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.
About 10 million Africans died during the Middle Passage, add a couple hundred years of slavery and violent discrimination. How much worse does it have to get before it's seen as being on the same level?
My question is of course rhetorical because when it comes to the cruel well thought out destruction of a people - there are no levels of "bad." It's just something we try to convince ourselves of so we can distance ourselves from it - or our historical role in it. The Holocaust, slavery, the Native American experience - all of it should be afforded the same level of social and historical respect.
As for the topic itself, if people can't deal with the consequences of their actions they shouldn't commit the crime. Period.
Their actions fall under hate crime legislation. I would rather such legislation be broad enough to curb planned hurtful socially irresponsible behavior before it becomes something more than to have hate crime legislation that's merely window dressing. Stop acting like a racist butthole and you don't have a problem. It's as simple as that.
Jews, African-American and Native Americans all suffered horrible crimes.
The latest two in the history of this country.
I am pretty certain that these boys kissed their military careers goodbye for good since the military rightfully so operates on more rigurous legal and ethical grounds.
However, these two young men don't deserve to rot in prison for what is a symbolic crime.
And I doubt they will.
Last edited by learningCA; 03-07-2010 at 02:11 PM..
No they don't. Freedom of speech doesn't end when people get offended. As much as I disagree with these guys, the 1st amendment gives them the right to be stupid.
I can stroll up to a TSA officer today with a plane ticket in my hand and let out a string of vulgarities toward the US government and proclaim that 9/11 was an unfinished job. I'd be perfectly within my right but tomorrow would be a very different day from the one I planned.
Free speech is not without its consequences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by learningCA
I am pretty certain that these boys kissed their military careers goodbye for good since the military rightfully so operates on more rigurous legal and ethical grounds.
However, these two young men don't deserve to rot in prison for what is still largely a symbolic crime.
And I doubt that they will.
They haven't been charged with anything yet but if/when they do, I too have a hard time believing that they will rot in prison.
Tampering in the second degree under MO law is a misdemeanor unless its motivated by a hate crime. Then the charge becomes a class C felony punishable by up to 7 years of jail time. Seeing as they are first offenders, its unlikely they'll be rotting.
More than likely this is what will happen:
An offender convicted of a nonviolent cass C or D felony with no prior prison commitment, after serving 120 days of his sentence, may, in writing, petition the court to serve the remainder of his sentence on probation or an alternative sentence. The judge, after recommendations by the Department of Corrections, will decide whether to grant the request.
And seeing as the judge gets to decide all the sentencing under Section 557.035, he'll most likely grant it.
Last edited by MeSoBe; 03-07-2010 at 02:24 PM..
Reason: addition
"In the statement released by Tucker's and Fitzgerald's attorneys, the night's events were attributed to a "series of foolish acts" including "riding" the tiger statue on the campus's South Quad and hoisting a pirate flag at Crowder Hall, the MU ROTC building."
I suspect all crying for a lynching never did anything silly in college?
"Slusher said that Tucker, along with his parents, apologized in person to Nathan Stephens, director of the Black Culture Center, before Tucker hired an attorney. "He was apologetic," Stephens said. "I expressed no ill will towards him... and on behalf of the Gaines Oldham Black Culture Center, we accepted his apology." Stephens added that he is interested in seeing Tucker's development in understanding that "these events are harmful toward more than just minority groups." Slusher said Tucker might not have understood how the community would react to the vandalism."
No, kidding, who knew a few cottonballs would cause this?
I can stroll up to a TSA officer today with a plane ticket in my hand and let out a string of vulgarities toward the US government and proclaim that 9/11 was an unfinished job. I'd be perfectly within my right but tomorrow would be a very different day from the one I planned.
Free speech is not without its consequences.
Completely different situation. You can be arrested for speech that causes a riot or unsafe situation. You can't be arrested for being offensive.
You can be arrested for being offensive. It's called disorderly conduct. It's also called tampering.
You can also be arrested for speech that causes an unsafe situation.
The unsafe situation is created for the target(s) of the crime. Hate crime legislation was enacted in part to address actions/speech that create an unsafe situation for members of society. As a result, the law will take action to neutralize such unsafe situations.
They face charges of tampering and hate crimes as a result of their actions.
You can be arrested for being offensive. It's called disorderly conduct. It's also called tampering.
You can also be arrested for speech that causes an unsafe situation.
The unsafe situation is created for the target(s) of the crime. Hate crime legislation was enacted in part to address actions/speech that create an unsafe situation for members of society. As a result, the law will take action to neutralize such unsafe situations.
They face charges of tampering and hate crimes as a result of their actions.
The First Amendment protects a wide range of expression that many people do not like. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan wrote in the Court’s 1989 decision in Texas v. Johnson: “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because it finds it offensive or disagreeable.”
firstamendmentcenter.org: Arts & First Amendment in Speech - Topic (http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/arts/topic.aspx?topic=fighting_words - broken link)
lighten up people,take a joke.A couple of teens painted certain words on a house and car owned by a black couple outside of Chattanooga last month.They decided not to pursue hate crime laws.And they should not have.It is vandals
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.
