Didn’t know you were a Buffy fan. I’m totally with you as far as that 5th season finale. One of the most perfect episodes of television ever made.

Lastly, I would suggest against equating the arts with sports as, hopefully you agree, they are not equally supported. I also think libraries and art museums and the like are quite different than “entertainment industries”. Are we really going to equate the Toledo Museum of Art with the Franklin Park SuperCinema? But again, I do believe there are valid debates and points on both sides of the public funding for the arts argument. Now everyone knows on which side I stand in that debate.

First, I do want the people who hung the nooses to have had a stiffer penalty — unfortunately it is too late for that. I also would like the man with the shot gun (more on him later) to have been charged, but again it is too late for that — such time has passed that the evidence will be gone. Similarly, I would have liked to have seen the white kids who attacked the black kids in Jena with beer bottles to have been charged (though not with the crime that Bell and the Jena Six were charged with because I don’t see these actions as being that severe).

As for the victim going to the party, it plays in my mind less like this was a victim of a life threatening and life scaring act and more like a victim of a schoolyard fight.

Hanging a noose is incredibly different than leering because I don’t think a case can be made that leering necessitates a sexual assault. Hanging a noose on an all white tree does clearly create intimidation and that intimidation is warranted considering the history of white people using nooses to strangle black people for doing things that white people don’t like. That is not hyperbole. That is a fact.

I don’t believe he should have been tried as an adult because th courts deemed he shouldn’t have been tried as an adult. And as I continue to consider Bell’s prior record I continue to question its relevence. We only know the record because of a slip up in court. The reason for that is that a juvenile’s record is sealed. His juvenile record should not come into play if he is now considered an adult. Those records go away and the adult starts over — at least that is my understanding of juvenile records. So you can’t have it both ways. Whatever the case, the assumption that this is just the act of a “common thug” both ignores what is really at issue and refuses to look at the actual case of the individuals.

I never said calling someone names allows someone to get a group together to beat someone up. But hate speech is not calling someone names. It is a dehumanizing process that has a long history of leading to the death of those who are the recipients of the hate speech. Bell also did not get called a slur, then get a group together, then attack. He was walking down the hall, someone called him and his friends the n-word, they responded. Immediately. Which is not getting a group together and ganging up on them. But to associate hate speech with calling someone a name, I’m sorry, but that to me is a diminishment of reality, and quite frankly one that I am sick and tired of hearing white men say. To associate the n-word with calling someone “stupid”, which is what you do when you say it is calling someone a name, is real easy for those of us who never live with hate speech and the reality of the effects of hate speech.

As for the guy with the shotgun — look again at what the man with the shotgun has been reported as saying: He was at a gas station. He felt threatened. He left the gas station, drove home (how many miles?) and drove back to the gas station to defend himself. That is not self defense. You know why? Because self defense is usable when in imminent danger. If you can leave, then you are not in imminent danger. And if you can leave and do leave, then when you drive back to the place where you claim you felt threatened, then the threat you felt wasn’t all the real. And if you do do that, if you do return to the place you felt threatened and you do so with a shot gun, then you are not defending yourself. You are acting violently in response. You are the agressor. You are th eone who committed the crime. Those who wrestled the shotgun, which you were pointing at them, away from you are defending themselves because you left and returned waving a shotgun at them. They have every right then to beleive you will use said shotgun on you, which equals imminent danger.

As for the bigger issue of justice, etc. The fact that we are discussing the man with the shotgun is only because of the attention the media and the protesters have paid to the issue. It is coming to light because people are finally looking into it. That is a success. That people are talking about racism again is a success. Thata conversation is going is a success. What you seem to not see is that the Jena Six are a concrete example of a very abstract issue. Getting people in support of the concrete allows us to discuss (or makes it easier) the abstract and that allows us to move forward. Will we actually move forward? Likely not. Once Imus was fired and once Michael Richards went into rehab, the conversation ended. And eventually, our attention spans will move on here and this conversation will stop again. I hope that isn’t the case, but it likely will happen.

Now, I am not looking to let people who committed a crime, go free. I am looking at the way our system is set up and applying the principles of American justice, which would rather see a hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail. So here is what I see. I see a complicated racially stressed context. I see nooses and white trees and lots of fights. I see lots of white people “committing crimes” and no one doing anything about it. I see a white DA pointing at black students and saying “with a stroke of this pen, I can ruin your lives.” I see a fight that takes place and a beating occurs (a beating which is wrong and bad and not condoned, but a beating that occurs regularly in American schools). And I see a black kid accussed of second degree attempted murder of a white kid. The kid is convicted by an all white jury after a BS trial where his court appointed public defender doesn’t call a single witness to his defense (and during which most analysts say the prosecution did not meet their burden of proof). He was charged with too harsh a crime, convicted in what very really appears to be an injust way. And in our system, that means he gets to go free. If I hit someone and am accused of second degree attempted murder and am aquitted, I cannot later be accused of a different crime for the same thrown punch. So, yes, I think the crime he was accused of was chosen because of the color of his skin and yes I believe he was convicted because of the color of his skin. Not because of the evidence. Because the evidence does not equal the crime he was accused of.

As for the other five members of the Jena Six, we don’t know the details of their involvement and they haven’t been given their day in court, but everyone wants to attack them and convict them right now. I thought it was wrong to do that to the Duke Lacross team (even though at the time I believed they were guilty) and I think it is wrong to do that here.

So find it funny that he goes free and the only reason is because he is black (evidence of this? considering for him to go free his ruling has to be overturned and that will come from the judge not the demonstrators — or do you think the judge doesn’t care about justice?). But maybe you should be concerned about the other crimes that have occured within this story where people have gone free just because they’re white.

So everyone can use the “they’re getting attention because they’re black” card all they want but it completely ignores the countless crimes that don’t get investigated in America because the perpetrator is white (and often the victim is black). Again, real easy for a bunch of white men to complain when they never have to worry about the justice system not being color blind toward them.

I have been following the news about whats going on in Myanmar and i cannot express the sadness that is flooding my soul by knowing that young monks , and not only them but protesters, are dying in the hands of violence.
Ill continue to pray for Burmas people sucess on this tough path they are going through.
Non-violence is the only answer to freedom!

When did I say they didn’t contribute to a community? I said they don’t need more public funding than they already have (in general). They contribute in the same way any other entertainment industry contributes (and they are treated mostly the same). I also don’t think sports arenas should get more public funding. Do you really think I, of all people, don’t think sports contribute to a community?

I think you missed my point about the levies. My point is that school funding doesn’t correlate with actual school performance.

I didn’t mean to criticize the “when its actions are visible” point, I meant to point out why you needed to add it as a qualifier. You trust the government, but only if they are completely open about what they are doing. Which essentially means you don’t trust the government.

It’s ok to beat people up if they say nasty things about you? Seriously, what kind of world do you live in. If someone calls you a name, that doesn’t give you the right to get a group together an beat him up later. Anymore than someone threatening you gives you the right to come back with a shotgun.

I do find it strange that the shotgun incident hasn’t been investigated. I’d expect the people focused on getting the kids that beat up another kid out of trouble to instead focus their attention on righting the actual wrong that you described. Since no one is apparently investigating that incident (police, the DA, the supposed victim, the alleged criminals or their lawyers, the ACLU, the NAACP, the rest of the people marching for the Jenna 6) to actually right that wrong, I find it more likely that the crime in question actually occured (guy was threatened, legally retrieved his weapon to defend himself, was assaulted after doing so). Either that or people aren’t really concerned with justice so much.

Why shouldn’t he have been tried as an adult? He’s a 16 year old with a prior criminal record.

The equal justice you request is, in fact, no justice. You aren’t looking for justice for the kids threatened with a shotgun (you might want it, but the marches and people you are supporting are not in any way seeking it and wishing for something isn’t the same as actually trying to make it happen), you are looking to let people who actually committed a crime avoid punishment. That’s the opposite of justice. And worse, it isn’t because of anything related to their specific case, but it is because in an entirely seperate incident something happened that you don’t agree with. Seeing it not applied should make you sick to your stomach. You should be doing everything you can to get the guy that came at a bunch of kids with a shotgun (as your narrative says) for no justifiable reason sent to jail. You should be working to get the kids that hung a bunch of nooses expelled from school or sent to jail for committing a hate crime. What you shouldn’t be doing is trying to get the guys the ganged up on another kid set free to balance some arbitrary scales. Using that logic, no one can ever be arrested or charged with anything if only one person has been treated unfairly.

Hanging a noose is not equivalent to beating someone unconscious. One action is meant to threaten someone, one action actually, physically violates another person . You might as well be claiming that leering at someone and sexually assaulting them are the same thing. Hanging nooses is wrong. Calling it a hate crime and then saying its equal or worse than battery both hyperbolizes the hanging of the nooses and diminishes the impact of the battery.

But the funny thing is Bell is probably going to go free and the only reason is because he is black.

Do you find it even strange that the shotgun incident hasn’t been investigated but these kids were accused of second degree murder? The story that is being told (for which I’ve yet to find anyone giving a counter-story). Guy goes to convenience store and sees black students. He (guy with shotgun) claims they were acting in a threatening way. So he left. Then he returned with the shotgun. That is a crime. The shotgun can be seen as necessary as self defence — but there is no self defense if you leave the area where you feel threatened and then return of your own volition. It is however self defence if someone comes at you with a shotgun. That is the evidence that has been presented. Since no one followed up on that story (police, DA, the supposed victim) its all we have to go on.

As for Bell deserving to be in jail, again I’m not sure I agree. But I certainly don’t believe he should have been tried as an adult and I don’t believe he should have been convicted of attempted murder. Not considering the other choices the DA made.

I’m perfectly happy if the outcome is that Bell walks away free — because his conviction was unjust.

And I really disagree that hanging nooses is somehow worse than “ganging up on someone and beating them unconscious”. Hanging nooses is a hate crime. That is, in my mind, equal — if not worse — than knocking someone who reportedly (and I have no reason not to believe) was spewing racist remarks in the middle of an already racially charged situation unconscious.

And racial harmony isn’t going to be improved, in my opinion, if some people (African Americans) are charged with crimes while others (European Americans) are not. The DA made mistakes. Plain and simple. And the kids were wrong to hang nooses. Again, the other kids were wrong to beat up the victim. But I’ve seen lots of kids “beaten unconscious” who didn’t wake up to go to a party later that night and they never got second degree attempted murder charges thrown at their attackers. So demanding equal justice under the law seems fair to me.

Seeing it not applied makes me sick to my stomach.

But what I really see you arguing for seems to be ignoring injustices that have happened in the supposed name of moving forward on these issues of race in America? But how can we move forward if we condone the racism? And if we don’t condemn the racism, if we just say, well he deserves to be in jail so no matter what crime he is there for, then we are condoning the racism.

School levies don’t actually have to do with poorly performing schools. That is federal funds; not local funds. Levies are local ordinances that provide funds to all schools in the area (TPS in my area). And I would assert that sufficiently funded schools are important as well as asserting that levies fail many times less because of the need for funds (or lack thereof) and more because of anti-tax sentiment.

You could argue that artistic ventures don’t need to be funded. I would disagree. I think a community should support its arts considering the known importance of art as a contributor to the quality of living in an area. But if you think art museums, libraries, symphonies, and theater groups don’t actually contribute to a community, I guess that is your perrogative.

And I’m suprised you criticize including “when actions are visible”. I assumed we had already agreed that reform was necessary.

See, school levies aren’t that important because increasing funding for poorly performing schools doesn’t actually improve those schools. And I’d argue that art levies get more support than they deserve, not less (though I also wouldn’t complain about the lack of art supported by art levies).

I can’t possibly comprehend why anyone would trust the government more than the general public. At least when the general public is being self serving, they are acting for the general publics self interests. The very reason you have to add “when its actions are visible” is that the government can’t be trusted to act in anything but its own best interests.