The Jena-6: Simple Injustice or Race Issue?

Well let’s see: the 3 WHITE boys that hung nooses in a tree where black people hang out simply got suspended from school. The 6 BLACK boys that beat him up are looking at 80 years in prison on attempted murder charges. The weapon was a shoe.

Constrast that with the story coming out of Virginia, where an adolescent black girl was essentially imprisoned, tortured, raped, stabbed and left to die (she got out) – her 6 WHITE assailants are looking at 3-6 years in prison.

The real issue I have with this whole mess is that in the marching crowd outside of Jena, there are precious few white people. It looks like almost none. Where is the outrage for a simple, yet heinous injustice against the 6 boys being held? Clearly, if there is no racism in America then we should all be on that boat.

But that is not the case. Racism is alive and well here in these United States and the face of it is uglier than ever: It’s become buried in so-called political correctness, hidden as humor or simply ignored because of how distasteful it is.

Although many will disagree with me, IMO this is simply another example of what a polarizing government does with its people – it becomes OK to hate, it becomes correct to distrust, it becomes fashionable to be sarcastic and uncompassionate.

It makes clever racism an attribute to be admired, emulated and employed as a weapon.


  1. Lupus says:

    WTF are you talking about?

    If I hang a noose from a tree that hurts no one. If I beat somone up that is a clear assault on that person.

    Provided the rope was owned by the people in question, and the tree was on their property the 2nd Ammendment outlines their right to free speach.

    The 2nd Ammendment is there specifically to protect unpopular speech. I think hanging some nooses from a tree is a pretty good example of unpopular speech.

    Just because the kids are aholes, doesn’t mean they should get in trouble. But, if you beat somone up you should.

    That being said, I would have beat them up myself as well.

  2. perkiset says:

    I disagree with you on this point because, in this case, the noose is an implied threat that has been acted too often in the past. It is not right that we need to have one of the black guys hung for the message and wrongness of it to actually get out.

    Predominantely I agree with you about free speech – but this is just a little different.

    @beat them up also – absolutely – I’da as well ;)

  3. Lupus says:

    I don’t really agree that there should be any legal recourse for a threat. Talking, or other expression (implied or not) of threats is just speach and nothing more.

    Now, if I grab somone, or put them in mortal danger (like pointing a gun at them) then that person has all the right in the world to defend himself. Addionally I think it would be just fine for other to come to his aid as well. But simple speech, or hanging rope from a tree causes no real damage to anyone. Except maybe the tree.

    That being said. If I was on the jury of the kids who beat this guy up, they would walk. Cause clearly he deserved it.

  4. perkiset says:

    See here’s the biggest challenge: you’re a thinking person and understand the value challenges associated with this issue.

    I don’t believe that the morons that hung the ropes do – in fact, they’re probably children of people that did actual hangings less than 30 years ago. So although I agree that it’s speech only, it’s the cowardly hanging of a black man by those same people in the middle of the night that makes this more heinous than simply a bashing. It is sometimes necessary for us to intervene, if even slightly, because once the supreme damage is done there is no undoing it.

    Now on to another topic: if the courts actually took care of business and there was a death penalty that was something other than a lawyers’ game for loads of cash and actually balance the scales of justice, we’d be having a completely different discussion.

  5. Lupus says:

    No, I think you are totally going against the princple of the 1st Ammendement. You don’t like the expression of nooses so you want to throw a guy in jal for it. Completely unAmerican.

    The courts have no incentive what so ever to do a good job. As a matter of face they are incentivised to do a shitty job. Meaning, if the court sucks, they can claim they are understaffed and need more funding. When they get more funding they can become more complacent and lazy.

    This is exactly why force based services do not work. Because I have a gun held to my head to use the court system I can not choose an alternative. Because the court system knows that you can not choose another option, they are totally secure in their job and only need to do a good enough job to keep themselves from going to jail.

  6. perkiset says:

    The purity of your hatred for all things tax and government is refreshing. Misplaced, I believe, but refreshing.

  7. Lupus says:

    I belive in freedom and peace. I believe it is your right and responsibility to define your own destiny. You prefer violence.