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.
Who started it? Nobody would have ever had to know he was a violent black man if the old white man had just treated him with respect. Didn't this white man get the memo about how black people are savages?
His penalty will reflect the desires of a civil society that does not want to give white racist permission to shout racial epithets and young black men with out recourse.
Speech is protected by the Constitution. Murderous assault isn't. You don't get to kill someone because they hurt your feelings.
Speech is protected by the Constitution. Murderous assault isn't. You don't get to kill someone because they hurt your feelings.
Wrong again, hate speech is not. You should keep up we already stablished that. Since I have been black longer than a lot of you I will be the bearer of some bad news . Nothing usually happens to a black person who retaliates against a person who calls them N-word. It keeps society civil. So you guys can't have your beloved word back after all, only black people can use that word, live with it. Its like that for all racial slurs.
Speech is protected by the Constitution. Murderous assault isn't. You don't get to kill someone because they hurt your feelings.
, hence the murderer was properly charged, and the store tapes should be the only evidence required to obtain a conviction. If his lawyers are wise, they will seek a plea bargain deal. Otherwise, like the Chauvin case, the video tape will be all the state needs to win its case.
Wrong again, hate speech is not. You should keep up we already stablished that. Since I have been black longer than a lot of you I will be the bearer of some bad news . Nothing usually happens to a black person who retaliates against a person who calls them N-word. It keeps society civil. So you guys can't have your beloved word back after all, only black people can use that word, live with it. Its like that for all racial slurs.
Years ago I read a novel by black author Walter Mosley, "Always Outnumbered--Always Outgunned," in which the protagonist, Socrates Fortlow, an ex-convict who had spent years in prison for a rape and murder, was trying to re-established life as a free man in Los Angeles.
While in prison, Socrates had been used by the prison guards to murder another black prisoner. Through that, had learned a particular lesson: The white establishment treats black men in such a way as to evoke violence because the white establishment knows exactly how to deal with black violence. Black violence suits their intentions and purposes. They are prepared for it. They know what to do with a violent black man, and how to use his violence to their greater political and economic advantage.
So we have this young black manager, who might well have had a promising, self-advancing future, who might have broken a cycle of poverty for a family...but who has now given the white establishment all it needs to destroy that possibility. Which is exactly what it wanted.
The law recognizes a concept of "fighting words". Yes, minor assaults are forgiven when the assailant is provoked. Had he shoved or punched the guy and that was the end of it, I'd say we're even.
The fact that the name caller was apparently frail, and fell to his unexpected death is an unintended consequence.
But I think if you get in someone's face and are rude and call them a racial slur for no reason, you should be prepared to be punched.
Response: Opinion
There are always unintended consequences. Does not mean there won't be unintended justice.
Just ask the parents of the little black baby that was shot in the projects.
She was an unintended target but the person who shot and killed her is going to jail.
Years ago I read a novel by black author Walter Mosley, "Always Outnumbered--Always Outgunned," in which the protagonist, Socrates Fortlow, an ex-convict who had spent years in prison for a rape and murder, was trying to re-established life as a free man in Los Angeles.
While in prison, Socrates had been used by the prison guards to murder another black prisoner. Through that, had learned a particular lesson: The white establishment treats black men in such a way as to evoke violence because the white establishment knows exactly how to deal with black violence. Black violence suits their intentions and purposes. They are prepared for it. They know what to do with a violent black man, and how to use his violence to their greater political and economic advantage.
So we have this young black manager, who might well have had a promising, self-advancing future, who might have broken a cycle of poverty for a family...but who has now given the white establishment all it needs to destroy that possibility. Which is exactly what it wanted.
The question is why would he let them do that? In the end we are all responsible for the choices we make. There is no one else to blame.
, hence the murderer was properly charged, and the store tapes should be the only evidence required to obtain a conviction. If his lawyers are wise, they will seek a plea bargain deal. Otherwise, like the Chauvin case, the video tape will be all the state needs to win its case.
And like the Chauvin case, the tape will make the guy's family very wealthy, by the time Dunkin Donuts settles their law suit.
The question is why would he let them do that? In the end we are all responsible for the choices we make. There is no one else to blame.
The point of Walter Mosley's novel was: Don't let them do that.
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.
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.
, hence the murderer was properly charged, and the store tapes should be the only evidence required to obtain a conviction. If his lawyers are wise, they will seek a plea bargain deal. Otherwise, like the Chauvin case, the video tape will be all the state needs to win its case.