RE: Jena 6 Day

RE: Jena 6 Day (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Sinergy -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 11:54:21 AM)
We used to lock up the studio after everybody went home so we could spar 3-4 on 1. I generally enjoyed the adrenalin and testosterone thrill of being in the middle. Finish up 2 hours later, clean up the blood off the mats, and go home. It is all good. Sinergy

Owner59 -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 12:11:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy We used to lock up the studio after everybody went home so we could spar 3-4 on 1. I generally enjoyed the adrenalin and testosterone thrill of being in the middle. Finish up 2 hours later, clean up the blood off the mats, and go home. It is all good. Sinergy In a private,instructor controlled room,w/ everyone on the same page,it`s great training. We had a drill,where we just took turns punching each other in the gut,till we dropped from exhaustion.Not for beginners. Another great drill,was fighting from the ground.Where the (Uki)defender ,starts from a prone position and fends off one or more attackers. It`s the only way to really become an affective fighter.Plus you learn what your limits are.

Sinergy -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 12:22:49 PM)
See? shows off his t-shirt I bought this in 1988. Sinergy

Owner59 -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 12:26:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy See? shows off his t-shirt I bought this in 1988. Sinergy Na,na,my system`s better than yours,lol. <kidding>

NorthernGent -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 12:47:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: the black lads are the first to take the law into their own hands by assaulting a white lad, and it is assumed they were trying to kill him in order to lock them up for 20-25 years. NG, Absolutely correct! These were educated HS young men who knew exactly how many kicks to the head a person can withstand without incurring permanent brain damage or death and counted each blow to make sure they didn't exceed it. Indeed the fact that there is only ongoing vision problems speaks to their ability and restraint. The distraction argument of race here is similar to the 'racial' and/or ethnic distraction regarding illegal immigration. The illegal actions are discounted in the face of 'political correctness'; speaking to the weakness of the argument and the weakness of the integrity of those supporting the arguments. Illegal Actions = Legal Consequence. Simple and racially and ethnically neutral. Why such a difficult concept? Illegal Actions = Legal Consequence not a difficult concept at all. What I'm struggling to understand is this: 1) The belief they were trying to kill him is your assumption/estimate. 2) The belief they knew exactly how many kicks will cause brain damage is your assumption/estimate. 3) Those who value individual sovereignty do not act as judge and jury based on personal assumptions/estimates. If you're going to lock someone up for 20-25 years, there's a heavy burden of proof, and your estimates and assumptions aren't good enough, Merc. It's an assault charge.

NorthernGent -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 12:53:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FullfigRIMaam What the white kids did was indeed a much worse crime than what the black boys did. These threads are fuckin' hilarious........."we're the people who fight back, we're the people who defend ourselves, we're the people who need to take over our government and take our rights back......" So, white lads over-step the mark, black lads fight back......"lock them up for 25 years!". Chaos.

Sinergy -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 1:16:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy See? shows off his t-shirt I bought this in 1988. Sinergy Na,na,my system`s better than yours,lol. <kidding> No argument here. My primary was 18 years, and most of the other half dozen or so I studied were 2-4 years each concurrent. And the full-contact stuff is not really a system. It is simply naked violence against a full armored scumbag. Sinergy

Mercnbeth -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 1:26:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: the black lads are the first to take the law into their own hands by assaulting a white lad, and it is assumed they were trying to kill him in order to lock them up for 20-25 years. NG, Absolutely correct! These were educated HS young men who knew exactly how many kicks to the head a person can withstand without incurring permanent brain damage or death and counted each blow to make sure they didn't exceed it. Indeed the fact that there is only ongoing vision problems speaks to their ability and restraint. The distraction argument of race here is similar to the 'racial' and/or ethnic distraction regarding illegal immigration. The illegal actions are discounted in the face of 'political correctness'; speaking to the weakness of the argument and the weakness of the integrity of those supporting the arguments. Illegal Actions = Legal Consequence. Simple and racially and ethnically neutral. Why such a difficult concept? Absolutely incorrect! I`ve been teaching and training in karate for over 20 years. I don`t know,and I don`t know anybody who knows, "exactly how many kicks to the head a person can withstand without incurring permanent brain damage or death". I have to agree with you as a martial arts and self-defense instructor since the early 1980s. Soft tissue injuries, hematoma, weak arteries and veins, etc., can kill a person with one blow of limited force. Additionally, the comment that vision irregularities which may last the rest of this person's life being used to prove the restraint and good-nature of 6 people jumping 1 person ranks down (in terms of complete idiocy) there with giving weapons of mass destruction to the Iraqi insurgency as a solution to our invasion of Iraq to prevent them from getting weapons of mass destruction. Sinergy Yup. I`ve been knocked out cold,with one strike. I also fell of a roof,splitting my scalp from my eyebrow to the top of my head(when the surgeon stitched me up,there was a half-dollar sized piece of flesh, missing. Gone).I had a concussion and two black eyes.But never even once got dizzy or light headed. I`ve also, on many, many occasions, been mistakenly hit, during sparring or other practice. Sometimes it`ll leave a red mark,or nothing.Other times,just a little pop, will close down an eye,leaving a huge shiner. In my book,no amount of kicks,or punches to head ,is right. If you hit someone in my class, even by mistake, you`re doing push-ups (in the corner), for the rest of the class. Owner / Synergy - DAMN! Thanks for the information. So a person can die or suffer very serious injury with only one blow! Who would have believed it?! ? Guess "attempted murder" was an appropriate charge. I stand corrected and once again - THANKS! How much injury is caused by viewing a rope hanging from a tree? quote: If you're going to lock someone up for 20-25 years, there's a heavy burden of proof, and your estimates and assumptions aren't good enough, Merc. It's an assault charge. NG - I defer to the experts who say - one blow is enough to kill. Your argument is with them. I'll leave the "idiocy" of equal distribution of weapons for another thread.

NorthernGent -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 1:37:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: If you're going to lock someone up for 20-25 years, there's a heavy burden of proof, and your estimates and assumptions aren't good enough, Merc. It's an assault charge. NG - I defer to the experts who say - one blow is enough to kill. Your argument is with them. I'll leave the "idiocy" of equal distribution of weapons for another thread. So, in effect, you're saying that throwing a punch deserves 20-25 years in jail........is this daft half-hour, Merc, or what?

Archer -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 1:38:10 PM)
Not sure it has been pointed out yet. The very first blow knocked the white kid out. Now had that been the end of the beat down I could have called it a school yard fight, no need for charges. However AFTER the victim was uncouncious the 6 continued to beat stomp and kick him. The fight was over after the boy is unconcious, hard to be any threat at all while in that condition, it became a hate crime in my view. Attempted murder, probably a bit of an overcharge, not sure where the law sits in LA as to a charge between agrivated assault and attempted murder. As o the Charges filed as an adult in some cases, there is a little law in LA that says any juvenile 16 or older charged with a crime on a set list MUST be tried as an adult. Guess what crime is on that list? Is Jena a town with some real racial troubles? Most Certainly, was the overcharge part of the problem? Maybe. Was the beating stomping kicking of the young man after he is unconcious a crime Definately. Does it constitute a Hate Crime? In my view it does and really wish they had charged the young men with assault with a Hate Crime special circumstance. Was the hangman's noose thing wrong No question. Shoulod the kids have been expelled? Not sure. I have seen cases where the crime was much worse where it was not expulssion. Physical Assaults, etc. Were there offences that should have resulted in expulssion, I'd say the shotgun was one. No clean hands in this situation I'm afraid.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 1:43:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: If you're going to lock someone up for 20-25 years, there's a heavy burden of proof, and your estimates and assumptions aren't good enough, Merc. It's an assault charge. NG - I defer to the experts who say - one blow is enough to kill. Your argument is with them. I'll leave the "idiocy" of equal distribution of weapons for another thread. So, in effect, you're saying that throwing a punch deserves 20-25 years in jail........is this daft half-hour, Merc, or what? Nope - Experts have documented that one blow can seriously injure or kill; qualifying the initial charges. You'll have address them whether the attempted murder charge which would have be subject to the 20-25 year possible sentence is daft or not.

NorthernGent -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 1:49:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Nope - Experts have documented that one blow can seriously injure or kill; qualifying the initial charges. You'll have address them whether the attempted murder charge which would have be subject to the 20-25 year possible sentence is daft or not. 'You can't have an opinion unless the experts speak first? Do you have the experts' phone number tattoed on you cock so you can give them a ring for them to tell you whether or not you need your cock sucking? Merc, let's not swerve what's put before you: do you believe one punch = 20/25 years in jail?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 2:11:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth So, in effect, you're saying that throwing a punch deserves 20-25 years in jail........is this daft half-hour, Merc, or what? Nope - Experts have documented that one blow can seriously injure or kill; qualifying the initial charges. You'll have address them whether the attempted murder charge which would have be subject to the 20-25 year possible sentence is daft or not. quote: Merc, let's not swerve what's put before you: do you believe one punch = 20/25 years in jail? NG, One blow can kill, the people who said so have more experience at it than I. The charge of "attempted murder" is then appropriate. If one kicked killed the charge would have been murder, also subject to a judge and jury ruling. My opinion? Do the act - suffer the consequence based upon the laws on the books and the sentencing guidelines for them. quote: NorthernGent: 'You can't have an opinion unless the experts speak first? Do you have the experts' phone number tattooed on you cock so you can give them a ring for them to tell you whether or not you need your cock sucking? Pity you need to resort to insult, a reference to your weak position. Obviously the "gent" is not in reference to 'gentlemen'. However since you have expressed interest in my cock, next time in the colonies - I'll give you the privilege of checking. How common a practice is this in the UK? How did you come by such information? Are you are one of the aforementioned cock sucking "experts"? Man, socialized medicine must have some interesting perks!

NorthernGent -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 2:28:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth One blow can kill, the people who said so have more experience at it than I. The charge of "attempted murder" is then appropriate. Let's be clear, you are saying that you believe someone throwing a punch is akin to attempted murder, and this crime should result in a 20-25 years jail sentence? One word will do from the following two options: a) Yes b) No quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth I'll give you the privilege of checking. If by some freak of nature I do find myself in the US, you better clear it with the experts first and foremost. Assuming they grant your request, I'll swerve the offer......nothing personal, Merc, I'm sure you have a cock of epic proportions, but some of us like cauliflower, and others like cabbage....'just life, ain't it. I'll defer you back to the experts for your check up.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 2:47:20 PM)
quote: Let's be clear, you are saying that you believe someone throwing a punch is akin to attempted murder, and this crime should result in a 20-25 years jail sentence? One word will do from the following two options: a) Yes b) No NG, I have insufficient information to answer in this particular case. The answer can only be made after, in open trial, ALL the facts are presented. If you are asking the question in general terms - No as you asked the question. Someone "throwing" a punch should not be subject to an attempted murder charge subject to a 20-25 year sentence. Someone LANDING a punch, or in this instance, punches and/or kicks to the head - YES they should. However that changes the scenario of the question you asked, which is irrelevant and not reflective of the cause of the effect which creating this 'Jena 6' situation. I think you want to know if one punch lands should that person be subject to an attempted murder charge and subsequent sentencing. Having the similar result, and based upon how others with more knowledge than me point out that one blow can have a fatal result - Yes I do. It is how the law reads. quote: If by some freak of nature I do find myself in the US, you better clear it with the experts first and foremost. Assuming they grant your request, I'll swerve the offer......nothing personal, Merc, I'm sure you have a cock of epic proportions, but some of us like cauliflower, and others like cabbage....'just life, ain't it. I'll defer you back to the experts for your check up. Well - NG, again - I appreciate your expressed interest in my cock - consider it an 'outstanding' offer. Always good to be checked by an 'expert' such as yourself.

NorthernGent -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 3:09:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth NG, I have insufficient information to answer in this particular case. The answer can only be made after, in open trial, ALL the facts are presented. Sounds reasonable, but inconsistent with post 81 (your original reply to me); if you had said this in the first place...... quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Someone LANDING a punch, or in this instance, punches and/or kicks to the head - YES they should. To each their own, Merc, but I find this an amazing statement......just as well you're in the minority, otherwise there'd be more people in jails than in homes.

julietsierra -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 3:22:41 PM)
This whole thing is pretty sad really. Most high school students - boys and girls - at one point, whether in their neighborhoods, basements or school grounds, end up in at least one fight in their high school lives. Everything perceived hurt and insult is superficial to a teen. It doesn't matter if that teen is black or white. Precedent doesn't pay attention to the color line. Yes, most schools these days have a zero tolerance rule in place. Zero tolerance means that the kids get expelled for fighting, not tried as an adult, not imprisoned for up to 25 years for attempted murder. Take the stance of "if this were my kid." Would you want YOUR son or daughter, white or black, to be imprisoned for fighting at school? And if you say it wouldn't happen to your son or daughter, I'd have to ask why you think that. I've seen otherwise very calm and reasonably mature teens snap at a perceived insult and unfortunately find out what zero tolerance means in practice. Bullying these days includes threats, both verbal and inferred, and the very unfortunate result of these inferred bullying tactics is that rarely are the bullies prosecuted for their actions, Whereas, those they hurt until they snap are. Columbine taught school officials this and the principal acted appropriately in recommending to the school board that the noose hangers be expelled. What was not appropriate was that the school board did not behave in a racially neutral fashion and their actions exacerbated a difficult problem that could have been avoided. What was not appropriate is that a school board member was allowed to threaten the population of a school and then use the power of his position to do the very thing he threatened. The bottom line is that the noose hangers AND the jumpers could have been any one of our progeny, and what the protesters were and ARE asking for was simply for people of all cultural backgrounds to realize this and behave accordingly. What they were and are asking for is for the criminal justice system in Jena, Louisiana to conduct itself in a fashion that does not reward people because they are white and punish people because they are black. Mychal Bell has been imprisoned in an adult facility now for 11 months. In contrast, the noose hangers have been living a life that is quite free. Just how many more pounds of flesh are people demanding from Mychal Bell before their quest for vengence against has been satisfied? Just how far are people willing to push things in order to keep one segment of society in their place? And would you want your son or daughter to face what Mychal Bell is facing? It can happen. It's not that far-fetched. juliet

Mercnbeth -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 3:31:28 PM)
quote: Sounds reasonable, but inconsistent with post 81 (your original reply to me); if you had said this in the first place...... NG, My apologies for the confusion, but checking again, I did not specify any sentencing in my reply. The position I've taken has been consistent throughout as noted in the post. quote: Mercnbeth: Illegal Actions = Legal Consequence. Simple and racially and ethnically neutral. Why such a difficult concept? Those consequences in the US are never determined until after the trial. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Someone LANDING a punch, or in this instance, punches and/or kicks to the head - YES they should. NorthernGent: To each their own, Merc, but I find this an amazing statement......just as well you're in the minority, otherwise there'd be more people in jails than in homes. Well - 'Amazing' is in the eyes of the beholder. One blow or a series causing the same result should be subject to the appropriate consequences. A charge is not the same as conviction, but what was inflicted deserved the scrutiny received. As it turns out, whether through attention or reconsideration of facts - the consequences are no longer as severe for all the participants. Not that it matters, but is it the matter of degree that you are having difficulty? Intent? Are you that sure, or just hoping, that I'm in the minority?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 3:59:49 PM)
quote: This whole thing is pretty sad really. Most high school students - boys and girls - at one point, whether in their neighborhoods, basements or school grounds, end up in at least one fight in their high school lives. Everything perceived hurt and insult is superficial to a teen. Things change - The PC police have already removed 'money bars', games of 'tag', and 'dodge-ball' in many locals. Parents have welcomed the nanny state and abdicated all responsibility to the state, in this case represented by the school. Sure, fights still happen, but with this result? http://news.yahoo.com/photo/070919/480/7b4a6f668d1d457bb9a96cc57fc23abd With 6 beating and kicking one? Seems a bit more than a ripped shirt and skinned knee. But there has been no judgment only arrest and if I've read correctly, 25 years is not even on the table for any of the participants. But this is the US, so I'm sure the civil litigation attorneys are lining up. They may not spend 25 years in prison but they have a good chance of working 'life' to pay off the resulting civil suit judgment.

EPGAH -> RE: Jena 6 Day (9/21/2007 4:18:34 PM)
What strikes (pun intended) me in this case is: The civil rights rabble-rousers claimed that Americans were just angry when OJ got off because he was better at using the (white) system than the whites were...If so, why did he NOT get off in civil trial, and why hasn't he had to pay back anything? (His pseudo-hypotheitcal confession--er--book notwithstanding) The white kid gets beaten down, while unconscious (I'm not sure how threatening an unconscious person is, I don't consider an unconscious entity threatening at all, but I'm white, so my "standards are different", according to a previous poster) The attackers get charged, all but one gets off, and they're upset because the whites fight with the LAW, while the blacks made the mistake of fighting with fists and feet? Doesn't this smack of the "Black Rage" Defense? (A defense whose ridiculousness was only surpassed by the "Twinkie Defense", basically an admission--in court and under oath--that blacks are little more than feral/pack-animals given humanoid form, and therefore, cannot LEGALLY be held responsible for their actions, yet paradoxically, demand the same rights as humans, even after confessing that they're just animals?) If he DOES get off, while I hate to resort to the cliche, "None of us will be safe", but there was a similar case earlier in New York, where six black adolescent men raped ONE white woman. The six were charged, BUT they all agreed that only ONE of their number had actually "completed" the rape, so they let the others go. Due to political pressures, even this one was released. One of the sleazier remarks made by the defense was that he "Is on a crusade to protect white womanhood from black aggression"--in other words, stopping just short of invoking the triple-K name! After he was released, he sued the state! (This may or may not be the minorities' version of gratitude, rather than thanking us, they demand more?) There is also the Central Park Jogger: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,928351,00.html Also available are Department of Justice Statistics that indicate blacks are SIX TIMES as likely as whites to commit a violent crime (This is actually an improvement, the previous statistics indicated SEVEN times as likely!) Are we going to let them KEEP getting away with this? Are we going to be correct, or "politically correct"? Our media is making our law into a sick, surreal caricature of itself...(For a longer treatise on the subject, see: www.google.com type in any combination of interracial (Or just use "black" if you can handle that and want to stop the pornsites from popping up), criminal, rapist, politically-correct, violent, violence; you get the idea!)

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109375