "loser"? You don't get punished because you have previous convictions, he's done his time for those. And look at how ridiculously easy it is to get mf attempted second-degree murder if you are black. How easy it is to get second degree robbery? Acting like this sort of blatant justice is somehow "ok" because this kid has a record?

No, he shouldn't be punished again for his previous offenses. But racial injustice occurs every day in this country. In this case, the injustice is not that this kid was arrested and prosecuted, but that others weren't. Telling him what he did is okay does not address the problem.

And frankly, people with more than a thimbleful of brains choose their battles. You don't rally to support a five-time violent offender. You plan your rally around a case that can arouse some support and sympathy among people who don't have their heads up their asses.

 

[MaddLlama]

Maybe I'm just daft, but when did it become OK to assault someone?

If these kids had a problem, then surely there was some other way to solve it than beating another one to a inch of his life.

Know what? They're both wrong. End of story.

 

[gnomon]

I find it amazing that anyone would believe that the weapon was a shoe and not...hands and feet.


The whole situation presented by the media is a cluster...you know. Yet I have not read a single report indicating that the student who was beaten was one of the students who put a noose on the maligned tree. Nor have I read an accurate account that only white students were actually ever allowed to sit under the tree.

Is there an issue of racism here? Probably. Is there a possibility that one event is being magnified by another even not completely related? Probably.

It's a shame that bandwagons roll into town on these issues rather than anything like reason and truth leak out. And I have to ask, in my usual manner, why aren't Jackson and Sharpton campaigning for Cory Maye while they are in the south.

I agree with MidnightBlue and MaddLlama, and even ScubaPete, on this issue. I will not wear black in support of a group of kids who assaulted and beat (with hands and feat, not a ******* shoe) on this issue. I would rather wait and see saner voices sort this out then rather rely on a media that can rarely be trusted and a few fevered egos more interested in whoring publicity than actually seeking justice.

And if I can insert again, retry Cory Maye!

 

[Smoke]

Good, then you should be protesting too. Believe it or not, if these kids had been charged with simple battery, and given fair trials, there wouldn't be a protest. This isn't about letting black kids get off scott free, regardless of what a few desperate Jena apologists might say--its about justice, plain and simple.

Exactly. That's why all the protesters are carrying signs that say CHARGE THE JENA SIX WITH SIMPLE BATTERY instead of signs that say FREE THE JENA SIX.

 

[Grappleberry Punch]

No, he shouldn't be punished again for his previous offenses. But racial injustice occurs every day in this country. In this case, the injustice is not that this kid was arrested and prosecuted, but that others weren't.

Nope, the injustice is that he was prosecuted on bad evidence, with biased jury on inflated charges. And that the white kids weren't charged with ****. And when black kids tried to express their distaste legally and peacefully, they were threatened to have their lives taken away by the DA. And that teenaged kids trying to get an education were threatened with lynchings and with a shotgun and it was repeatedly ignored. There is all sorts of injustice to pick from, and all sorts of reasons to protest.

Telling him what he did is okay does not address the problem.

Nice strawman. :slap:.

And frankly, people with more than a thimbleful of brains choose their battles. You don't rally to support a five-time violent offender. You plan your rally around a case that can arouse some support and sympathy among people who don't have their heads up their asses.

Yes, we do. Because even nasty scary "violent offenders" can be the victims of injustice. And he's just one kid. Tell me why the **** his record matters to this case. And this has widespread sympathy from all sorts of people who aren't willfully ignorant about racism.
-------------------------------------------

Maybe I'm just daft, but when did it become OK to assault someone?

:slap:

If these kids had a problem, then surely there was some other way to solve it than beating another one to a inch of his life.

It wasn't to an inch of his life. :no: Please read the facts of the case before you comment.
----------------------------------------

I find it amazing that anyone would believe that the weapon was a shoe and not...hands and feet.

Hands and feet aren't lethal weapons--I mean, if that were the case what would battery without weapons look like? :sarcastic LOL.

Yet I have not read a single report indicating that the student who was beaten was one of the students who put a noose on the maligned tree. Nor have I read an accurate account that only white students were actually ever allowed to sit under the tree.

The student wasn't one of those who hung the noose on the tree. And black kids were" allowed" to sit under the white tree--they just were threatened with lynching when they did. That's usually how segregation works in the 21st century. You're missing the point.


EDIT:

Exactly. That's why all the protesters are carrying signs that say CHARGE THE JENA SIX WITH SIMPLE BATTERY instead of signs that say FREE THE JENA SIX.

::Sigh::...yes, you are missing the point on purpose, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Aqualung]

Maybe you should address people's points instead of just slapping them.

 

[Grappleberry Punch]

Maybe you should address people's points instead of just slapping them.

It's been addressed, it's a ridiculous strawman, if I continue to go over the exact reasons why this isn't about saying "its ok to beat up white kids", we'll be here all day. Maybe you should actually look at what's being said and the reasons behind the controversy.

Let me say it again: no one says it's ok to let the kids get off scott free. Not even "FREE THE JENA SIX" shirts. The controversy isn't about kids getting in trouble. Trust me. They could have been suspended, they could've been given normal fair charges...and there wouldn't be this sort of movement. The outrage isn't black kids beat up a white kid and got in trouble for it. It is almost everything BUT that. Get it now?

 

[Smoke]

Nope, the injustice is that he was prosecuted on bad evidence, with biased jury on inflated charges.

If there was any injustice at all committed against Mychal Bell, it was that his lawyer seems to have been incompetent.

The conviction was overturned because it was decided that he shouldn't have been tried as an adult, and not for any of the reasons you claim above.

And that the white kids weren't charged with ****.

I agree that several of the white students should have been charged. But you want to free the only kids who actually caused anybody any physical harm, so why wouldn't you want the kids who merely made threats to be free, too?

6 white people beat up and raped a black teenage girl a few weeks ago and it went under the radar -- she even spent like a week in the hospital recovering -- you remember that? Probably not

I'll bet everybody would remember it if you rallied in support of the assailants.

 

[Aqualung]

It's been addressed,

Then refer them to it (not everybody has time to read every post by every member in every thread) or just ignore the point. It just makes you look antagonistic and hostile if your responses consist mostly of :slap:

 

[Grappleberry Punch]

If there was any injustice at all committed against Mychal Bell, it was that his lawyer seems to have been incompetent.

Well, we are making some progress at least. :sarcastic

The conviction was overturned because it was decided that he shouldn't have been tried as an adult, and not for any of the reasons you claim above.

Trying him as an adult when he is certainly no where near adulthood is a reason I gave, though my other reasons are legitimate.

I agree that several of the white students should have been charged. But you want to free the only kids who actually caused anybody any physical harm, so why wouldn't you want the kids who merely made threats to be free, too?

Again, we don't know if the Jena 6 are even guilty, and trust me, I don't think any of the white kids should get such ridiculous charges either. They should all be suspended or get charged with exactly what they did...hate crime, assault, simple battery, etc. That's what justice is...you seem to have this warped "all or nothing" idea of justice.

 

[Smoke]

Again, we don't know if the Jena 6 are even guilty, and trust me, I don't think any of the white kids should get such ridiculous charges either. They should all be suspended or get charged with exactly what they did...hate crime, assault, simple battery, etc. That's what justice is...you seem to have this warped "all or nothing" idea of justice.

There is no justice. Whatever you do to the kids who hung the nooses in the tree, it doesn't balance the scales for the sick feeling in the stomachs of fourteen-year-old black kids who went to school and saw what was clearly intended to mock and intimidate. When somebody commits a crime against you, punishing that person doesn't bring justice to the victim. It might, if it's done well, bring a sense of balance back to the community.

I think hanging those nooses calls for something more serious that suspension. And I think when you kick another person in the head till he's unconscious, that's more serious than simple battery. But we can go back and forth on what we think about that till the cows come home.

What's really confusing to me is this curious idea you have that people must be proven guilty of a crime before they can be tried for it. Doesn't work that way.

Here's the problem: people ***** and moan because the white kids weren't prosecuted, but when it comes down to it, they don't want the white kids tried, either. They just want the black kids freed, because the truth is, they think the little white racist ******* got what he deserved. That's pretty sick.

And I reiterate: If six white kids had done this to a black kid, the same people demanding that they "free the Jena Six" would be there demanding prosecution for a hate crime. They certainly wouldn't be rallying in support of the assailants.

If those six kids were white, and the victim was black, not one of the 50,000 people who rallied in Jena would have lifted a finger in their defense. Not one of those 50,000 people would have said they should have been maybe suspended instead. Not one of those 50,000 people would have said, "Hey it's just a kids' fight; don't take it so seriously." And nobody else would have rallied either, unless it was the Klan. Probably not even the Klan, but if anybody did, it would be them. That's the level this rally is on. These people just have a different prejudice. Not even a different kind of prejudice, just a different prejudice of the same kind.

 

[MaddLlama]

Ok, so when did it become legally acceptable to assault someone?

 

[Grappleberry Punch]

When somebody commits a crime against you, punishing that person doesn't bring justice to the victim. It might, if it's done well, bring a sense of balance back to the community.

? I think we disagree about the meaning of justice.

I think hanging those nooses calls for something more serious that suspension. And I think when you kick another person in the head till he's unconscious, that's more serious than simple battery..

Haha, it was in-house suspension no less. It is still simple battery though, even if he got knocked unconscious.

What's really confusing to me is this curious idea you have that people must be proven guilty of a crime before they can be tried for it. Doesn't work that way.

I think they should be proven guilty before people start calling them violent thugs who don't deserve fair trials or reasonable charges.

Here's the problem: people ***** and moan because the white kids weren't prosecuted, but when it comes down to it, they don't want the white kids tried, either. They just want the black kids freed, because the truth is, they think the little white racist ******* got what he deserved. That's pretty sick.

Oh no, they want the white kids tried. I think I've been involved with this movement much longer than it's been around in the mainstream press. There are people, especially those deeply effected by racism, who like to thin that this is vigilante justice, and that's a whole other debate about what choices the kids really had. It's not important though, because like I said--if the kids had been given reasonable charges, there would be no controversy right now. Hell, this barely even became a controversy, it was ignored for ages.

And I reiterate: If six white kids had done this to a black kid, the same people demanding that they "free the Jena Six" would be there demanding prosecution for a hate crime. They certainly wouldn't be rallying in support of the assailants.

Well, that's because the assailants would be given simple battery and probation (if that!), so why would we need to support them? They got all the support they need from the actual system.

If we lived in bizzaro world where black administrators and law enforcements purposely silenced white kids' legitimate concerns about racial violence, slapped violent black teenagers on the wrist for hate crimes against whites while throwing "attempted murder" or "second degree robbery" charges towards any backlash...well, maybe it would be an issue then, and we would be rallying to support them. We don't live in that world though.

That's the level this rally is on. These people just have a different prejudice. Not even a different kind of prejudice, just a different prejudice of the same kind.

Prejudice against racists? Maybe. Racism is a clear threat, and I do think that Barker doesn't exactly win any sympathy contests, and he probably deserves a good punishment himself. But I fail to see how that reaches Klan levels of prejudice.
--------------

Ok, so when did it become legally acceptable to assault someone?

IDK, ask the school administrators or law enforcement officials of Jena. They certainly think it's acceptable and harmless pranking--so long as the victims are black.

 

[MaddLlama]

IDK, ask the school administrators or law enforcement officials of Jena. They certainly think it's acceptable and harmless pranking--so long as the victims are black.

So, in your view then, it's legally acceptable to assault someone if they do something racist?

I'm not saying it's ok to be racist, I'm just saying that two wrongs don't make it right, and the suggestion that violence is equal to justice makes no sense to me.

It isn't fair to paint just one side as the victim. They're both to blame. Frankly I'm amazed that people don't see that. :sarcastic

So, why is doing something racist not OK, and assaulting someone in response is acceptable? Is it just because the victims of the initial racism were black?

I don't see being black, or being offended as an excuse to assault someone any more than I think it's acceptable to be racist just because one is white, or from the south.

 

[Grappleberry Punch]

So, in your view then, it's legally acceptable to assault someone if they do something racist?

Did I say that? Anywhere? :slap: That is why you get the smack smilie. Dumb strawmen like that.

 

[MaddLlama]

Did I say that? Anywhere? :slap: That is why you get the smack smilie. Dumb strawmen like that.

Well, maybe if you'd be clearer in explaining what you're saying, I wouldn't need to make such assumptions, because it certainly sounded like that's what you were saying..

I simply don't see what the controversy is. Racism exists. Duh. :sleep: