Not really. They were not defending anything. It was 6 on 1. They were not in danger. They were nothing but punk kids being punk kids. It is not acceptable for any reason.
That is your point of view that they were not defending anything, you cannot fathom what was going through those kid's mind, probably because racism is an afterthought in your mind. Once again, are you a pacifist, or aren't you? If you aren't then you cannot judges these kids for what they did, because you yourself would have a breaking point. I'm willing to bet your breaking point would not be shared by those kids, that they would pass by what you would chose to defend.
If a person is on the ground unconcious and there are six of you, if you intend to kill the person, it wouldn't be that difficult and would have been approached differently than some addtional stomps and kicks. I don't think the DA in this case had a clue or he wouldn't have initially charged attempted murder. Since he changed the charge, he might have gotten a clue at a later date. One of the kids had a criminal record, that doesn't make him a murderer. Most crimes are non-violent. In and of itself a criminal record doesn't prove anything. The types of crimes might give some indication, but it doesn't really prove anything.
They could have changed their mind, or become scared etc. Again, you don't know. The DA aggressively pressed charges against them. Some may be outraged by that, but I'm just not. A 6 on 1 pile up can turn deadly real fast. I just don't have much sympathy for the attackers. I don't want them hurt or anything, but they got themselves into this.
I don't have sympathy for the attackers either and agree charges should be pressed and they should be punished. I just it want it to be the correct charges and correct punishment. The DA changed his mind about the initial charges because he was wrong. He lessened them. I also don't trust the power system in the place because it has numerous problems with race, and have shown that time and again. So because that police force, or DA claims something, doesn't really give me a lot of confidence that it must be correct. The power system in Jenna is unjust, and should be viewed with skepticism every step of the way.
For some odd reason you're rhetoric reminds me of the general in "Dr. Strangelove" and his concern for pure water and the health of his bodily fluids.
I'm black, and grew up in the South, so it wasn't in mine, not at their age. But by the time I was in high school, I understood that there was a reasonable risk of racial humor and or comments, and had learned not react to it with violence or even unnecessary outward anger. Don't these kids have bigger things to think about, or look forward to, at that point in their life, than racial self esteem?
I never made this the kind of black issue you are. I said that these individual kids had a breaking point and, once that point was crossed, they simply took matters in their own hand. Just because you are black yourself doesn't imply that you have the same breaking point. People are different for goodness sakes. However, I do feel that, based on the circumstances, that what these kids have done was a reasonable response. We all have a breaking point at which point we lash out, unless you are a pacifist. I dont fault them for lashing out. Maybe they chose a misguided target. But most people do condone violence in certain matters, whether they know it or not.
So if I have a bad day at work, I can just go take it out on anyone I want and not have to take any responsibility for it. That makes a lot of sense. Let me try to explain that one to the DA.
You tried to discount Meowgi's argument by stating that racism was probably an afterthought in his mind. Because racism deals with race, and the kids' race was black, it looks like you pretty much have made this a black issue. You're justifying mob assault and calling anyone who doesn't a pacifist. Taken to the logical extreme, your disturbing line of reasoning basically decriminalizes manslaughter.
No. I am not trying to blanket the whole darn race of black people, which is what you did in your original post. You assumed that I was trying to say that, based on my comments. Fair enough. I have since tried to clarify. Again. The constant innuendo of racial symbols, I.E the ropes hanging from the tree, and the very fact that they were their was because a group of black kids asked permission to sit under that tree, the trumped up charges as well, all seems to be factors in this case of why these boys did what they did. The boys had finally reached their breaking point. This is not a black issue necessarily, in so far as every black person would react the same. That is ludicrous. Also. Mr. Meowgi clearly doesn't view those racial innuendos as just cause for what you term "mob assault." My comment toward him was only meant to convey the differences between his thought process and theirs. And. I used the term pacifist, because it is helpful to my argument. I wanted to separate the people who don't agree with violence at any cost and the people who agree that violence is sometimes necessary. If it is, you agree, sometimes necessary, than you have no cause to judges these boys because their circumstance doesn't meant your level of when you should use violence. That is a subjective opinion on your part. I bet these boys would not have cared a wit if say Hitler was punished with death for his crimes against the Jews, but I bet many jews would have pulled the trigger themselves. Understand?
What I want this "what" guy to explain to me is how his "reasoning" is any different from that of the typical mass-murderer, e.g. Timothy McVeigh. It's a good thing we live in a free country -- because boy do you sound like a dangerous person.
Obviously, I don't condone mass murder as a practice, but all of us have that sort of history in us. What do you call the civil war, if not mass murder(s) of innocent kids for the benefit of a political agenda. Timothy McVeigh. In one context, we call it patriotic and in the other lunacy. Who is to decide the difference? Certainly not me. So now we are fighting the "war on terror." Dress it up any way you want, but we are killing people who don't believe the way we believe. Timothy McVeigh, right? I am only speaking as a realist here. Of course, this whole thing is morally unsettling but it is nonetheless apart of every one of us. You and I have just not gotten to the point that the McVeighs of the world have already gone, meaning we are not doing the killing. But to say that we are somehow pure in this matter is false. We cheer our troops on while that bomb Iraq, or if we don't we at least don't speak out against it with more than just idle talk. We call it defending our country, sure. But we are killing others to do that.
Wow. Just ... wow. (It's cliche'd, yeah, but really that's all I could muster after reading that response.)
Update: Mychal's (I think that's the spelling) been ordered back to jail for violating terms of his probation from one of his past convictions - in this case, beating the snot out of that white kid. Poor guy. link
