Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Cotton comes to Columbia. or...You say Hate Crime, I say Horse Shit.


So 2 white nimrods allegedly spread some cotton balls in front of MU's Gaines/Oldham Black Culture Center. People were pissed off and offended, black students, educators, some white folks too. I even received an email from a reader about the incident, questioning how cotton balls have racial connotations. More than a few people didn't get it. Of course it is a reference to Slaves picking cotton. And as I told the reader, yes I believe it's racist. It's not exactly the same as hanging a noose from a black co workers locker, or spraying racist graffiti on the front of someones house, but it's racist all the same. So I can't fault anyone who found it offensive, it's a good call and a legit grievance. But is it a Hate Crime?


Sean D. Fitzgerald, 19, and Zachary E. Tucker, 21, were arrested on suspicion of second-degree tampering.
Police are pursuing the charge as a hate crime, making it a felony. Some people, white people, are upset that the charge is a felony. Frankly, I could give a shit less about the felony part. The hate crime part is what has me more than a little miffed. This case isn't about racially motivated intimidation, it's about a racially motivated shitty sense of humor. Make no mistake, these two turds, if they did it, are a couple of racists. But that's not a crime in America, if it was, half of America would be locked up right now. Lets face it, White, Black, Brown, Asian, feel free to add your own ethnicity, there is no shortage of people who dislike people of a differing complexion. And in this country, that is your right. Is it wrong headed? Absolutely. Ignorant? Sure. Racism is all of that and then some, but a crime it ain't.


Racism becomes a crime when the racist acts out in a way that is harmful to someone. Be it mentally, physically, whatever. If racially tinged attempts at humor were a crime, then Dave Chappell would be doing life, Richard Pryor would have been given the death penalty, and Eddie Murphy would have been drawn and quartered. Not that Eddie was particularly racist in his humor, but his movies were all punishable offenses.


These two ass hats were trying to be cute. They thought they were being funny. They weren't even original, this same incident was already done to death. UC of San Diego beat them by a week or two, another similar incident occurred at some other school whose name escapes me. So on top of it being not funny, it's not even original. I always assumed I was correct in my belief that a hate crime would need to have an element of harm or perceived intimidation. I was wrong. Here is the definition of a hate crime from the FBI website. "A hate crime, also known as a bias crime, is a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin." By that definition, comedians can rest easy, except Murphy, who should be arrested immediately. Seriously, have you seen Dr. Doolittle or Norbit?


I shouldn't make jokes, someone is going to take offense, but that's kind of my point. Where does the line get drawn, and who gets to draw it? While it is perfectly reasonable for anyone to voice their concern, outrage, and offended sensibilities, you can't have it both ways. If you are going to label the piss poor, racially tinged humor of two borderline retards, a hate crime, then you are going to need to go out and arrest everyone who ever used a derogatory racist term directed towards a person of a different color. Problem is, there probably will be a shortage of jurors to hear the cases, prosecutors to prosecute them, and judges to rule on them.


Most people, have at one time or another, used a derogatory word about someone of a different ethnicity. Usually in anger, and hopefully followed by regret, but let's not bullshit each other. Regardless of color, most of us have a little racist in us at some point in time, even if it's only a millisecond. But that doesn't make everyone a racist, or hate crime perp, it just makes us human, replete with the baggage heaped upon us all, generation after generation. At the end of the day, most people realize that what constitutes good and bad, can't be determined by pigmentation or the lack there of. Then there is the small underbelly of society, who really believe it can all be narrowed down to color. Not for nothin, but that isn't a mental defect confined to just white folks. mouth breathers come in all shades. If I had a dollar for every time I was called cracker or peckerwood, and some stuff in Spanish that I'm sure would have offended me, if I understood it, well I'd be a rich middle age blogger, rather than a middle age blogger who is so broke, if it cost a quarter to shit, I'd have to throw up.


Before I start to ramble, let me put this puppy to bed. MU should be ashamed. The two douche bags alleged to have spread 3 dollars worth of cotton balls should be ashamed as well. The cotton ballers, it's obvious why they should hang their heads. MU, maybe I should explain. Pushing this incident as a hate crime taints the true intent of the law. It's a slap in the face to the folks who have been terrorized, killed, beaten, and denied the basic human rights we all hold dear. Nobody should have to be afraid they will be targeted simply due to their skin color. Black men have been drug behind the pick up trucks of died in the wool hate filled crackers, a young gay man was killed and hung on a fence, people have died because someone didn't like the way they looked. Those are hate crimes. Two chuckle heads and a Walgreens bag full of cotton balls, ain't in the same ball park, it ain't even the same game. MU is simply trying to placate people so they don't turn this in to a platform for the Al Sharptons and Rev. Jacksons. They are trying to avoid the inconvenience of bad press and pissed off donors. So I suppose they have succeeded. They have also managed to taint the definition of Hate Crimes, and slighted anyone who has ever been the victim of a real one. In my mind, that is tantamount to a hate crime in and of itself.

24 comments:

  1. This is one of the most dangerous things I have read in a long time. First of all, what is second degree tampering in connection with spreading cotton balls around? How hard did they have to look to find that charge? I disagree with you. The felony part is what makes it a serious crime. Without the crime, there could be no hate crime.

    This whole fucking world has gone nuts. Get ready everybody. You're next.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Orphan of the RoadWednesday, March 03, 2010

    You know those two scholars could have been hit with littering and harrassment charges. Covers what they did. But hate crime? I'm still searching for that love crime!

    Worked at a Fortune 500 company's world headquarters and you should have seen the shit we were spoon fed on harassment and such.

    Sitting in one "class" with about 200 people, the HR representative was telling us how a third-party could be harassed by a conversation they didn't hear or by a t-shirt or your car's bumper sticker.

    This HR person (neither human nor a resource) had a bumper sticker which read "MEAT IS MURDER". I engaged her with talk of Confederate flags, foreign flags and such.

    I then told her how upsetting her bumper sticker was and the whole crowd went ape-shit-crazy jumping on her for the class and her inability to see the irony in her BS.

    As they pummeled her with questions and innuendos, I left the meeting. My work was done...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nice MM...the question really is how the heck those two got INTO college!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I loved your post today. Thank you for a real look at the news.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Maniak ProductionsThursday, March 04, 2010

    I'm no racist....I sold my Plymouth.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If I were the judge I'd make them both wear a sign around their necks that said "Racist Retard" every day for six months. I think that would stop any recidivism.

    ReplyDelete
  7. if you're a white guy, no, this is absolutely not a hate crime and there's no offense at all.

    If you're African-American and your ancestors were property for about 300 years and beaten, abused and who knows what all, yes, it's absolutely a hate crime.

    The likely intonation of putting cotton balls in front of the "Black Culture Center" seems to suggest that maybe we should go back to those days, doesn't it? It seems like the inference they're trying to give.

    Oh, yeah. There should be charges for sure.

    If this is allowed, what's next?

    If this is allowed, why is not a noose left around okay?

    Mo Rage
    The blog

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, the cotton balls were offensive, and were intended to insult.

    But it shouldn't be a crime to hurt someone's feelings.

    That makes a mockery of justice, and a tyranny of our government.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mo
    You are so quick to give me a history lesson, you must have skipped over the multiple times I said It was a racist act, offensive, even a crime. I can't change being a "white guy", but you shouldn't be so quick to write me off just because I am. I think you made my point for me. You ask what is the difference between a noose and cotton balls? C'mon man, you're a bright enough guy , you know the difference. People can be hanged, so that is clearly a threat. The cotton balls were racist, offensive, but there was no threat behind it. You are saying that being offensive is deserving of a federal or state hate crime charge. My point was and still is, if you slap the term Hate Crime on every offense that involves an ignorant white person committing an offensive act upon a person of color, it takes all of the weight out of the meaning and intent of hate crime laws. I don't believe real hate crimes should be lessened by calling every offensive act, that results in no real physical or psychological harm, a hate crime.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I also meant to add this from your comment
    "
    The likely intonation of putting cotton balls in front of the "Black Culture Center" seems to suggest that maybe we should go back to those days, doesn't it? It seems like the inference they're trying to give."

    Maybe that is what they were inferring, although I doubt either of the mental midgets put that much thought into it. But lets say that is what they meant. How is an idiotic desire for the bad ol days a crime? There are religious groups that say women shouldnt have a voice. Under your line of thinking, thats a hate crime too. My point is, ignorance, intolerance and backward thinking is a right, not a crime. If offending people was a crime, half the bloggers on the web would be doing a stretch. I'm not defending these two douche bags, but it sets a bad precedent and it really does a disservice to people who are really victims of hate crimes. I know we wont ever agree on this, but thats life.

    ReplyDelete
  11. MM,

    first, I wasn't giving you any history lesson at all. I'm not about dictating to you. I know you're not dumb.

    Second, sure, as you say, "people can be hanged", etc., but one, the noose, is threatening while the other, the cotton balls, say just the same thing. That is, that these people are to go back to slavery, back to being owned, back to being property and being abused and, yes, being lynched. It's all down the same road.

    Third, I think and the law assumes this point, I think, that if we "slap the term 'Hate Crime' on every offense that involves an ignorant white person committing an offensive act upon a person of color," it's much more likely that it will be taken seriously--and hopefully very shortly, so that these incidents will decrease in time and hopefully (likely?) disappear.

    And to "anonymous" (and understand that I think people who remain anonymous out here are cowards, btw)--first, I am a white guy.

    Second, this has nothing to do with the situation 300 years ago as you describe. This has to do with what these two chuckleheads did now when they put the cotton balls out there. It was racist and it was meant in an blatantly ugly, racist way and should not and cannot be allowed.

    See? White people just don't get this. I mean in no way to be talking down to anyone but for white guys to do this clearly implies and suggests that maybe we should have all that ugliness and pain back.

    Slavery wasn't funny.

    Being owned--and beaten, and burned and whipped and too frequently painfully killed because you were a slave and your "owner" could do that--wasn't a joke.

    It's a hate crime and should be punishable with a felony conviction of some appropriate length.

    When "Billy Bob" or one of his friends goes away because he put cotton balls or a noose or some other nonsense at an African-American's home or community center or wherever, his friends and family will all get the message, post haste and the amount of that stuff will decrease.

    ReplyDelete
  12. While I wouldn't dare to compare the beatings and killings of the past with cotton balls on a front lawn, just as you're saying, I do think that, if you draw a line in the concrete and say "this is unacceptable", these incidents will decrease and, likely, with this exposure, go away, as I said earlier.

    I like and agree with what you said: "Nobody should have to be afraid they will be targeted simply due to their skin color."

    In any way.

    Mo Rage

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey Mo-I'm anonymous simply because I don't care to set up an account. If you want to compare names, feel free-I got no problem publishing mine.

    To say that these two eejits deserve to have felony convictions simply because they hurt someone's feelings is carrying PC beyond extreme. It's ludicrous.

    Was it racism? Sure. So what? Everyone in the world has a bit of racist to them, just the way it is. Was it a crime? No way in the world.

    You say to draw a line in the concrete, that you shouldn't be targeted becasue of your melanin level...

    And then you propose to target people who make statements you don't agree with.

    Bullshit. No matter what color you are.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Okay, I have to go with MM on this one. Speaking as a State prosecutor, I have never understood or agreed with the construct of "hate crimes" at all.

    It seems to me that when you get right down to it, calling something a hate crime simply criminalizes thoughts. I have never be given or discovered a satisfactory answer to how that can be squared with the First Amendment.

    I disagree that these two morons were attempting humor, however. There is no evidence of that, they were trying to, as Mo said, put people down for being Black. However detestible, that is their right, one I do not think should be sacrificed.

    Littering, trespassing, criminal michief, disorderly conduct, take your pick. Any of these crimes may fit the bill, but when we start legislating peoples thoughts, we risk eroding a very fundamental freedom.

    These jerks are disgusting jackasses who be punished, but not for what they think.

    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"? - Voltaire

    -LadyLaw

    ReplyDelete
  15. The point here is that there must be a crime first before it can be a hate crime. They have been charged with tampering. Tampering with what? We've all heard about tampering with the mail. That is a crime. We've heard of tampering with utilities. That is a crime. What did they tamper with? Is it illegal to throw something, anything, on the ground at a university? Confetti? Cigarette ashes? Beer cans? If that's the case, I'm sure everybody is guilty of tampering. Before there can be a hate crime, there must be a crime. Right?

    ReplyDelete
  16. this isn't to "criminalize a thought" at all or by any means. this is to punish actions, that's why what they did is a hate crime and why it's wrong. If they only thought it, they wouldn't be in any trouble.

    MR

    ReplyDelete
  17. mo
    I try to get out, then you go pulling me back down that slippery slope you are walking.
    "It was racist and it was meant in an blatantly ugly, racist way and should not and cannot be allowed."

    Being racist, acting ugly, isn't a crime, and it isnt illegal. We all know what these clowns did was racist, ugly and contrary to the way decent people should act. Look, here is a perfect example. Neo nazi and klan types, have demonstrations, marches, on a regular basis. They say a lot worse shit than any reasonable person could abide. Do you think that is a hate crime? All the cops have to do is hit em with a disturbing or littering charge, then Bam, hate crime charges could be filed. Jessie Jackson called Jewish folks Hymies. The jews have been persecuted for thousands of years. But we allow free thought, and free speech, so Jessie can say as much hateful shit as he pleases, because it's his right to do so. As long as those thoughts and words don't lead to physical, mental, or financial hardships, then there is no crime. Insulting people isn't illegal. You can't make hating people or being stupid out of season a crime. A noose has a threatening life or death connotation.In state court it could be defined as a terroristic threat. Cotton balls spread on the ground is tantamount to a white guy using a racial slur directed towards a black person. Said white guy may end up shitting his own teeth out, but he is only guilty of being stupid and racist. There is no implication of a violent act in cotton.That's not a crime, and it damn sure isn't a hate crime. It's just hate. Ignorant, ugly, and perfectly legal.

    ReplyDelete
  18. MM,

    Actually, I believe we've institutionally and on the books made being racist a crime. We made "hate crimes", in some cases, illegal and that does it.

    I admit, this is a fuzzy line but clearly, as you can tell, I think this cotton ball crap they pulled deserves a punishment, for sure. I also agree, it shouldn't rise to a felony but punishment? Yeah, absolutely.

    Bringing up slavery to and in the face of African-Americans in these forms should have punishment attached to it, in my eyes and now, in the eyes of a court, apparently.

    As for the KKK, they can march and say things but the fact is, they have to pull way back from the things they want to say, to begin with, and completely back from the things they clearly believe, given the fact that, if they did say it, they'd be committing one of these crimes.

    Sure, we allow for free thought and free speech but this is that old problem of yelling fire in a theater.

    As long as these 2 are punished in some way, I'm good and I think the society is served (not that anyone need check in with me). I agree with you about not taking it to felony level but if you let ugly racist stuff like this happen, it gets bigger and worse and then somebody gets pulled behind a truck by their neck with a rope, like happened down in Texas some years ago. That's why there is a real purpose for punishing this stupid, smaller crap.

    MR

    ReplyDelete
  19. throwing these 2 clowns in jail wouldn't serve any good purpose, I'll grant you that, too. Make them do embarassing community work and have them do it for African-Americans so they can learn they're good people. That would make sense.

    And again, it's rare white people think racism is a problem. That doesn't mean much

    MR

    ReplyDelete
  20. MV is a Russian Jew, they haven't exactly had a cake walk over the last several centuries or so. I'd say he speaks with some actual authority on the subject of antisemitism, which isn't much different than racism is over here, except persecution of jews has been going on for thousands of years. All due respect, but your notion that being white somehow invalidates that persons views on racism, is ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  21. MM,

    I didn't say or suggest that "being white somehow invalidates that persons views on racism" but what I did mean to impart is that, consistently, White people in the US have no idea what African-Americans or other minorities experience in our same America when it comes to treatment in jobs, the workplace, restaurants, etc. Consequently, they know extremely little about that situation and/or about being discriminated against.

    True, like it or not.

    How could they? They've never experienced it. It stands to reason and logic.

    MR

    ReplyDelete
  22. Missouri Revised Statutes
    Chapter 569
    Robbery, Arson, Burglary and Related Offenses
    Section 569.090

    August 28, 2009

    Tampering in the second degree.

    569.090. 1. A person commits the crime of tampering in the second degree if he or she:

    (1) Tampers with property of another for the purpose of causing substantial inconvenience to that person or to another; or

    (2) Unlawfully rides in or upon another's automobile, airplane, motorcycle, motorboat or other motor-propelled vehicle; or

    (3) Tampers or makes connection with property of a utility; or

    (4) Tampers with, or causes to be tampered with, any meter or other property of an electric, gas, steam or water utility, the effect of which tampering is either:

    (a) To prevent the proper measuring of electric, gas, steam or water service; or

    (b) To permit the diversion of any electric, gas, steam or water service.

    2. In any prosecution under subdivision (4) of subsection 1, proof that a meter or any other property of a utility has been tampered with, and the person or persons accused received the use or direct benefit of the electric, gas, steam or water service, with one or more of the effects described in subdivision (4) of subsection 1, shall be sufficient to support an inference which the trial court may submit to the trier of fact, from which the trier of fact may conclude that there has been a violation of such subdivision by the person or persons who use or receive the direct benefit of the electric, gas, steam or water service.

    3. Tampering in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor unless:

    (1) Committed as a second or subsequent violation of subdivision (4) of subsection 1, in which case it is a class D felony;

    (2) The defendant has a prior conviction or has had a prior finding of guilt pursuant to paragraph (a) of subdivision (3) of subsection 3 of section 570.030, RSMo, section 570.080, RSMo, or subdivision (2) of subsection 1 of this section, in which case it is a class C felony.
    ________________________________________________

    So, it would appear that if they ARE charged with Tampering in the 2nd, it's only a misdemeanor. Doesn't make it any less wrong that they be arrested, but at least it isn't a felony-what's a misdemeanor amongst friends!?

    And at the risk of being racist, the poster who wrote this should try being a White man in a State prison for a day or two!

    "White people in the US have no idea what African-Americans or other minorities experience in our same America when it comes to treatment..."

    You have no clue.

    The same poster posits...

    "Actually, I believe we've institutionally and on the books made being racist a crime. We made "hate crimes", in some cases, illegal and that does it."

    Untrue.

    Institutionally, in the sense that in some liberal institutions, and in some places that are ruled by the law of the jungle, racism is, de facto, illegal. It is not, anyplace in the U.S.A., de jure illegal. "Hate Crime" laws do not criminalize racism per se, nor do they delineate actual offenses. They are instead enhancers, modifying other offenses.

    Dan / Chicago

    ReplyDelete
  23. Its a very great article of the cotton. thanks for sharing with us...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Such a very wonderful article and informative. thanks for sharing with us...

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.