[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
With that in mind, I am wondering who was so incompetent as to allow this without thinking of the final result. Is anyone here so in the dark that they think a group of skinheads could march through any “poor” black neighborhood and everyone would just stay inside? It isn’t like they are afraid of the Nazis.
No one marched anywhere. How hard is that to understand? The city cancelled the march. The rioting took place after it was already cancelled.
Making excuses for a bunch of gang bangers by blaming the city for not knowing that they would destroy their own community after the march was already cancelled is just idiotic.
[/quote]
Prof X you might as well ignore the guy. He cant understand that were not trying to exuse the “thugs” but make the point that it is not only their fault. City officials need to know what is good and what is potentially dangerous. If they think letting NEO-NAZIS “TRY” to march down a black neighborhood where violence is already prevelant, then oboviously somethings wrong. The Protestors tried to march but were disbanded after the crowd got too rowdy. Its not like they called off the protest back at their office. Fine maybe they did have the right to protest, but was it in the city’s best interest.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
With that in mind, I am wondering who was so incompetent as to allow this without thinking of the final result. Is anyone here so in the dark that they think a group of skinheads could march through any “poor” black neighborhood and everyone would just stay inside? It isn’t like they are afraid of the Nazis.
No one marched anywhere. How hard is that to understand? The city cancelled the march. The rioting took place after it was already cancelled.
Making excuses for a bunch of gang bangers by blaming the city for not knowing that they would destroy their own community after the march was already cancelled is just idiotic.
[/quote]
That’s not making excuses. It’s common sense. I also have enough common sense not to deliberately move in right next to a child rapist if I have kids. SURE, he may have the right to live next to me, but common sense dictates that it may not be a good idea and that something could happen. No one is denying that destroying shit is wrong. The issue is that there was actually someone dumb enough in charge of this who was about to let it go on without sufficient security. If what Boston Barrister just wrote is true as well, then it means that this all could have been avoided. It isn’t like the peaceful wonderful Nazis showed up and cancelled on account of rain. They left because the authorities felt it wouldn’t be safe. Well, no shit! What fool was in charge of this thing?
[quote]rainjack wrote:
rl4g63 wrote:
Did i bring them up in the first place???
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I just showed a point that there is no comparison. This thread has nothing to do with the panthers i know that. But your buddy over here doesnt seem to understand that. Get your facts straight before you open your mouth.
My facts are fine. It is you that is acting like an emotional idiot. The only comparison that Mica made to the black panthers was one of rights - not of belief. And in that respect, he is absolutely correct - the nazis have the exact same right to assemble and to protest as the black pnathers do.
Now - go take some midol, and take a nap.
What would have been the problem with protesting in a neutral neighborhood??? Why did they have to protest right in the heart of the black community??? Why were they allowed to do that??? Maybe they had the right to but was it the best decision???
Because they have the right to do exactly what they did. To not allow it based on their beliefs is a violation of their rights. Honsetly - how hard is that for to understand?
Until you know what the debate is even about, I suggest you sit on the curb and watch. You are only getting in the way.
[/quote]
People get denied basic rights everyday in this country. If your going to imply the rules, please do it for us all, Not to those who we think deserve it. Not allowing the NEO-NAZIS to march for safety reasons is not a problem. The people had no right to burn down buildings but the situation should have never gotten there if we already knew it was going to happen. Their intention from the get go was to stir up trouble. If you cant see past that, then I cant say anything but you are entitled to your own opinion.
This is all a bunch of bullshit. As long as the nazis aren’t inciting violence actively(i.e. you can’t blame them for local pricks going bananas) they should be allowed to march and protest and whatever else they want to do within the law. As for the dumbasses who protested by destroying their own town, instead of acting like a bunch of emotional schoolgirls they should have either ignored the march or smiled and walked right by the nazis. If the nazis attacked someone then I can understand counter violence, but these jackass locals just started breaking shit. If you are as ignorant as these locals white or black or w/e they are you would not be a huge loss to the gene pool.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Governments can impose ideologically neutral time, place and manner restrictions (TPMs) on free speech. For instance, they can prohibit people from driving around neighborhoods at midnight and using bullhorns to speak their political messages.
With that in mind, I am wondering who was so incompetent as to allow this without thinking of the final result. Is anyone here so in the dark that they think a group of skinheads could march through any “poor” black neighborhood and everyone would just stay inside? It isn’t like they are afraid of the Nazis.[/quote]
I wonder if you would leap to the defense of an all white neighborhood where a group of Black people wanted to march?
[quote]rl4g63 wrote:
People get denied basic rights everyday in this country. If your going to imply the rules, please do it for us all, Not to those who we think deserve it. Not allowing the NEO-NAZIS to march for safety reasons is not a problem. [/quote]
That may very well be, but the discussion is not about everyone else. It is about the right of a bunch of skin heads to assemble in an all black neighborhood and stage a white power march.
I am not implying anything. I don’t even know what you are trying to say.
What do you guys not understand about this? The police cancelled the march. The march NEVER HAPPENED. The thugs did what they did several blocks away after the march was cancelled. There was no provocation. There was just a bunch of criminals - 114 of them - that were just waiting for an excuse to go off. They didn;t even get a chance to have an excuse. If you can;t see past that - then you are a much bigger fool than I gave you credit for, and I apologize.
What crackhead running that city didn’t think that “something” would happen if some skin heads walk down the street in a poor black neighborhood chanting…
…but what fool didn’t expect something like that to happen?[/quote]
This has nothing to do with what happened, but it is an interesting side note: The mayor of Toledo is black. He is also up for re-election next month. He won the last election on the overwhelming support of neighborhoods with minorities like the one where the riot happened. It will be interesting to see if he gets that support in the next election after all of this.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
That’s not making excuses. It’s common sense. I also have enough common sense not to deliberately move in right next to a child rapist if I have kids. SURE, he may have the right to live next to me, but common sense dictates that it may not be a good idea and that something could happen. [/quote]
Nice example but you only went part of the way with it. Allow me to finish it for you and then maybe you will see my point, as it seems to be lost on you.
If the cops showed up on the day the child rapist was to move in and told him that he would not be allowed to move in, and you went ahead and burned you house down in protest to him even thinking about moving in - then you would be in the same situation as they are in Ohio.
Blaming anyone for anything that happened other than the worthless pieces of shit that destroyed their neighborhood on protest of a cancelled march is just fucking stupid.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Governments can impose ideologically neutral time, place and manner restrictions (TPMs) on free speech. For instance, they can prohibit people from driving around neighborhoods at midnight and using bullhorns to speak their political messages.
With that in mind, I am wondering who was so incompetent as to allow this without thinking of the final result. Is anyone here so in the dark that they think a group of skinheads could march through any “poor” black neighborhood and everyone would just stay inside? It isn’t like they are afraid of the Nazis.[/quote]
I don’t get it, why can’t the neo-nazis demonstrate in the community that is the target of their demonstration? They’re demonstrating against violence in poor black neighborhoods, aren’t they? Doesn’t it make sense that they should get the message to the group they’re targeting?
Gee whiz, wouldn’t it be racism to assume that the population of a poor black neighborhood would be unable to control itself and would break out in pointless mob violence over a legal demonstration? Because I sure think people would be screaming racism if the government decided that neo-nazis can’t demonstrate where the uncontrollable, violent blacks live because they’re just so violent and out-of-control.
And what is the relevance of whether or not people from this neighborhood are “scared” of neo-nazis or not? There is no relevance, but you felt compelled to include that because it makes you feel good about yourself that you perceive poor blacks as “fearless” when it is in fact irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is the right of a group to demonstrate peacefully wherever it wishes.
In case anyone is interested, I spoke with someone from the area and he told me that specific homes and businesses of people that were thought to be antagonistic towards the black community were targeted.
An example he gave was a particular business that the national news has noted as having been part of the community for decades. The national media has implied that that business was randomly targeted, but in reality the owner of that business had frequently made disparaging remarks about blacks and followed blacks around to “ensure they weren’t stealing”.
I don’t intend to get involved with the ongoing discussion here, but at least the explanation I got solves some of the “WTF?!” we had about people destroying their own homes and businesses.
Bad planning on the part of the city doesn’t condone the actions taken against the police, fire and EMT’s who were trying to protect the citizens.
It’s not a reflection upon an ethnic class it’s a statement by a bunch of thugs. Hopefully the city will prosecute them effectively and make a statement of their own.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Why is this shit 3 pages long? Since when did anyone think gangs were the epitome of education and advancement? What fool would sit here and look at this as if the actions of a street gang represent me or another black person in this country? Do we get to blame the actions of all serial killers on all white males between the ages of 20-35?
The answer to why this is three pages long, is that regardless of the glossy coating, there still is a large race issue in this country. The street gangs who did this and anyone else involved just educated the entire country on how stupid they are. This should have ended on page one.
Any black person who has made any headway towards success in this country has had to bite their tongue on racial issues at one time or another. It is called discipline, and the street gangs who did this showed that they have none. But who is surprised that a street gang has little to no discipline? It’s a fucking street gang. They could be an Asian street gang and I would expect just as much.
What shows racism in this thread is that anyone would use this as a representation of all blacks in this country. That is the only sick ingredient in this thread. I don’t give a shit about neo-Nazis. They are less than scum but rioting doesn’t make up for their worthlessness. Anyone making more of this than that is a douche. It was a fucking street gang. This should have ended on page one.[/quote]
I think your being somewhat hypocritical on this issue X, b/c you have posted so much contributing to the supposed " racism " inherent in discussions about these events. By your own logic you could say that you contributing to any race problems we have.
[quote]Wreckless wrote:
rainjack wrote:
The constitution guarantees the right to assemble. The neo-nazis, as much as most people on here want to disagree, have the right to assemble in a peaceful manner. They cannot be denied that right. I don;t think they violated any law. They had the proper permits, and had not even begun the march.
…
That’s part of the problem, them having the proper permits I mean.
How very likely is it you think that any black action group would ever get the proper permits to march in a white area? Or do you think they are smarter and perhaps they don’t want to protest in that way?
[quote]paul bunyan wrote:
If the Nazis had their way everyone would be either killed or enslaved. A law should be made regarding Nazi groups. This wasn’t just a hate group, it was a nazi group. Hate groups can have the right to assemble but not NAZI groups. Forget about the law, what about basic principles. There are times when common sense rises above the law. I’ll bet if the writers of the constitution knew what would happen with the Nazis they would have added a special clause or something.[/quote]
so every kid wearing gang colors should be arrested on sight, as well then???
[quote]paul bunyan wrote:
I think their very presence should make them legally responsible for insighting a riot. Rainjack ur not a spineless pussy. But I still don’t blame those people for responding the way they did. If a nazi group goes to a black neighbourhood they should be charged even if they didn’t provoke anyone. you guys are right though, if everyone completly ignored these mutts they would be without a means to spread their hate filled ignorance. [/quote]
by your train of thought, that’s like saying you can punch someone in the face for offending you. hell, they deserved it!! good luck with that in court, by the way…
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Governments can impose ideologically neutral time, place and manner restrictions (TPMs) on free speech. For instance, they can prohibit people from driving around neighborhoods at midnight and using bullhorns to speak their political messages.
With that in mind, I am wondering who was so incompetent as to allow this without thinking of the final result. Is anyone here so in the dark that they think a group of skinheads could march through any “poor” black neighborhood and everyone would just stay inside? It isn’t like they are afraid of the Nazis.
I wonder if you would leap to the defense of an all white neighborhood where a group of Black people wanted to march?
Would you deny the permit to the Black group?
[/quote]
[quote]cycobushmaster wrote:
paul bunyan wrote:
If the Nazis had their way everyone would be either killed or enslaved. A law should be made regarding Nazi groups. This wasn’t just a hate group, it was a nazi group. Hate groups can have the right to assemble but not NAZI groups. Forget about the law, what about basic principles. There are times when common sense rises above the law. I’ll bet if the writers of the constitution knew what would happen with the Nazis they would have added a special clause or something.
so every kid wearing gang colors should be arrested on sight, as well then???
[/quote]
Cyco, couldnt they come up with a way to make RICO work against any gang if they wanted the way they used it against the Angels,Mafia etc.
[quote]lumbernac wrote:
A bunch of Neo-Nazi’s from Roanoke Virginia have organized in Ohio and prepared for a march or something and then the local neighborhood has started fires probably to a business or somebody supporting the nazis or mabey they are just doing it b/c they are sad i dunno. Im waiting for one of the nazis to get a camera interview or something. Sorry just cynical.
See what happens when you get arrogant? White pride shhould be about having pride in yourself and in your culture these bozoz are just a bunch of drunk clowns wanting to fight or something.[/quote]
pride shouldn’t have anything to do with your race-it’s not like you could control that prior to your birth. pride should be based off of your abilities, worth ethic and contributions…
[quote]ron33 wrote:
cycobushmaster wrote:
paul bunyan wrote:
If the Nazis had their way everyone would be either killed or enslaved. A law should be made regarding Nazi groups. This wasn’t just a hate group, it was a nazi group. Hate groups can have the right to assemble but not NAZI groups. Forget about the law, what about basic principles. There are times when common sense rises above the law. I’ll bet if the writers of the constitution knew what would happen with the Nazis they would have added a special clause or something.
so every kid wearing gang colors should be arrested on sight, as well then???
Cyco, couldnt they come up with a way to make RICO work against any gang if they wanted the way they used it against the Angels,Mafia etc.
[/quote]
Ron33,
well, they SHOULD be able to, but usually the law enforcement agencies get labeled as “racist” and end up being sued…but it is a good point, man. the bikers and Mafia didn’t really make that an issue before…