What color code are you talking about? You realize Morant signed 100M dollar deals with Nike and Gatorade right? How many white boys have that privilege? Him showing his gun on IG is against the law, period. Doesn't matter if he black or white he would be canceled all the same. In fact he already got forgiven for doing it the first time, if you're talking about "color law" he was already absolved of all sins. He dumbass he did it again. His color has nothing to do with it, name me one white nba ball player who showed guns on IG voluntarily and didn't get suspended.[/QUOTE] Color Code goes back to the Christian Black Codes 1700's, Color Code society is exactly what you (and mostly everyone in the modern USofA) are indoctrinated into thinking is a pedigree / bloodline, when it is actually a ''Legal'' status that identifies 14th Amendment property Black / White is a perpetual contractual slave (name mark) in actual Jurisprudence / In Law I don't subscribe to the coloring crayon game, but I do know many hybrid Europeans have privileges in other fields outside of the NBA, like Zuckerberg / Musk and others who topped $100 million dollars Him showing his gun on IG is against the rules/regulations set by the NBA Association, which is not Law rules / codes (U.C.C. / U.S.C. etc) is not actual Law, they derive from it and they call it Legalese jargon the origin / etymology of black means pale
What color code are you talking about? You realize Morant signed 100M dollar deals with Nike and Gatorade right? How many white boys have that privilege? Him showing his gun on IG is against the law, period. Doesn't matter if he black or white he would be canceled all the same. In fact he already got forgiven for doing it the first time, if you're talking about "color law" he was already absolved of all sins. He dumbass he did it again. His color has nothing to do with it, name me one white nba ball player who showed guns on IG voluntarily and didn't get suspended.[/QUOTE] It was only in the 16th century that we saw the semantic change of blac to refer to something dark (night-colour) The word ‘Black’ can be traced back to its proto Indo-European origins through the word ‘blac’ which meant pale, wan, colourless, or albino. ‘Blac’ was incorporated into Old French as Blanc, Italian and Spanish as Blanco, Bianca, Bianco, Bianchi. In Old English “blac” person meant fair; someone devoid of colour, similar to the word “blanc” which still means white or fair person. In Middle English the word was spelt as “blaec” same thing as the modern word “black”, only at that time, around 1051 AD, it still meant a fair skin, or so-called white person. The words “blacca” an Old/Middle English word still resonates with “blanke” the Dutch-Germanic term for white people of today. It was not till the sixteenth century that the semantic broadening of black occured- both figurative connotations as well as literal. From ‘blac, blake, bleaken, blaccen’ and their literal meaning ‘to bleach out or make white, blond or pale’ came the figurative meaning ‘to stain someones reputation, or defame’ or darken. Literally “blac” by that time came to mean night-like colour, dark. One can say a very dramatic shift indeed.
Sovereign citizen alert. These half-baked arguments have never proved successful in a court of law. Barely comprehensible tbh[/QUOTE] You half-baked replies / rebuttals Club Members have never been proven to be successful on a internet, let alone a court of law, which you have no clue what a actual court of law is, and stop confusing said Sovereign citizen (oxymoron) with Sovereign People (Nation), which I subscribe to the latter ''When we consider the nature and the theory of our institutions of government, the principles on which they are supposed to rest, and review the history of their development, we are constrained to conclude that they do not mean to leave room for the play and action of purely personal and arbitrary power. Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. And the law is definition and limitation of power.'' Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356 (1885). ''A Sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the law on which the Right depends.'' Kawananakoa v. Polyblank, 205 U.S. 349,353, 27 S. Ct. 526, 527, 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907). Juliard v. Greeman, 110 U.S. 421 (1884) Supreme Court Justice Field, 'There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States... In this country, sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise power which they have not, by their Constitution, entrusted to it. All else is withheld. * US Supreme Court in: US vs. Minker, 350 US 179 at page 187: ''Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights, due to ignorance.''
What color code are you talking about? You realize Morant signed 100M dollar deals with Nike and Gatorade right? How many white boys have that privilege? Him showing his gun on IG is against the law, period. Doesn't matter if he black or white he would be canceled all the same. In fact he already got forgiven for doing it the first time, if you're talking about "color law" he was already absolved of all sins. He dumbass he did it again. His color has nothing to do with it, name me one white nba ball player who showed guns on IG voluntarily and didn't get suspended.[/QUOTE] Free White Persons means a naturalized ''citizen of the United States'' and is a European construct that came over to the modern USA 1776, that gets granted privileges similar to a doggy treat, and the other color code status is a non-citizen and gets mistreated worse and picks up whatever crumbs is left from the doggy treat the other color leaves on the ground, if any at all
Wtf does this have to do with Morant representing the Grizzlies while playing a sport/game? Either take the money and be a professional (or at least portray yourself as one) or the leave will move without your dumba**.
I don't think Silver is a pushover but agree he doesn't necessarily try to make an example of people like Stern would. I'm sure Silver had a very specific idea of what a punishment would look like if Ja got caught again and I would not be shocked if he already shared that with Ja the first time they met...but yeah - probably could be worse. Stern made everyone wear business suits to the sideline for a while when it seemed like people were being too 'urban' for his corporate sponsors. Silver has a much more evolved sense of what league and player branding means in the digital age.
He's getting played for money than betrayed because of jealousy. These guys are ungrateful and they know they're hurting him.
Not Ja related, but do you know what Dan Patrick needs? Spoiler ... more sports memorabilia on his desk.
Because all these deals he be signing have morality clauses No one would care if he showed videos of him at the gun range. They care about the incidents of pointing “lasers” outside a arena after a game. Beating up kids and flashing a gun. Showing up to a mall pressing security guards flashing a gun. Pressing a high school girl at a high school basketball game with his boys. Flashing a gun multiple times in not the safest circumstances. It’s just not a good look for companies paying you 100mil to represent their brand
