The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11065
Page 1 of 1

Author:  LadyKate [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:31 am ]
Post subject:  Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live

Quote:
Man allegedly politely said restaurant wasn't safe for whites because of Michael Brown's killing in Ferguson, Mo.
http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/08/25/witness-beaten-man-told-restaurant-safe-whites/14575453/
Spoiler:
Image

Family members say a West Point man is in a Tupelo
hospital after he and another man were attacked in a Huddle House parking lot by up to 20 people.

Ralph Weems, a 32-year-old marine and Iraq war veteran, is in fair condition today according to officials at North Mississippi Medical Center.

Monday evening, police arrested 22-year-old Courtez McMillian of Okolona. He is being held in the Clay County Detention Center and will be charged with aggravated assault.

Related Link: Police make arrest in beating, others expected

Brinkley said other arrests are also pending, and that most, if not all of the assailants appear to come from Monroe County. Detectives are reviewing video footage of the incident.

The Associated Press reports that Weems went to a Waffle House early Saturday. His friend David Knighten, an Air Force veteran of the Afghanistan war who was with him, told reporters that a man told him politely outside the restaurant that it wasn't a safe place for whites, because people were upset by the killing of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.

Knighten said when he entered the restaurant, Weems was arguing with some people inside. The argument brought police, and Knighten and Weems left. On their way to Weems' house, they stopped at a Huddle House with an empty parking lot, according to the Associated Press.

The pair was followed to Huddle House by what Knighten said was around 20 people. Witnesses told police that the group was made up of black men, but couldn't identify any of them. One witness did provide a vehicle description and police said they are working on identifying the owner.

Knighten told reporters he was trying to diffuse the situation. When a security guard told everyone to leave, Knighten said he was blocked from getting to Weems, who was on the ground being kicked by a group of people. Knighten said others then attacked him.

"I do remember racial slurs being yelled from the crowd," he told the Associated Press.

Knighten couldn't be reached for comment so far on Monday, but he posted on Facebook Saturday.

"All my injuries were minor fractures and lacerations. I just wish I could have reached him sooner. Please keep your thoughts and prayers on Ralph," he wrote.

Brinkley, who could not be reached for comment Monday, said in the release that the attack right now is an aggravated assault investigation, and that the cause is not yet determined.

"This does not appear to be a hate crime," he said. "It's very early in this investigation but thus far the evidence and statements suggest that a verbal altercation turned physical and somebody got hurt."

Investigators are reviewing surveillance video and putting together a list of suspects. Brinkley encouraged those involved with come forward voluntarily before arrest warrants are issued.

Police said it is not theirs to charge a hate crime if the situation does turn out to be racially motivated, but that the District Attorney's office and the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation have been briefed.

"It's up to the Grand Jury to make this determination. All we do is process the evidence and turn the case over to the District Attorney who in turn presents it to the Grand Jury. It's within their discretion to add the hate crime enhancement," Brinkley said.

Anyone with information is asked to call Crime Stoppers at (800) 530-7151 or the West Point Police Department at (662) 494-1244.


Author:  Micheal [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:29 am ]
Post subject: 

Man was stupid. Doesn't excuse the beating but blindly ignoring the situation was provocational. Yes, he should have been able to have a meal in peace, but with racial tensions high he was stupid to try and insist on it. Not he way it is supposed to be, but things rarely are.

Author:  Midgen [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Micheal wrote:
Man was stupid. Doesn't excuse the beating but blindly ignoring the situation was provocational.


So, he had it coming then?

Author:  shuyung [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:48 am ]
Post subject: 

He probably shouldn't have dressed so provocatively.

Author:  Kaffis Mark V [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 12:31 pm ]
Post subject: 

Also, it's not a hate crime because he's white, and hate crime laws protect minorities.

Author:  Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 12:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

shuyung wrote:
He probably shouldn't have dressed so provocatively.


Yeah, what kind of idiot wears white skin out to a Waffle House?

(As an aside, what is it about Waffle House that attracts this crap? I've been to 3 different military bases in different parts of the country where part of the inbrief was "stay away from Waffle House!)

Author:  Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 12:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Micheal wrote:
Man was stupid. Doesn't excuse the beating but blindly ignoring the situation was provocational. Yes, he should have been able to have a meal in peace, but with racial tensions high he was stupid to try and insist on it. Not he way it is supposed to be, but things rarely are.


You should stop being a beating apologist. This is a perfect example of beating culture in our country.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live

My reaction would have been as well to turn my happy butt around and go somewhere else. It doesn't make him culpable or provocative to disagree

Author:  Micheal [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

No, he didn't have it coming. Not until he opened his mouth and back talked a room full of angry people. After he did that, Darwin's rule takes effects.

Author:  Midgen [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:36 pm ]
Post subject: 

Micheal wrote:
No, he didn't have it coming. Not until he opened his mouth and back talked a room full of angry people.

So he had it coming then?

Author:  Vindicarre [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:41 pm ]
Post subject: 

Ahhh, it's clear now, Micheal, that those lynched black folks "had it coming". Opening your mouth, or not knowing your place, or looking at white women, Darwin, and all that...

I'm sure all those rape victims "had it coming" too? Short skirts, or out at night, or drinking, Darwin and all that...

It's also good to know that assumed "impertinent remarks" are worth a beat-down and a hospital stay.

Author:  Lenas [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live

Should it have happened? No. Should he have expected something like it to happen? Maybe, yeah. Especially given the area's current social climate.

Whether or not he was "asking for it" or "had it coming" is leading and irrelevant. When you ask if someone is "asking for it" you are really asking if you think they deserved what happened or will happen. No this guy did not deserve to get his *** kicked in a parking lot for speaking his mind, regardless of his opinions. Is any of us very surprised that it happened though? Probably not.

Author:  LadyKate [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Also, it's not a hate crime because he's white, and hate crime laws protect minorities.


Caucasions are the minority here. 60% black in West Point and Columbus.

Author:  LadyKate [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live

I'm just wondering what it was exactly that this guy said to warrant 20 people following him to another location and beating him almost to death.

Author:  Müs [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live

LadyKate wrote:
I'm just wondering what it was exactly that this guy said to warrant 20 people following him to another location and beating him almost to death.


1D > Kanye West.

Author:  Micheal [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:19 pm ]
Post subject: 

Freedom of speech only keeps the government from officially doing something about your poor choices. And yes, when he back talked a bunch of angry folk, he incited that riot and became the focus of it. Did he deserve it, did he have it coming? Depends on your point of view I suppose, but in this case, yes, I think he did. He was playing Russian Roulette with a derringer.

Author:  Xequecal [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

shuyung wrote:
He probably shouldn't have dressed so provocatively.


You know, I hate this analogy. The short skirt defense is offensive because it carries the implication that dressing provocatively is itself immoral and thus the woman "deserves" to be raped as a punishment. That element is not present here. While eating in a "black" restaurant during high racial tensions is stupid, its not immoral and calling it stupid doesn't imply that it is.

If someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys in it in a bad neighborhood and it gets stolen, you would call them an idiot, too.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Not a Hate Crime 20 minutes away from where I live

You know, it just occured to me that if he was black and 60ish years earlier, we'd call him a hero instead of an idiot

Author:  shuyung [ Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Xequecal wrote:
shuyung wrote:
He probably shouldn't have dressed so provocatively.


You know, I hate this analogy. The short skirt defense is offensive because it carries the implication that dressing provocatively is itself immoral and thus the woman "deserves" to be raped as a punishment. That element is not present here. While eating in a "black" restaurant during high racial tensions is stupid, its not immoral and calling it stupid doesn't imply that it is.

If someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys in it in a bad neighborhood and it gets stolen, you would call them an idiot, too.

Now I can't figure out if I'm the troll, or if you are.

Author:  Diamondeye [ Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Xequecal wrote:
shuyung wrote:
He probably shouldn't have dressed so provocatively.


You know, I hate this analogy. The short skirt defense is offensive because it carries the implication that dressing provocatively is itself immoral and thus the woman "deserves" to be raped as a punishment. That element is not present here. While eating in a "black" restaurant during high racial tensions is stupid, its not immoral and calling it stupid doesn't imply that it is.

If someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys in it in a bad neighborhood and it gets stolen, you would call them an idiot, too.

The short skirt defense has nothing to do with dressing provocativy beng immoral, or deserving to be raped. Its simply the idea that she was foolish to do so because some men cant help themselves - the exact same reasoning in a lesser form that has muslims dressing women in burquas. Is a sacred cow of feminists but Ive never heard of any case where it ws actually employed, much less successfully. Most likely it was done once or twice and feminiss seized on that in their zeal for revisionist history to claim it was a regular thing.

As to the matter at hand, Michael is righ that its foolish to provoke angry people or ignore a threat. that does not excuse the beating, though. inciting a riot is not an excuse to riot.

Author:  Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Xequecal wrote:
shuyung wrote:
He probably shouldn't have dressed so provocatively.


You know, I hate this analogy. The short skirt defense is offensive because it carries the implication that dressing provocatively is itself immoral and thus the woman "deserves" to be raped as a punishment. That element is not present here. While eating in a "black" restaurant during high racial tensions is stupid, its not immoral and calling it stupid doesn't imply that it is.

If someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys in it in a bad neighborhood and it gets stolen, you would call them an idiot, too.


You're misunderstanding. The logic is not that she was immoral and should be punished, but that she was "asking for it" in the sense that she was clearly trying to attract male attention. It's an act that, by the argument, invites bad behavior by others. So the analogy is apt.

That said, it's no defense in either instance, particularly from a legal standpoint. If he was going around being intentionally disrespectful to people in general, then yeah, he had it coming.

Author:  Vindicarre [ Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

I don't know that you've ever got a beating coming, that results in an induced coma, brain surgery, and brain damage, for talking, but for the most part, I agree.

Author:  Arathain Kelvar [ Thu Aug 28, 2014 9:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Vindicarre wrote:
I don't know that you've ever got a beating coming, that results in an induced coma, brain surgery, and brain damage, for talking, but for the most part, I agree.


Jesus. I wasn't aware the beating was so bad.

Author:  Diamondeye [ Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
I don't know that you've ever got a beating coming, that results in an induced coma, brain surgery, and brain damage, for talking, but for the most part, I agree.


Jesus. I wasn't aware the beating was so bad.


Which is why people don't "have it coming" just because someone else thinks they're being "intentionally disrespectful". There's no limit on how far it goes, and the issue comes down to who has more people on their side, or who is stronger or more experienced at fighting. There is no "street Bushido" that keeps it to just a "good honest tussle".

Author:  Vindicarre [ Thu Aug 28, 2014 1:24 pm ]
Post subject: 

I think it's a culture thing, Ara. We can't see injuring someone to that level for that kind of offence. You and I (and the people we associate with) wouldn't lay that kind of beating on someone for less than doing injury to our family, and it wouldn't be 20 on 1. The culture other folks come from doesn't have those kind of self-imposed limits, apparently.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/