lawrocket 3 #1 October 23, 2007 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071023/ap_on_re_us/anti_noose_law And it's a Republican sponsoring it. QuoteWe won't tolerate this," said Sen. Dean G. Skelos, a Long Island Republican who sponsored the measure that passed Monday in the Senate. "There is no place for racism and intimidation in America." He's so intolerant, as his words say. Now, my problem with this is that IT IS SPEECH. I don't care that people hate it. It's speech. And this law would be a prior restraint of speech. In other words, censorship. If you want to harass somebody, you better not use a depiction of a noose! Otherwise, you've committed a felony. You should harass people with flowers and butterflies, instead. Pass the Tylenol... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AWL71 0 #2 October 23, 2007 Rididulous. A symbol, like a noose, only has as much power as any one group gives it. When some jackass hangs a noose they are looking for a reaction. If a reaction is not given then the power of the symbol is lessened. But when some attention seeking politician tries to garner attention from the situation it just goes down hill from there. People need to get a thicker skin.The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #3 October 23, 2007 QuoteIT IS SPEECH It's a 'gesture', it's no more 'speech' than pissing on things. And it's a cowardly gesture at that, anonymous and without consequences. It's speech that doesn't involve a response and a discussion. We've really lost the value of what freedom of speech was to represent. Mainly due to cowards that hide in their anonymity. Go ahead and say it's "protected by freedom of speech", but it's a nonsense version of it. Nevertheless, however idiotic and pointless and non-value added it is, it should be protected - so it can be ignored as we should ignore all cowardly gestures (like filth-based 'art', flag burning, childish t-shirt slogans, etc). We need more government censure like we need more spending programs. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #4 October 23, 2007 Does this mean no more rodeos in NY??!!! Oh... the humaity! -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #5 October 23, 2007 I can see it now. Boy Scouts arrested while practicing tying knots. "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #6 October 23, 2007 Quote Does this mean no more rodeos in NY??!!! Oh... the humaity! They use hangman's nooses at rodeos? Back on topic, I find it interesting that something so dated is giving so much power in this day and age. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #7 October 23, 2007 Well, at least you're not one of those bozos electing the bozos into office in NY.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #8 October 23, 2007 Quote"There is no place for racism and intimidation in America." So he's next going to enact a ban on Jesse Jackson? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #9 October 23, 2007 Quotehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071023/ap_on_re_us/anti_noose_law And it's a Republican sponsoring it. QuoteWe won't tolerate this," said Sen. Dean G. Skelos, a Long Island Republican who sponsored the measure that passed Monday in the Senate. "There is no place for racism and intimidation in America." He's so intolerant, as his words say. Now, my problem with this is that IT IS SPEECH. I don't care that people hate it. It's speech. And this law would be a prior restraint of speech. In other words, censorship. If you want to harass somebody, you better not use a depiction of a noose! Otherwise, you've committed a felony. You should harass people with flowers and butterflies, instead. Pass the Tylenol... Is a burning cross "speech"? Has the SCOTUS ruled on that? (Hint - Virginia vs. Black) How is a noose different?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #10 October 23, 2007 Isn't there a playing piece shaped like a noose in the boardgame "Clue"? It's a piece of friggin' rope! Next thing they'll want to ban four-wheel-drive pickups because they represent rednecks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #11 October 23, 2007 QuoteIn other words, censorship. If you want to harass somebody, you better not use a depiction of a noose! Yes it is MUCH better to just hire a lawyer and let them harrass the people you do not like for you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #12 October 23, 2007 QuoteIs a burning cross "speech"? Has the SCOTUS ruled on that? (Hint - Virginia vs. Black) How is a noose different? Back when lynching was widespread, burning crosses were actively used to intimidate blacks. The message was typically one of two things - "get out of town" or "know your place". I don't recall nooses being used (with any frequency) for the same purposes. Anyone know how many times nooses (left on display) have been used as a form of intimidation in the last 60 years or so? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #13 October 23, 2007 QuoteQuoteIs a burning cross "speech"? Has the SCOTUS ruled on that? (Hint - Virginia vs. Black) How is a noose different? Back when lynching was widespread, burning crosses were actively used to intimidate blacks. The message was typically one of two things - "get out of town" or "know your place". I don't recall nooses being used (with any frequency) for the same purposes. You're right. Instead of being used to send a message, it was used to kill people. Lawrocket - the court already ruled that anti abortionist websites with doctor addresses (and dead ones crossed out) is not a legitimate form of free speech. This seems rather similar. (though I take issue with the felony bit) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #14 October 23, 2007 QuoteQuoteIs a burning cross "speech"? Has the SCOTUS ruled on that? (Hint - Virginia vs. Black) How is a noose different? Back when lynching was widespread, burning crosses were actively used to intimidate blacks. The message was typically one of two things - "get out of town" or "know your place". I don't recall nooses being used (with any frequency) for the same purposes. Riigghht - nooses were used to PUT blacks in their place.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #15 October 23, 2007 Funny how the black students who saw the nooses in Jena were so overwrought that they used them as rope swings, before they were taken down. It wasn't until six days later, when some parents and students got together discuss this incident and the media reported on it did this become an issue. One other interesting point - In late July 2007, Donald Washington, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, noted that of the more than 40 statements taken regarding the assault of Justin Barker, none mentioned the noose incident. *paraphrased from wiki IOW, no one made the connection until they realized there was some attention to be gained by cooking up a story about those separate events being connected. A black woman finds a noose on her door - more high drama. Meanwhile, the brutal beating of Mordechai Moskowitz gets zero national attention. I notice you didn't respond to: Anyone know how many times nooses (left on display) have been used as a form of intimidation in the last 60 years or so? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #16 October 23, 2007 Quote Quote "There is no place for racism and intimidation in America." So he's next going to enact a ban on Jesse Jackson? "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #17 October 23, 2007 Quote I notice you didn't respond to: Anyone know how many times nooses (left on display) have been used as a form of intimidation in the last 60 years or so? Why don't YOU tell us. I have no intention of doing your homework again today.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 635 #18 October 23, 2007 next thing you know they will start banning the Confederate flag..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #19 October 23, 2007 QuoteQuote I notice you didn't respond to: Anyone know how many times nooses (left on display) have been used as a form of intimidation in the last 60 years or so? Why don't YOU tell us. I'm guessing anyone would be hard pressed to find any statistics on this. Outside of recent incidents, I doubt there are many cases of nooses being left out, as a form of intimidation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #20 October 23, 2007 Quote next thing you know they will start banning the Confederate flag..... And singing "Dixie". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #21 October 23, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote I notice you didn't respond to: Anyone know how many times nooses (left on display) have been used as a form of intimidation in the last 60 years or so? Why don't YOU tell us. I'm guessing anyone would be hard pressed to find any statistics on this. Outside of recent incidents, I doubt there are many cases of nooses being left out, as a form of intimidation. Well, we didn't have iPhones or DVD players 60 years ago, either. Someone is always coming up with new ways of doing things.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #22 October 23, 2007 How irrelevant. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #23 October 23, 2007 QuoteHow irrelevant. Only in your opinion.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #24 October 23, 2007 What a pile of crap. Obviously, these people hate nature and wildlife and will do anything to keep the urbanites in their obvious state of denial with their little styrofoam food packs and weekly garbage pickup and SUVs - absolutely disgusting. A Moose is a simple woodlands animal and might wander into urban areas on occasion, but it's not the moose's fault. To make them illegal is just a failure on the part of urban planners to make sure that the surrounding wildlife has its own habitat to live and thrive in, and to also afford sport and meat for hunters. Moose are harmless. "Moose and Squirrel" is the dangerous combo and that just doesn't occur in nature. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #25 October 23, 2007 QuoteQuoteHow irrelevant. Only in your opinion. Of course, you explaining it's relevance is out of the question, eh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
