How "we" deal with the Klan in NC.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by DearthnVader, Aug 16, 2017.

  1. DearthnVader macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #1
    I say "we", but I really mean the Lumbee tribe. I wasn't alive in 1958, but if I had been, I'd be all too happy to join in ridding the area of the KKK.[​IMG] :D

    https://indiancountrymedianetwork.c...y-lumbees-ran-the-klan-out-of-north-carolina/
     
  2. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #2
    So you deal with the Klan by firing bullets at them? May not go down too well these days.
     
  3. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #3
    If they are going to burn crosses, and try and subjugate people through fear and intimidation, they'll get what's coming to them.

    There is a right to free speech, but burning crosses in someone front yard goes beyond speech.

    The leader of this faction of the Klan was convicted of incitement to riot, and served two years over this incident.

    No Lumbee was charged, even those they shot four Klansmen.:p
     
  4. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #4
    If they are on your property I agree, shooting them in the open public might be trickier though, not sure if the jury would convict.
     
  5. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #5
    That's not how it went down at the time, and not how it would go down today. The Lumbee will not be intimidated, not by the Federal government, not by the state, and most certainly not by the Klan.

    They own banks, land, and businesses in this area, and they have the support of the community.
     
  6. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #6
    Burning crosses as a direct threat is not a 1A protected right, so proclaimed by SCOTUS, and rightfully so.

    BL.
     
  7. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #7
    Pretty sure that's not going to help you when the state prosecutes on murder charges.
     
  8. DearthnVader thread starter macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #8
    You're not looking at the entire series of events, the Klan did not show up one day and try and hold a peaceful rally. They burned crosses in people's front yards, and tried to sow fear in the community, then they tried to hold a rally to further intimidate the Lumbees.

    That's why their leader was charged and convicted, he incited the Lumbees to riot.

    There is such a thing in the law as justifiable homicide, you can be driven to violent acts, provoked.
     
  9. LordVic macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Ontario
    #9
    I want to make this comparison to the Nazi symbolism, flag and Ideology.

    The burning cross is a symbol, that was considered a direct threat. Because it meant someone was there and wanted to kill you.

    This is how the Nazi swastika is to me. I see it, I know you want to kill me. It's terrifying to know that someone would walk around, who directly wants me dead. And not only me, My family. All of them. Everywhere. Why? Because I am Jewish (and not even by faith!). I am a Jew, and therefor, I must die. That is what Nazism believed in. That All Jews, Blacks, Gays, Gypsies, and many other peoples should die, just because we existed.

    That's what I see when I see the swastika and the Nazi symbolism and flag. How that is a protected right of expression is beyond me. And anyone who defends their right to wave that flag around, is complicit. They are allowing, openly, for these people to parade around wishing my death.

    If burning crosses is considered a threat. Than so is Nazi symbolism.
     
  10. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #10
    Wishing someone's death isn't against the law unless you action on it, if it were 90% of this forum would be in jail via Trump.

    Starting a fire on someone's yard is different, and if they planted the flag in your yard that would also be different.
     
  11. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #11
    And the other 90% would be in jail via Obama and Clinton.

    Regardless, burning a cross in direct threat due to someone's religion, faith, race, or ethnicity is well and truly against the law.

    BL.
     
  12. LordVic macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Ontario
    #12
    It's very different. I don't condone punishing thoughts. at no point do i have the right, or the government to jail, punish or prosecute people for thinking.

    But when they start waving flags and shouting "Blood and Soil" and "get rid of the jews". It's advertising. it's saying "THIS IS OUR MORALITY, COME TO US SO WE CAN BE STRONG!". That's a direct threat to me. that is supporting and allowing for a group who wishes my demise to be vocal and allowed to be vocal about wiping me out.

    this isn't like the Left v Right with the ACA, or other controversial bills. This is outright giving a voice to a group of people who wish nothing but death on people.

    And if someone isn't willing to draw the line at LITERAL NAZIS. Where would their line be? Because that terrifies me.
     
  13. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #13
    Agreed. If someone's burning a cross in a yard or planting Nazi flags to threaten someone directly they should be dodging bullets.
     
  14. bopajuice macrumors 6502a

    bopajuice

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    #14
    Great history lesson. I was not familiar with this incident in 1958.

    What I find interesting is a group will push, and push, and push, intimidate, scare, threaten, and in many instances do great harm to another group of people because of hate, but yet when the victims of the hate react, they are all of a sudden the bad ones. How far can you push someone before they say enough and react with violence?

    Why is it such a surprise when force is met with force?
     
  15. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #15
    Dangerous path. It leads to jail to whoever burns the American flag. Burning the flag is a disgrace but a disgrace that I will protect.
     
  16. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #16
    I think just post their pictures on facebook. let them stop hiding behind hoods.
     
  17. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #17
    A cross is not a flag. Not sure of your relevance here.

    Additionally, when is burning a flag a direct threat to someone's life?

    BL.
     
  18. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #18
    I vote for making modern art out of their brain matter
     
  19. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #19
    Pass a constitutional amendment.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 16, 2017 ---
    You can't burn stuff on other people's property, especially in a threatening manner.
     
  20. LordVic macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Ontario
    #20
    We don't need one ;)
    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-319.html

    And if you saw the list earlier, again, Canada, where we live, (Judging from your location), is one of those countries that DO limit hate speech.

    I'm usually one to scream about our civil liberties. I do agree with freedom of consciousness and belief. But there have to be reasonable limits to things. And I would say incitement or support of Genocidal ideologies absolutely fits the bill for "The line in the sand".

    I would hope that does for you too
     
  21. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #21
    A cross is just two pieces of wood for the US government.
     
  22. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #22
    You are right up here, but this type of activity is less common.
     
  23. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #23

    Oh absolutely.
     
  24. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #24
    A cross burned in the yard of someone who is not of the same race or ethnic background is a direct threat of the life of that person.

    BL.
     
  25. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #25
    In the yard of the guy? Yes. But not because of the cross (the object).
     

Share This Page