Jump to content




Photo

Kanye West under investigation for allegedly punching teenager


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#41 -Wade-

-Wade-

    知己知彼,百戰不殆

  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: Jun 17, 2010
  • Location:◕‿◕
  • Name:Chao ❤
  • Fan Since:▄︻̷̿┻̿═━一
  • Fav. Laker:♛ Kobe Bryant

Posted January 15, 2014 - 02:10 AM

Accountability and repercussions for one's actions is all I'm talking about. 

 

And in a civilized nation, especially one that practices democratic principles, we use the law as a function to serve as accountability and repercussions.

 

 

Again, basics as in bridling your tongue. Not blurting out every thought that comes out of your perverted mind. Let's say I'm with a woman (spouse/mother/sister) and she is verbally assaulted in this manner. Who's to say what I'd do in that scenario? The key is striving to be Christ-like but I wouldn't judge any man if he decides to give dude a swift back-hand. If some racist dude is all in my family's face spouting off obscenities, then I have every right to defend myself and my family...PERIOD. 

 

Basics is also being able to seize your temper. Again, you can't expect everyone on this planet to bite their tongue. What about people who suffer from mental disorders? Better yet, if you don't believe in mental disorders, what about people who suffer from neurological disorders? For example, one who suffers from Tourette Syndrome might shout obscenities at people when they have a tic (depending on their condition). You might argue that you would be able to make that distinction, but the fact is, not everyone can, and for this reason, it is our duty as human beings to keep the battles in an intellectual realm.

 

Showing a man kindness after they have been hateful toward you is the ultimate way to inflict a wound, tenfold times the strength of a fist to their face. The Chinese military strategist and general Sun Tzu said, "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

 

You can have your opinion as to where you draw the line in defending your family, but at the end of the day, regardless of our position or what we would do in a hypothetical situation, you cannot use physical force against someone who is simply exercising speech.

 

What are you expecting? That a police officer is going to come and arrest the guy that you just punched?

 

 

If I'm wrong for defending myself and my family then God will judge me. This isn't about compromise and neither is it about convenience.

 

This argument is used too often. You see extremists from all faiths use it. I am not calling you an extremist, but I find it ironic that we bash an extremist who uses this very logic to justify blowing up a building, to then go and use it to justify punching a guy who called you a racial slur.

 

 

Sometimes defending yourself requires an act of violence.

 

You do not need to tell me this. I have practiced in "Hard/Soft" martial arts for over a decade with a black belt. You are correct in stating that sometimes defending yourself requires an act of violence. That "sometimes" equates to instances where you are being physically attacked. As stated in another thread, I don't go and whup people's asses because they call me a cracker or another name when I'm walking down the block by myself.

 

I find great delight in replying, "oh, you really think that? Well, it's too bad that I can't change that. I hope that you have a nice day," as I look into their eyes and cast them a smile. You would be surprised at some of the responses I receive.

 

I used that hypothetical (and in this world it's not a far-fetched one) to illustrate that sometimes it requires an "extreme" response to meet an "extreme" threat.

 

So what is the extreme response that you expect? Because a guy shouting obsceneties at the president is certainly no threat, their idiocy portrayed to the world would be punishment enough. "You're the guy that did XYZ to the president? Get out of my store!" And that is the way it should be in a civilized society.


Edited by -Wade-, January 15, 2014 - 02:18 AM.

wKNsigp.png

"I'm always a firm believer in us being able to make our own decisions." --Kobe Bryant


#42 Windu

Windu

    Shatterpoint

  • 43,183 posts
  • Joined: Apr 24, 2009
  • Name:Will
  • Fan Since:1999
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted January 15, 2014 - 09:54 AM

And in a civilized nation, especially one that practices democratic principles, we use the law as a function to serve as accountability and repercussions.

 

 

 

Basics is also being able to seize your temper. Again, you can't expect everyone on this planet to bite their tongue. What about people who suffer from mental disorders? Better yet, if you don't believe in mental disorders, what about people who suffer from neurological disorders? For example, one who suffers from Tourette Syndrome might shout obscenities at people when they have a tic (depending on their condition). You might argue that you would be able to make that distinction, but the fact is, not everyone can, and for this reason, it is our duty as human beings to keep the battles in an intellectual realm.

 

Showing a man kindness after they have been hateful toward you is the ultimate way to inflict a wound, tenfold times the strength of a fist to their face. The Chinese military strategist and general Sun Tzu said, "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

 

You can have your opinion as to where you draw the line in defending your family, but at the end of the day, regardless of our position or what we would do in a hypothetical situation, you cannot use physical force against someone who is simply exercising speech.

 

What are you expecting? That a police officer is going to come and arrest the guy that you just punched?

 

 

 

This argument is used too often. You see extremists from all faiths use it. I am not calling you an extremist, but I find it ironic that we bash an extremist who uses this very logic to justify blowing up a building, to then go and use it to justify punching a guy who called you a racial slur.

 

 

 

You do not need to tell me this. I have practiced in "Hard/Soft" martial arts for over a decade with a black belt. You are correct in stating that sometimes defending yourself requires an act of violence. That "sometimes" equates to instances where you are being physically attacked. As stated in another thread, I don't go and whup people's asses because they call me a cracker or another name when I'm walking down the block by myself.

 

I find great delight in replying, "oh, you really think that? Well, it's too bad that I can't change that. I hope that you have a nice day," as I look into their eyes and cast them a smile. You would be surprised at some of the responses I receive.

 

 

So what is the extreme response that you expect? Because a guy shouting obsceneties at the president is certainly no threat, their idiocy portrayed to the world would be punishment enough. "You're the guy that did XYZ to the president? Get out of my store!" And that is the way it should be in a civilized society.

 

And in a civilized nation, especially one that practices democratic principles, we use the law as a function to serve as accountability and repercussions.

 

If the law of this land deems I be punished for protecting my family, then so be it.

 

Again, you can't expect everyone on this planet to bite their tongue. What about people who suffer from mental disorders? Better yet, if you don't believe in mental disorders, what about people who suffer from neurological disorders? For example, one who suffers from Tourette Syndrome might shout obscenities at people when they have a tic (depending on their condition). You might argue that you would be able to make that distinction, but the fact is, not everyone can, and for this reason, it is our duty as human beings to keep the battles in an intellectual realm.

 

Mental/neurological disorders are a different story. 

 

Showing a man kindness after they have been hateful toward you is the ultimate way to inflict a wound, tenfold times the strength of a fist to their face. The Chinese military strategist and general Sun Tzu said, "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

 

I'm aware of this. But like I said, who's to say what I would do if I was in that situation. I would like to NOT repay "evil for evil" but there's a sometimes hard to discern line between retaliation and defense. 

 

You can have your opinion as to where you draw the line in defending your family, but at the end of the day, regardless of our position or what we would do in a hypothetical situation, you cannot use physical force against someone who is simply exercising speech.

 

I'll concede that I'll be in the wrong for retaliation but I don't agree that this is someone who is "simply exercising speech". 

 

What are you expecting? That a police officer is going to come and arrest the guy that you just punched?

 

In that moment, what the police officer decides to do after the fact would be irrelevant. 

 

This argument is used too often. You see extremists from all faiths use it. I am not calling you an extremist, but I find it ironic that we bash an extremist who uses this very logic to justify blowing up a building, to then go and use it to justify punching a guy who called you a racial slur.

 

That may be your opinion but again...I'm defending myself and family. A mass murderer blowing up a building is in no way, shape, form, or fashion the same as someone deciding to defend. 

 

You do not need to tell me this. I have practiced in "Hard/Soft" martial arts for over a decade with a black belt. You are correct in stating that sometimes defending yourself requires an act of violence. That "sometimes" equates to instances where you are being physically attacked. As stated in another thread, I don't go and whup people's asses because they call me a cracker or another name when I'm walking down the block by myself.

 

I find great delight in replying, "oh, you really think that? Well, it's too bad that I can't change that. I hope that you have a nice day," as I look into their eyes and cast them a smile. You would be surprised at some of the responses I receive.

 

 

Agree to disagree. What I may perceive as a threat may be different than what you would perceive as a threat. You don't have to "invoke" your training as a black belt to remove someone who is threatening you and your family. Besides that, I don't think calling a white person "cracker" has the same "sting" as does calling a black person the N word; maybe you feel differently about that.

 

Yes. That would be nice if I could say what you said in response to a white man verbally assaulting me and my family with the N word. Would be a true test of my restraint.

 

So what is the extreme response that you expect? Because a guy shouting obsceneties at the president is certainly no threat, their idiocy portrayed to the world would be punishment enough. "You're the guy that did XYZ to the president? Get out of my store!" And that is the way it should be in a civilized society.

 

This is what I said:

 

What do you think would happen to you if you met the POTUS and you proceeded to wag your finger in his face all the while verbally abusing him with words that would make the Grand Dragon of the KKK blush

 

I'd be hard pressed to believe that you'd simply "state your business" and then walk back to your vehicle with no problems whatsoever.

 

 

 


Pau Gasol is GONE


#43 Ham

Ham

    Rap Enthusiast

  • 6,563 posts
  • Joined: Jul 10, 2012
  • Fan Since:Showtime
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson, Kobe Bryant

Posted January 15, 2014 - 11:31 PM

You never call an African American a [expletive]er. Straight up disrespect even worse if you think about all the African American race has gone through. Freedom of Speech? How would you feel if you were an African American and then in modern times you have some prick call you a [expletive]er after all the [expletive] that has happened in our history? Not only did he call him a [expletive]er he completely disrespected his wife and the mother of his kid.

 

He deserved it. I hope he gets no time in jail. 

 

Lol cracker and [expletive]er are not even comparable in terms of disrespect...


Edited by Ham, January 15, 2014 - 11:33 PM.

Mike D'Antoni is GARBAGE.


#44 James Worthy

James Worthy

    Rookie

  • 914 posts
  • Joined: Jul 31, 2008
  • Fav. Laker:James Worthy

Posted January 16, 2014 - 09:19 AM

Free speech? LMAO

Their are consequences. If I called my boss a bad word, would I not be justifiably fired? Free speech guarantees I won't be arrested. Their are still consequences, as this kid learned.

#45 James Worthy

James Worthy

    Rookie

  • 914 posts
  • Joined: Jul 31, 2008
  • Fav. Laker:James Worthy

Posted January 16, 2014 - 09:23 AM



Lol cracker and [expletive]er are not even comparable in terms of disrespect...


You don't get to decide that for an entire country.

#46 Icker

Icker

    Hall Of Fame

  • 9,006 posts
  • Joined: Jul 28, 2008
  • Location:california

Posted January 16, 2014 - 11:18 AM


You don't get to decide that for an entire country.


So... You're saying they are comparable?

#47 LakeShow805

LakeShow805

    Superstar

  • 7,764 posts
  • Joined: Jun 13, 2011
  • Location:Cali
  • Name:Tyler
  • Fan Since:2000
  • Fav. Laker:The mamba

Posted January 16, 2014 - 11:35 AM

So... You're saying they are comparable?

Pretty damn comparable.

 

Both go back to slavery 

 

Pretty much calling someone a cracker is calling them a slaveowner. Both are very offensive. 



#48 James Worthy

James Worthy

    Rookie

  • 914 posts
  • Joined: Jul 31, 2008
  • Fav. Laker:James Worthy

Posted January 16, 2014 - 11:59 AM

So... You're saying they are comparable?


What you find offensive might not offend me. What offends me might not offend you.

If I called you a derpgatory word for Jewish people, would it offend you? Wanna compare their history?

Again, you don't get to decide what's more offensive for an entire country. Thats up to the sender and receiver of the message.

#49 -Wade-

-Wade-

    知己知彼,百戰不殆

  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: Jun 17, 2010
  • Location:◕‿◕
  • Name:Chao ❤
  • Fan Since:▄︻̷̿┻̿═━一
  • Fav. Laker:♛ Kobe Bryant

Posted January 16, 2014 - 03:25 PM

If the law of this land deems I be punished for protecting my family, then so be it.

 

Al Capone and "Two Gun" Crowley carried the same mentality toward their actions. I am not attempting to compare you to notorious criminals (you seem like a good character), but am rather attempting to illustrate a larger point. The law wouldn't be punishing you for protecting your family. In your reality, you view it as protecting your family, but the consensus of society, illustrated through many centuries of law, states otherwise. The correct action to do in "defending" yourself or your family from an unpopular verbal dispute is to remove yourselves from it or ask the proper authority (cashier, manager, law enforcement officer) to have that person removed from the situation.

 

That may be your opinion but again...I'm defending myself and family. A mass murderer blowing up a building is in no way, shape, form, or fashion the same as someone deciding to defend.

 
I am sure many of the extremists feel that they are defending themselves and their own "warped" reality. They likely feel the same genuine emotions that you do in terms of defending and or standing up for a cause. They are both different causes that use the same excuse. Spend some time studying interviews from members of Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. They believe that their country and religion are being attacked and they do what they do to defend their culture, family and God. Their actions are most certainly wrong, but their genuine motivation and justification for their actions are very similar to yours.


 

Free speech? LMAO

Their are consequences. If I called my boss a bad word, would I not be justifiably fired? Free speech guarantees I won't be arrested. Their are still consequences, as this kid learned.

 
The difference is, your boss has the right to fire you. Your boss won't go to jail for it.
Another person doesn't have the right to physically assault you. They will go to jail for it.
 
Everyone has the right to free speech, including name-calling.
Nobody has the right to force you to agree with that free, unpopular, and bigoted speech.
 
 

You never call an African American a [expletive]er. Straight up disrespect even worse if you think about all the African American race has gone through. Freedom of Speech? How would you feel if you were an African American and then in modern times you have some prick call you a [expletive]er after all the [expletive] that has happened in our history? Not only did he call him a [expletive]er he completely disrespected his wife and the mother of his kid.
 
He deserved it. I hope he gets no time in jail. 
 
Lol cracker and [expletive]er are not even comparable in terms of disrespect...

 
My brother is black, you are preaching to the choir. I am not defending racism, I am defending unpopular speech, which is even a racist's right. Let's face it, when we start restricting certain unpopular speech ("I hope Kanye doesn't go to jail"), it is a slippery slope for censorship.
 
We simply can not pick and choose liberty when it is most convenient for us. That is why we have an out of control government.
 
 

What you find offensive might not offend me. What offends me might not offend you.

If I called you a derpgatory word for Jewish people, would it offend you? Wanna compare their history?

Again, you don't get to decide what's more offensive for an entire country. Thats up to the sender and receiver of the message.

 
And it is for this reason that altercations should never leave the intellectual realm if they started there.
 
 
 
 
If Kanye gets a slap on the wrist, it will only be because of his wealth and status. I don't want to hear anybody that is supporting him receiving no consequences to be complaining about "inequality" and "social classes" if that is to be the case. It would quite literally be the epitome of hypocrisy. I also find it interesting that people speak of consequences for verbal assault, but wish to disregard other consequences that are to be expected if you physically assault someone in retaliation.

 

I think the entire theme is that we can't pick and choose.


Edited by -Wade-, January 16, 2014 - 04:01 PM.

wKNsigp.png

"I'm always a firm believer in us being able to make our own decisions." --Kobe Bryant


#50 Windu

Windu

    Shatterpoint

  • 43,183 posts
  • Joined: Apr 24, 2009
  • Name:Will
  • Fan Since:1999
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted January 16, 2014 - 04:51 PM

Al Capone and "Two Gun" Crowley carried the same mentality toward their actions. I am not attempting to compare you to notorious criminals (you seem like a good character), but am rather attempting to illustrate a larger point. The law wouldn't be punishing you for protecting your family. In your reality, you view it as protecting your family, but the consensus of society, illustrated through many centuries of law, states otherwise. The correct action to do in "defending" yourself or your family from an unpopular verbal dispute is to remove yourselves from it or ask the proper authority (cashier, manager, law enforcement officer) to have that person removed from the situation.

 

 
I am sure many of the extremists feel that they are defending themselves and their own "warped" reality. They likely feel the same genuine emotions that you do in terms of defending and or standing up for a cause. They are both different causes that use the same excuse. Spend some time studying interviews from members of Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. They believe that their country and religion are being attacked and they do what they do to defend their culture, family and God. Their actions are most certainly wrong, but their genuine motivation and justification for their actions are very similar to yours.

 

Whatever label the law wants to use for me defending myself and my family is perfectly fine with me.

 

I really don't care about the "consensus of society" when it comes to a situation like this. The "consensus of society" is not always right.

 

What if there's no "proper authority" around at the time? Am I supposed to run around screaming "Someone helpppppppp! This meany is calling me and my family the "N" word!"? No. I'm a man that is afforded the right to defend my own.

 

This isn't even remotely comparable to extremists bombing buildings. The emotions aren't the same, the realities aren't the same. 

 

but their genuine motivation and justification for their actions are very similar to yours.

 

<_<


Pau Gasol is GONE


#51 Game

Game

    Your Daddy

  • 10,812 posts
  • Joined: Sep 13, 2008
  • Location:Santa Barbara, Cali
  • Fan Since:Late '80s
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted January 16, 2014 - 07:28 PM

apologize for not having read the whole thread, but i will this say this...there are very few, and i mean very few things that i would fight someone for...but to call me that word hatefully, and to simultaneously insult my wife...it might be go time depending on what i've got going on that day, and i don't blame anyone for feeling the same way 

 

and yea, i'm sure its against the "law" but it wouldn't be the first illegal thing i've done, and i'm sure it wouldn't be the last either...don't do the crime if you can't do the time.  i don't have a problem with the dude being able to say it, i'm all for free speech, but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets his ass beat every now and then...legality aside, and those doing the beating shouldn't have a problem going to jail for what they believe in


Posted Image


#52 -Wade-

-Wade-

    知己知彼,百戰不殆

  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: Jun 17, 2010
  • Location:◕‿◕
  • Name:Chao ❤
  • Fan Since:▄︻̷̿┻̿═━一
  • Fav. Laker:♛ Kobe Bryant

Posted January 16, 2014 - 08:31 PM

This isn't even remotely comparable to extremists bombing buildings. The emotions aren't the same, the realities aren't the same. 

 

 Spend some time studying interviews from members of Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. They believe that their country and religion are being attacked and they do what they do to defend their culture, family and God.

 

It's the same thing as physically assaulting someone who verbally disagreed with their faith. They see it to be just as disrespectful as calling someone a racial slur, and will defend their family. I am not comparing your choice to physically "defend" yourself in a purely verbal situation to that of terrorists, but rather your reasoning for lack of fear of the law, which was that God would judge you in the end.

 

Their actions are most certainly wrong, but their genuine motivation and justification for their actions are very similar to yours.

 

I am putting together a video that will better illustrate what I feel these words are failing to paint. I hope that you will have the time to watch it, I will be posting it in the "faith" thread. I do apologize if you felt that my analogy was hurtful, the last thing I want to do is make somebody else feel bad; I was only trying to illustrate a larger social idea. Like I said, you're a good guy, and I'm not a fan of personal attacks.

 

 

 

What if there's no "proper authority" around at the time? Am I supposed to run around screaming "Someone helpppppppp! This meany is calling me and my family the "N" word!"? No. I'm a man that is afforded the right to defend my own.

 
I could go through every hypothetical with you and it still would not change your opinion. However, I stopped trying to convince people after my second post. At this point, I'm just trying to understand.
 
 
 
".... with Liberty and Justice for all."

 

Liberty: the kid exercised his 1st amendment right in an unpopular manner

 

Justice: Kanye West should receive an assault charge

 

for All: it does not matter if you are the president or a bum, black or white, rich or poor, civilized or racist, communist or capitalist -- Liberty and Justice are impartial!


Edited by -Wade-, January 16, 2014 - 09:10 PM.

wKNsigp.png

"I'm always a firm believer in us being able to make our own decisions." --Kobe Bryant


#53 Windu

Windu

    Shatterpoint

  • 43,183 posts
  • Joined: Apr 24, 2009
  • Name:Will
  • Fan Since:1999
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted January 17, 2014 - 12:42 PM

It's the same thing as physically assaulting someone who verbally disagreed with their faith. They see it to be just as disrespectful as calling someone a racial slur, and will defend their family. I am not comparing your choice to physically "defend" yourself in a purely verbal situation to that of terrorists, but rather your reasoning for lack of fear of the law, which was that God would judge you in the end.

 

I do apologize if you felt that my analogy was hurtful, the last thing I want to do is make somebody else feel bad; I was only trying to illustrate a larger social idea. Like I said, you're a good guy, and I'm not a fan of personal attacks.

 

I could go through every hypothetical with you and it still would not change your opinion. However, I stopped trying to convince people after my second post. At this point, I'm just trying to understand.
 
".... with Liberty and Justice for all."

 

Liberty: the kid exercised his 1st amendment right in an unpopular manner

 

Justice: Kanye West should receive an assault charge

 

for All: it does not matter if you are the president or a bum, black or white, rich or poor, civilized or racist, communist or capitalist -- Liberty and Justice are impartial!

 

It's the same thing as physically assaulting someone who verbally disagreed with their faith. They see it to be just as disrespectful as calling someone a racial slur, and will defend their family. I am not comparing your choice to physically "defend" yourself in a purely verbal situation to that of terrorists, but rather your reasoning for lack of fear of the law, which was that God would judge you in the end.

 

My reasoning is not that "deep". It's really simple for me: Guy is my face shouting the "N" word, guy is in my family's face shouting the "N" word, I tell guy to get lost, guy continues, it's quite possible guy is going to be "neutralized". I respect man's law but I fear God's law. 

 

I do apologize if you felt that my analogy was hurtful, the last thing I want to do is make somebody else feel bad; I was only trying to illustrate a larger social idea. Like I said, you're a good guy, and I'm not a fan of personal attacks.

 

I feel your analogy was off-base but you and I are cool regardless.

 

 

 

I could go through every hypothetical with you and it still would not change your opinion. However, I stopped trying to convince people after my second post. At this point, I'm just trying to understand.
 
".... with Liberty and Justice for all."

 

Liberty: the kid exercised his 1st amendment right in an unpopular manner

 

Justice: Kanye West should receive an assault charge

 

for All: it does not matter if you are the president or a bum, black or white, rich or poor, civilized or racist, communist or capitalist -- Liberty and Justice are impartial!

 

No. My position will not change when it comes to defending myself and my family in such a situation. 

 

The 1st amendment doesn't give you the right to say WHATEVER you want:

 

The freedom of speech is not absolute

 

If I was Kanye, I'd gladly accept my punishment...provided the other guy is properly handled as well.


Edited by Windu, January 17, 2014 - 12:42 PM.

Pau Gasol is GONE


#54 RobBlake

RobBlake

    Off The Bench

  • 2,733 posts
  • Joined: May 22, 2012
  • Fan Since:Birth
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe, Shaq, Fisher, Magic

Posted January 17, 2014 - 05:38 PM

honeslty, i like the result. I hate racism, and disrespectful pricks and i dislike violence. That kid deserve to get his ass beat, and kanye deserves to be charged for assault 'n battery.


ap1.png


#55 Windu

Windu

    Shatterpoint

  • 43,183 posts
  • Joined: Apr 24, 2009
  • Name:Will
  • Fan Since:1999
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted January 17, 2014 - 11:18 PM

That kid deserve to get his ass beat, and kanye deserves to be charged for assault 'n battery.

 

Everybody wins!  :rock2:


Pau Gasol is GONE





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users