Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Where are you now, Rev. Jackson?Follow

#1 Jan 08 2006 at 1:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Interesting take on the fight against the death penalty.

Quote:
With just a few days to go before the scheduled execution of a 76-year-old blind and deaf man who uses a wheelchair, there has been no public outcry of support for clemency for Clarence Ray Allen, who is white. There have been no planned protests and celebrity read-ins in support of saving an old man's life. Community activists and civil rights leaders aren't organizing statewide tours to bring attention to Allen's execution. There hasn't even been one "Kill Clarence Ray Allen Hour" from KFI-AM's "John and Ken Show."

Which raises the question: Was the community cry for clemency for Williams because he was a black man, or was it because the death penalty is immoral, inhumane and cruel?


So. Does no one care about this execution because he's old? Not personable? Not an author?
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#2 Jan 08 2006 at 1:50 PM Rating: Good
Which statement do you find more offensive:

Murder a gringo/cracker.

Kill a ni[b][/b]gger.



Simply put, the world has been programmed by MTV. Also, guess which racial slur I had to break the filter for? Smiley: dubious

Hypocrasy at it's finest.




Edited, Sun Jan 8 13:54:36 2006 by Elderon
#3 Jan 08 2006 at 6:13 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Elderon the Wise wrote:
Hypocrasy at it's finest.

You spelled 50% of the words in that sentence incorrectly.



As for the death penalty, activists will more quickly jump to the aid of those seemingly at the biggest disadvantage. With the level of perceived institutional racism in the U.S, that means those with an interest in the death penalty will scrutinize the sentencing of minority convicts more closely than that of white ones.

Not saying that that's the motivation behind the Tookie protesters, or that protesters don't profiteer off media-friendly convicts, but I imagine it holds true for many.

It's not necessarily fair, but then protesters don't have to be fair.

On the protestors' side, however, their actions do parallel our system of justice that protects defendants more stringently than it does the prosecutors.




Edited, Sun Jan 8 18:18:02 2006 by trickybeck
#4 Jan 08 2006 at 6:24 PM Rating: Default
trickybeck wrote:
Elderon the Wise wrote:
Hypocrasy at it's finest.

You spelled 50% of the words in that sentence incorrectly.



As for the death penalty, activists will more quickly jump to the aid of those seemingly at the biggest disadvantage. With the level of perceived institutional racism in the U.S, that means those with an interest in the death penalty will scrutinize the sentencing of minority convicts more closely than that of white ones.

Not saying that that's the motivation behind the Tookie protesters, or that protesters don't profiteer off media-friendly convicts, but I imagine it holds true for many.

It's not necessarily fair, but then protesters don't have to be fair.

On the protestors' side, however, their actions do parallel our system of justice that protects defendants more stringently than it does the prosecutors.

Edited, Sun Jan 8 18:18:02 2006 by trickybeck


in other words reverse discrimination...

here is just one more bit of proof that it exsists. right or wrong does not matter. discrimination is well and alive in the USA and around the world.
#5 Jan 08 2006 at 6:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Quote:
As for the death penalty, activists will more quickly jump to the aid of those seemingly at the biggest disadvantage. With the level of perceived institutional racism in the U.S, that means those with an interest in the death penalty will scrutinize the sentencing of minority convicts more closely than that of white ones.


This does bring us into the crux of the matter.

One of the reasons I oppose the DP is that it is applied unfairly, on several levels. Blacks are more likely to receive a penalty of death than whites for an equivalent crime. People of either race who kill whites are more likely to be sentenced to death than people of either race who kill blacks. Men are more likely to receive the death penalty than women - unless they kill their own children, oddly.

However, opposition to the penalty is also supposed to be applied fairly. It's the penalty itself that's wrong, right? Or is it?

As far as a perceived disadvantage - I don't see how much more clearly disadvantaged this person can be. He's elderly, blind, deaf, and in a wheelchair. Is the fact that he's also white enough to outweigh all of that, in the more-disadvantaged-than-thou lottery?

Finally, I have to wonder at what point have we waited too long to apply the penalty. It seems a little silly to wait until a criminal is demented and blind to put him to death.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#6 Jan 08 2006 at 6:46 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Singdall wrote:
in other words reverse discrimination...

here is just one more bit of proof that it exsists. right or wrong does not matter. discrimination is well and alive in the USA and around the world.

But my point is that reverse discrimination wouldn't exist if regular discrimination wasn't around in the first place. It's a necessary evil. (Well, not really evil, more like a necessary wrongness).

Also, while government-practiced reverse discrimination like affirmative action may be ill-advised, I can't really fault independent activists. Better to protest more strongly for blacks than to protest for no one at all.


#7 Jan 08 2006 at 6:48 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Quote:
As far as a perceived disadvantage - I don't see how much more clearly disadvantaged this person can be. He's elderly, blind, deaf, and in a wheelchair. Is the fact that he's also white enough to outweigh all of that, in the more-disadvantaged-than-thou lottery?

I was referring to disadvantages in the legal system.

Blind, deaf, and handicapped may make him disadvantaged in life, but aren't traits that would make a jury more likely to convict.

#8 Jan 08 2006 at 6:51 PM Rating: Decent
Kanye West wrote:
Rev. Jackson does not care about white people.
#9 Jan 08 2006 at 7:06 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,632 posts
Peter: Aw, c'mon, is it possible to win this game?

Cleveland: You can never win, but you do a little better every time.

#10 Jan 08 2006 at 7:08 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
So "gringo" is a racial slur, now?




You gringos kill me.
#11 Jan 08 2006 at 7:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
trickybeck wrote:
Quote:
As far as a perceived disadvantage - I don't see how much more clearly disadvantaged this person can be. He's elderly, blind, deaf, and in a wheelchair. Is the fact that he's also white enough to outweigh all of that, in the more-disadvantaged-than-thou lottery?

I was referring to disadvantages in the legal system.

Blind, deaf, and handicapped may make him disadvantaged in life, but aren't traits that would make a jury more likely to convict.


Well, as far as that goes, they were both convicted and sentenced to death. The question now is, why does no one appear to care about the crippled old white murderer, when so many were passionately protesting the death of the virile black murderer?

Can it just be explained on the basis of sex appeal?
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#12 Jan 08 2006 at 7:41 PM Rating: Good
The Glorious Atomicflea wrote:
So "gringo" is a racial slur, now?




You gringos kill me.


It's only a slur if we take it that way.

In other words, my lily-white self is only defiled if it was uttered by a person of brown persuasion.
#13 Jan 08 2006 at 7:49 PM Rating: Good
As far as the death penalty goes, I think it's a horrible travesty in its current form.

It would be far more humane (and cheaper) if applied immediately after the verdict were handed down. Immediately meaning immediately adjacent to the courtroom in an attached execution chamber where the condemend woudl be put down in a quick and inexpensive manner, such as a 12 gauge shot to the noggin.

For those who cry out about incorrect verdicts, I offer a simple but substantial incentive plan for correct verdicts: make the judge, jury, and prosecutor liable at law for a proven incorrect verdict. This would never eliminate all incorrect verdicts but the truth is that only the victor ever gets justice, never the loser.
#14 Jan 08 2006 at 7:51 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Quote:
The question now is, why does no one appear to care about the crippled old white murderer, when so many were passionately protesting the death of the virile black murderer?

Like I said, only in fewer words now:

Chances* that the white guy got a fair shot in the justice system
>
Chances* that the black guy got a fair shot in the justice system


It's not the only reason, of course, but I think it's a big one.



*Chances in the protesters' minds. It doesn't matter if it's actually true or not because we are only examining motivation.


#15 Jan 09 2006 at 10:00 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
TStephens wrote:
The Glorious Atomicflea wrote:
So "gringo" is a racial slur, now?




You gringos kill me.


It's only a slur if we take it that way.

In other words, my lily-white self is only defiled if it was uttered by a person of brown persuasion.

Why, you shifty gringo.... Smiley: mad

Hm. I guess I could see it.



Mi hermano gringo, TeeSteevehns.

Maybe not.

Edited, Mon Jan 9 10:04:36 2006 by Atomicflea
#16 Jan 10 2006 at 3:06 AM Rating: Good
***
2,324 posts
The Glorious Atomicflea wrote:

Why, you shifty gringo.... Smiley: mad

Hm. I guess I could see it.







Aren't Gringos a type of potato chip?
#17 Jan 10 2006 at 3:16 AM Rating: Good
#18 Jan 10 2006 at 2:08 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Sir Weebs wrote:


Aren't Gringos a type of potato chip?

I wouldn't doubt it, but...
Hm. In Peru, it's just what we call people with lighter skin/hair/eyes, even if they're Peruvian. It's not derogatory at all, although not quite an endearment. Interesting to see that it's developed into a derogatory term.
#19 Jan 10 2006 at 2:14 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
Hm. In Peru, it's just what we call people with lighter skin/hair/eyes, even if they're Peruvian.

What do you expect from a bunch of third world jungle dwellers who still live in thatch huts?
#20 Jan 10 2006 at 2:32 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Quote:
Hm. In Peru, it's just what we call people with lighter skin/hair/eyes, even if they're Peruvian.

What do you expect from a bunch of third world jungle dwellers who still live in thatch huts?

Exactly, gringo!
#21 Jan 10 2006 at 2:32 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
Hm. In Peru, it's just what we call people with lighter skin/hair/eyes, even if they're Peruvian.


It's funny how you proudly bring up Peru every chance you get.

I'm not sure why anybody would be proud of having heritage from a third-world sewage pit that's never accomplished anything worthwhile, but hey, to each their own, right?

Hmm, what could someone from Peru be proud of? Could it be the incredible corruption? How about the abject poverty and disease? Maybe it's having an average national IQ in the single digits? Perhaps its notorious reputation for thievery (noteworthy even among the other third-world South American cesspools) is something to be proud of?

Questions, questions...

Edited, Tue Jan 10 14:42:12 2006 by SpinShark
#22 Jan 10 2006 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Neph Lite wrote:
It's funny how you proudly bring up Peru every chance you get.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#23 Jan 10 2006 at 2:46 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,755 posts
I jumped that ship months ago...Flea just doesn't dance for me since Mr. Nails showed up Smiley: frown
#24 Jan 10 2006 at 2:46 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
SpinShark wrote:
Quote:
Hm. In Peru, it's just what we call people with lighter skin/hair/eyes, even if they're Peruvian.


It's funny how you proudly bring up Peru every chance you get.

I'm not sure why anybody would be proud of having heritage from a third-world sewage pit that's never accomplished anything worthwhile, but hey, to each their own, right?

Hmm, what could someone from Peru be proud of? Could it be the incredible corruption? How about the abject poverty and disease? Maybe it's having an average national IQ in the single digits? Perhaps its notorious reputation for thievery (noteworthy even among the other third-world South American cesspools) is something to be proud of?

Questions, questions...

Even by your standards, this is weak. I'm not sure what you consider so funny about my posts, but I just have to reciprocate and tell you that this post is comedy gold. I'll make sure to bookmark it just in case I need a lift. Thank you. Smiley: wink
#25 Jan 10 2006 at 2:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Spinny just likes to feel like he's dominating teh wimmins. Once you've figured that out, it goes from difficult to impossible to take his posts as anything but an ongoing temper tantrum.


____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#26 Jan 10 2006 at 2:53 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
I jumped that ship months ago...Flea just doesn't dance for me since Mr. Nails showed up Smiley: frown

It's hard to dance with this huge bellyfull of baby, sweetcheeks. Smiley: frown
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 198 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (198)