Racial/Ethnic Slurs and Physical Violence

Great Debates
61

[QUOTE=Askia]
Antinor01. First of all, this was a state superior court ruling in Seattle, Washington, not the U.S. federal Supreme Court. Secondly, we’re only interested in the findings of the court regarding fighting words, not whether fighting words were actually used.

Of course it proves my point. The particular facts about the Seattle v. Camby indicated that what happened there was NOT fighting words, but by logical extension, defined what would be. "The Superior Court defined the issue as “[w]hether under the City’s harassment ordinance there must be an additional element that the addressee was in fact provoked to the point where there was a substantial likelihood of assault on the speaker.” Threatning to kick someone’s ass isn’t. Using the slur “nigger” – what is widely regarded as one of the most contentious verbal slurs in the English language, especially in an interracial altercation – meets the standard of “fighting words” pretty much everywhere I can think of and may warrant a lesser sentence for assault under mitigating circumstances.
[/QUOTE]

It was the washington state supreme court. Though I freely admit I may be misinterpreting what they have to say, I’m far from a legal expert.
Here’s a couple of SCOTUS cases I found in my reading, both of these involved cross burning rather than actual words, but they seem to relate.

A more recent decision by the US supreme court is quite interesting, take a look at RAV v city of saint paul, decided in 1992. The city of St. Paul had an ordinance that prohibited fighting words that were based on ‘race, color, creed, religion or gender’. That ordinance was determined to be unconstitutional.

Virginia v Black (2002) is another interesting one. From a quick reading of it, they say that intent to indimidate is the primary factor. (prior rulings against the cross burner were overturned)

Overall from my reading it seems that this is far from a settled issue in legal terms. I haven’t found any cases yet that relate to someone using ‘fighting words’ and then being physically assaulted. So, how these two things would work in a practical sense, I don’t know.

Do you have any reference to a case that more relates to what the conversation was about? That is, is there a legal right/defense to physically assault someone over something they say to you? I would be interested in reading it.

I would just say though, even if there is a legal defense I still believe it is wrong. My personal feeling is that both the person that uses a slur and the person that physically assaults them are in the wrong, but I believe that using violence is more wrong.

62

[QUOTE=Linty Fresh]
To me, what’s more disturbing that the threats of punching people out is the implication that yes, he really would use that gun and walk away with a smile.
[/quote]
Using a gun shoiuld be more disturbing. But who, besides you, assumes I’d be smiling? I never said I would. Doesn’t sound like I would. I don’t think anything about being ready to kill is funny.

I see no need to stick around or to involve the authorities, so I’d walk. Potentially going to court over something like this would be bullshit, and I excise as much bullshit as I possibly can from my life. Dude opened his mouth, I closed it. Cause. Effect. Trespass. Consequence.

Hey. If what I did was soooooo wrong, if how I reacted was sooooooo egregious to the peace of society, if the police want me that bad, if the guy I assaulted wants to go to trial and say in open court and admit he called me a nigger, come and find me.

63

[QUOTE=Askia]
Hey. If what I did was soooooo wrong, if how I reacted was sooooooo egregious to the peace of society, if the police want me that bad, if the guy I assaulted wants to go to trial and say in open court and admit he called me a nigger, come and find me.
[/QUOTE]
ow you’re just sounding irrational.

I guess that, in your mind, not being caught is sufficient to justify any crime.

64

My problem with the whole situation stems from the guy’s demeanor as he was bragging about his high school fights. I realize that no one else on the board witnessed the incident – I wish I could have it on videotape! Of course, psychologically, I am putting myself in his white victim’s shoes (I am short of stature and physically inept – fortunately I was never bullied in junior high and high school; it was not until graduate school when I attended a predominantly black college that I realized the racial bullying and intimidation that some blacks are capable of! That is a different story, of course!).

I can only imagine what kind of abuse he heaped upon the smaller white guy! His friend actually crossed the racial boundary line and felt sorry for the guy, to the point of saying his friend had “overdone it” with the beating, so it must have been intense!

The whole incident just reminded me of the attitude so prevalent in minority cultures – centuries of discrimination absolve me from all blame, no matter how badly I treat white people, I should not be blamed or held accountable for my actions if I beat a few white people up, since their ancestors mistreated mine in previous generations!

I certainly never intend to use the “N- word”, and I will attempt to refrain myself from physically punishing any one who calls me a “honkie”, “whitey”, or “white devil”!

65

[QUOTE=Excalibre]
Fine, but you realize that this directly contradicts what you said earlier about being a “peaceable guy”? If you tend to beat people up when they piss you off, then you’re a volatile, violent person, not a “peaceable guy”. What do you think makes someone violent? I would say that a tendency to use violence under inappropriate circumstances qualifies. While obviously someone who randomly beats up little old ladies walking down the street is not “peaceable”, I don’t think not subjecting people around you to random violence is quite sufficient to qualify as “peaceable”.
[/quote]
You seem to be much more bothered by this apparent contridiction in my character than I am, or anyone who knows me is, or how I have conducted myself in the past 30-odd years. I think I’m peaceable… until I don’t think I should be. I am very comfortable with this seeming contradiction within me.

There’s is something rather naive about you and your life experience if you honestly don’t think there may well be circumstances which crippling someone is not only justifable, but laudable. I’ll stick to my game plan, thanks.

And hey. I’m not heartless. You can recover from being crippled. At least I didn’t say “maim.”

66

[QUOTE=Antinor01]
It was the washington state supreme court. Though I freely admit I may be misinterpreting what they have to say, I’m far from a legal expert.
Here’s a couple of SCOTUS cases I found in my reading, both of these involved cross burning rather than actual words, but they seem to relate.

A more recent decision by the US supreme court is quite interesting, take a look at RAV v city of saint paul, decided in 1992. The city of St. Paul had an ordinance that prohibited fighting words that were based on ‘race, color, creed, religion or gender’. That ordinance was determined to be unconstitutional.

Virginia v Black (2002) is another interesting one. From a quick reading of it, they say that intent to indimidate is the primary factor. (prior rulings against the cross burner were overturned)

Overall from my reading it seems that this is far from a settled issue in legal terms. I haven’t found any cases yet that relate to someone using ‘fighting words’ and then being physically assaulted. So, how these two things would work in a practical sense, I don’t know.

Do you have any reference to a case that more relates to what the conversation was about? That is, is there a legal right/defense to physically assault someone over something they say to you? I would be interested in reading it.

I would just say though, even if there is a legal defense I still believe it is wrong. My personal feeling is that both the person that uses a slur and the person that physically assaults them are in the wrong, but I believe that using violence is more wrong.
[/QUOTE]
But a racial slur is usually the precursor/intensifier to a physical confrontation anyway, at least in my experience. You either have to fight, or take off. I’ll take my chances with a fight.

I’ve been pocking around the internet trying to find more recnt cases dealing with this. I agree its far from a settled issue. My guess is cases like this are routinely plead down to lesser charges long before they end up in court.

67

[QUOTE=mhendo]
I guess that, in your mind, not being caught is sufficient to justify any crime.
[/QUOTE]
No, not “any” crime. Just assault cases in which I may or not be involved in involving aggressors who may or may not have realized what they were getting into when they called me a racial slur. Or not.

Sheeeesh. I’m spending more time justifying the fights I’ve been in than the time it took to have them!

68

[QUOTE=gytalf2000]
My problem with the whole situation stems from the guy’s demeanor as he was bragging about his high school fights. I realize that no one else on the board witnessed the incident – I wish I could have it on videotape! Of course, psychologically, I am putting myself in his white victim’s shoes (I am short of stature and physically inept – fortunately I was never bullied in junior high and high school; it was not until graduate school when I attended a predominantly black college that I realized the racial bullying and intimidation that some blacks are capable of! That is a different story, of course!).

I can only imagine what kind of abuse he heaped upon the smaller white guy! His friend actually crossed the racial boundary line and felt sorry for the guy, to the point of saying his friend had “overdone it” with the beating, so it must have been intense!

The whole incident just reminded me of the attitude so prevalent in minority cultures – centuries of discrimination absolve me from all blame, no matter how badly I treat white people, I should not be blamed or held accountable for my actions if I beat a few white people up, since their ancestors mistreated mine in previous generations!

I certainly never intend to use the “N- word”, and I will attempt to refrain myself from physically punishing any one who calls me a “honkie”, “whitey”, or “white devil”!
[/QUOTE]
If it makes you feel better, I think the black guy sounds like an ass. I’m no fan of bullies of any race. I do not justify my (mis)behavior beyond the immediate circumstances of whoever I fight and whatever occurred between us. Most black people do the same, and any violence done in the name of generational mistreatment that’s not part of some extremeist political group’s ideology sounds like made-up unjustifiable bullshit to me.

69

[QUOTE=Askia]
Using a gun shoiuld be more disturbing. But who, besides you, assumes I’d be smiling? I never said I would. Doesn’t sound like I would. I don’t think anything about being ready to kill is funny. I see no need to stick around or to involve the authorities, so I’d walk. Potentially going to court over something like this would be bullshit, and I excise as much bullshit as I possibly can from my life. Dude opened his mouth, I closed it. Cause. Effect. Trespass. Consequence.
Hey. If what I did was soooooo wrong, if how I reacted was sooooooo egregious to the peace of society, if the police want me that bad, if the guy I assaulted wants to go to trial and say in open court and admit he called me a nigger, come and find me.
[/QUOTE]

Personal experience working in a racially mixed school where fights between whites and blacks are far from uncommon and as a deputy sheriff indicates that in Pennsylvania you will be charged with assault, aggravated assault, and sundry other charges following the beating you give the mouthy rascist. He’d find himself facing an array of similar charges. IOW, you won’t walk because he called you a nigger; the court will regard it as mutual combat. I’ve seen defendants try to tell the magistrate exactly what you are claiming in this thread and it didn’t fly. A shooting would be regarded even less favorably by the court, I’d expect.
FTR, I’ve known bunches of convicts who fancied themselves as peaceable guys. I also think, despite your crowing in this thread, that you’ve most likely never been anything more serious than a grade school scuffle. The real throat-stompers who like to sound off about it are in prisons, or dead, and that makes it difficult to post almost daily to a discussion board.

70

[QUOTE=Askia]
You seem to be much more bothered by this apparent contridiction in my character than I am, or anyone who knows me is, or how I have conducted myself in the past 30-odd years. I think I’m peaceable… until I don’t think I should be. I am very comfortable with this seeming contradiction within me.
[/quote]

It’s not a “contradiction in your character”. It’s a contradiction between the way you describe yourself and the way you actually are. I’m bothered to know that you think it’s appropriate to assault someone, or worse, in response to being called a name. The fact that your character is vastly different from your self-perception is just something you ought to consider.

Those circumstances don’t include “He called me names!” Jesus, I can’t believe an adult would speak the way you do. I really, really hope this is pure macho posturing. Because you’re starting to sound unbalanced.

“Far from a settled issue”? You haven’t found any evidence that any assault case has been dropped because someone was “provoked” by being called a nigger. That’s like me deciding that my cat dying is a good excuse to rob banks. No, there’s no cases of bank robbers being set free because of the trauma of their cat dying. That doesn’t make it “far from a settled issue”.

71

[QUOTE=Excalibre]
“Far from a settled issue”? You haven’t found any evidence that any assault case has been dropped because someone was “provoked” by being called a nigger. That’s like me deciding that my cat dying is a good excuse to rob banks. No, there’s no cases of bank robbers being set free because of the trauma of their cat dying. That doesn’t make it “far from a settled issue”.
[/QUOTE]

I’m the one that originally used that phrase. I should have been more clear what I meant by that.

What I’m saying not settled is what is and what is not classified as protected speech under the first amendment. The various rulings that I’ve read and cited appear to my non-expert mind to conflict on that point. I’ll reiterate that I may be interpreting the rulings incorrectly, but that is my lay person reading of it.

72

[QUOTE=Antinor01]
I’m the one that originally used that phrase. I should have been more clear what I meant by that.

What I’m saying not settled is what is and what is not classified as protected speech under the first amendment. The various rulings that I’ve read and cited appear to my non-expert mind to conflict on that point. I’ll reiterate that I may be interpreting the rulings incorrectly, but that is my lay person reading of it.
[/QUOTE]

My point remains, though, and that’s that Askia has come up with no evidence for his main claim - that you get to kick peoples’ asses at will for using racial slurs.

73

[QUOTE=Scumpup]
Personal experience working in a racially mixed school where fights between whites and blacks are far from uncommon and as a deputy sheriff indicates that in Pennsylvania you will be charged with assault, aggravated assault, and sundry other charges following the beating you give the mouthy rascist. He’d find himself facing an array of similar charges. IOW, you won’t walk because he called you a nigger; the court will regard it as mutual combat. I’ve seen defendants try to tell the magistrate exactly what you are claiming in this thread and it didn’t fly. A shooting would be regarded even less favorably by the court, I’d expect.
[/quote]
In the case of using a gun, I rather pointedly admitted I wouldn’t use it unless I felt threatened by the situation I found myself in on the whole in addition to the racial slur. But the circumstances in which I’d find myself facing down a racist armed with a gun are so ludicrious I can’t take this seriously.

This is again assuming I’d end up in court, or that they guy I assaulted would want to press charges, or that any witnesses would cooperate, or that the police would be interested in pursuing the matter further if I just left him on the ground writhing in pain.

Hell, I could be the one to get my ass kicked. It’s not outside the realm of possibility.

Agreed, which is precisely is why I reject the accusation that I’m a Walking Angry Black Man Stereotype.

74

[QUOTE=Excalibre]
My point remains, though, and that’s that Askia has come up with no evidence for his main claim - that you get to kick peoples’ asses at will for using racial slurs.
[/QUOTE]
You are inverting and twisting what I’ve said. Is your position so weak you have to mischaracterize mine?

75

[QUOTE=Askia]
You are inverting and twisting what I’ve said. Is your position so weak you have to mischaracterize mine?
[/QUOTE]

What’s your position? Your claim was that you could get assault charges dropped by arguing that your victim provoked you with “fighting words”. But you haven’t found any evidence for that.

76

No. I claimed I’d fight someone who called me nigger. I also said, in answer to a hypothetical question, that if the guy was much bigger than me and if I had a gun and if he made me feel threatened or fear for my safety I’d shoot him, and depending on the circumstances I might shoot to kill. I said I’d probably get a lesser sentence due to the fact that I have no prior criminal history. I said much earlier that calling me, or any black person, “nigger” would likely constitute “fighting words” under most circumstances. While it might not get me a free pass for the assault, the mitigating circumstances might warrant a lesser sentence, especially given the fact I am not, nor have I ever been, a felon.

I also said I most likely wouldn’t even stick around if it was a simple fistfight, that I’d do my level best to cripple his ass and simply leave the scene: break his fingers, an arm, a leg if I can manage it; definitely his nose. I tend to doubt the police, IF they became involved, would pursue the matter much further, because I can’t imagine any circumstances that would involve me in a fight with a racist where anyone would know me personally or want to cooperate. I also don’t know many racists who want to broadcast the fact a black man kicked his ass.

My “evidence” is common sense and knowledge of the courts: I know there are precedents for evoking mitigating circumstances in sentencing that result in milder sentencing for first-time offenders, and I believe I fit the criteria and that I would make a sympathetic defendant.

None of this matters, really. Even if I risk getting the full sentencing for assault and battery, or aggravated assault, I would do it, and not regret the decision.

You do NOT get to call me that word, or anything comparable.

You do not get to insult my family.

You (obviously) do not get to put your hands on me.

77

I’m surprised nobody has taken this to the Pit yet. Perhaps they’re afraid of Askia tracking them down and breaking their nose?

78

[QUOTE=Askia]
No. I claimed I’d fight someone who called me nigger. I also said, in answer to a hypothetical question, that if the guy was much bigger than me and if I had a gun and if he made me feel threatened or fear for my safety I’d shoot him, and depending on the circumstances I might shoot to kill.
[/quote]

Which is–more or less–“You get to kick peoples’ asses at will for using racial slurs.”

Don’t kid yourself, son. If this thread is any indication of what you’re really like, you don’t have any of either.

Oh, suuuuurrre. How could a jury not love you? Especially if you spout off like this in court. Here’s a hint. If you really do find yourself in this situation, take the fifth–especially if you see me in the jury box. :dubious:

And we’re right back to the scared, stupid eight year old’s attitude. That’s the thing, Askia. You’re an adult. You’re supposed to be mature about these situations. I can damn well guarantee you that the law expects you to be mature. I believe I read somewhere that you’re a teacher. Aren’t you supposed to have . . . you know . . . grown up before you find yourself in front of a bunch of kids who ostensibly look to you to show the way?

I invite you to listen to yourself again. You don’t care that you’ll do hard time (even though it means that you’ll never see the inside of a classroom again with your record)? You’d try to cripple someone based on what he said?

These are not the words of an adult, dude. This is the kind of thing a punk kid who’s never saw the other side of eight grade says right before he holds up a liquor store. These are the words of a child with “Fucked At Birth” tatooed on his forehead and six illegitimate children by the age of 20. They are the words of grown-up children who never learned to think with their heads.

Hey, talk as tough as you want. Men don’t talk this way. Kids who want to impress other kids with how diesel they are talk this way. Men think with their heads. They don’t make excuses about how they couldn’t help themselves, 'cause they were irrationally angry. Kids say that, only they use smaller words.

Men reason their way out of situations. They show enough discipline and foresight not to wreck their lives over something some drunk idiot said. Men control themselves. They don’t let themselves be controlled by the situation. Kids and gangster punks get controlled.

You want to be a man? Show a little self-discipline and learn to walk away. You want to be a punk? Keep it up, until all that talk turns real, and then you can hang with other punks in prison talk about how you never saw this coming. It’s up to you, Askia. Personally, from what I’ve read of your posts elsewhere on the board, I think you could make a good man if you put your mind to it.

79

[QUOTE=Askia]
Hey. If what I did was soooooo wrong, if how I reacted was sooooooo egregious to the peace of society, if the police want me that bad, if the guy I assaulted wants to go to trial and say in open court and admit he called me a nigger, come and find me.
[/QUOTE]

Well, I am not a lawyer, but it’s possible that I could be a juror. Not, apparently, in your state.

But if I was a juror, and somebody told me they attacked a person who called them a n****r, I would not vote to acquit.

How are you any different?

Regards,
Shodan

80

Not wanting to get too far into this thing, but I’ll say this: it is precisely because of what Askia threatens to do, I believe, that we don’t see people generally spouting the “n-word.” I don’t think I have a problem with that.

Let’s face it. Not everyone has evolved to the realization that racially derogatory language is just not part of being civilized. For a certain segment of the population, the reality that an ass-kicking is imminent is precisely the way they’re kept in check.

I think everyone has a hot-button issue that might cause them to fly off the deep end; Lord knows I’ve seen enough meltdowns on the SDMB over issues like sexual assault and child molestation. Sounds like this might be Askia’s. Personally I couldn’t make a blanket statement about how I’d react, because it doesn’t affect me in the same way, but I’d be plenty pissed and yes, depending on the context, I might be inclined to try to whup someone’s ass (unlike Askia, it’s by no means a given that I’d emerge victorious).

Someone just straight up calling a Black person “nigger” in this day and age is either a) crazy, b) seriously unaware of the power of the word (don’t care how many times they’ve heard a Black person use it), or c) really intending to do that person some harm.