Saturday, November 17, 2007

 

Until We're All Blind, Or In Jail

A commenter to this post called me "an apologist for racism." The sham of claims of racism in the Jena 6 case continue.
Thousands of demonstrators encircled Justice Department headquarters in the nation's capital Friday to demand the government crack down harder on hate crimes.
The noose incident at Jena was the beginning of months of racial tension that included the beating of a white student in December, allegedly by six black classmates. Two months ago, 15,000 to 20,000 protesters, including Sharpton and King, descended on Jena -- a town of about 3,000 -- to protest how authorities handled the cases of the six charged in that beating.

"There's Jenas everywhere," Sharpton said Friday. "Which is why you saw thousands of us come to Jena and why you see thousands of us come now.
Sharpton and Jackson aren't free from racism themselves. But, Jackson and Sharpton continue to push the myths of the Jena 6 for their own enrichment. Jackson and Sharpton need racism to exist or they lose their power and, most likely, much of their income. In order to ensure their positions, they must create racism even when none exists.

The problem with hate crimes is that it moves into the realm of thought control and mind reading. The noose incident is hoisted as a tremendous racist act. In order for it to be racist, racism must be the motive. It was not.
Myth 2: Nooses a Signal to Black Students. An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students. Instead, they were understood to be a prank by three white students aimed at their fellow white friends, members of the school rodeo team. (The students apparently got the idea from watching episodes of "Lonesome Dove.") The committee further concluded that the three young teens had no knowledge that nooses symbolize the terrible legacy of the lynchings of countless blacks in American history.
But the truth be damned, Jesse and Al need the money and power.

When I think of nooses, I think of the Wild West, Judge Roy Bean, and Clint Eastwood movies. Although I grew up in the South, nooses don't conjure up images of racial lynchings for me but of unruly crowds outside a jail in a small Western town.

The path of "hate crimes" is dangerous. Hate crime laws move us ever farther down the path of a police state the the left hopes for fears. This brings us to the words of the commenter calling me "an apologist."

Some believe the response to the lefts harping on racism and calling for more hate crime legislation and prosecutions is an eye for eye. We should be out finding blacks, Hispanics (an ethnic group by the way, not a race), and others committing hate crimes against whites. There is no doubt minorities commit crimes against whites that are racially motivated. But prosecuting assault as assault does the job. Wasn't the attack on Justin Bark, a white student, at Jena High School racially motivated? There are many who claim an minority can't be racist.

Continuing down the road of an eye for an eye "soon the whole world is blind." In the words of Martin Luther King, whom Jackson and Sharpton betray,
The reason I can' t follow the old eye-for-an-eye philosophy is that it ends up leaving everyone blind. Somebody must have sense and somebody must have religion. I remember some years ago, my brother and I were driving from Atlanta to Chattanooga, Tennessee. And for some reason the drivers that night were very discourteous or they were forgetting to dim their lights...And finally A.D. looked over at me and he said, 'I'm tired of this now, and the next car that comes by here and refuses to dim the lights, I'm going to refuse to dim mine.' I said, 'Wait a minute, don't do that . Somebody has to have some sense on this highway.' And I'm saying the same thing for us here in Birmingham. We are moving up a mighty highway toward the city of Freedom. There will be meandering points. There will be curves and difficult moments, and we will be tempted to retaliate with the same kind of force that the opposition will use. But I'm going to say to you, 'Wait a minute, Birmingham. Somebody's got to have some sense in Birmingham.'
Yes, somebody's got to have some sense. We need to be fighting the constant, increasing encroachment of the government into every aspect of our lives down to what we think. Jackson and Sharpton don't care about freedom and equality. They care about money and power. They are happily flushing your freedom down the commode to enhance themselves.

We need to stop the insanity before we're all blind or in jail. Crimes need to be prosecuted for what is done, not what is thought. And that is why I'm not going to going to get my bowels in an uproar every time someone uses a racially a disparaging term whether my race is the object or not.

Comments:
You're not an 'apologist for racism,' you're an 'advocate for a thicker skinned society.' That would be the politically correct way to phrase that, anyway.

Far as nooses, this again goes to you and I growing up in far, far different parts of the South. Hell, we apparently had a race brawl at my high school the year before I got there in 1992, and there is never a question about what someone is saying when they show up at a costume part with a noose around their neck.

But as soon as I heard there were nooses hanging from trees in Jena, I already knew how this story would end: badly for all invovled.

And, as I've said before, if we can determine 'intent' and factor those into the sentencing of usual every day crimes, then hate crimes aren't a stretch further than choosing to charge someone with second degree murder rather than manslaughter and vice-versa. So much of our legal system is already intertwined with the mindset of the assailant, that, if you want to go at hate crimes, there are far deeper aspects of the criminal justice system to be dealt with as well. I mean, what is the difference between terrorism and murder, anyway? (A: the mindset of the attacker.)

But nobody talks about that.

And, again, I reiterate the fact that hate crime legislation came about to add a Federal level of prosecution to cases where local or state officials would refuse to do their jobs according to the letter of the law. In my humble opinion, it comes from prosecuting the wrong people - instead of going down the road of hate crimes, it would have been far more effective to go after all the back country sherrifs and county prosecutors who turned blind eyes to lynchings back in the day.

But that would have been far, far harder to prove - more work on the parts of so many - and so terribly divisive, I don't know if we'd be in a better situation today.
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]