At least this girl can visit Daddy Dearest in jail. Her father’s victims can’t even do that.
The daughter has every right to be angry and she is a victim. But she is a victim of her father’s poor choices and judgement. She is not a victim of racism. She is not a victim of white society’s real or percieved hatred of Hmong people and thier culture. She has nobody to blame but her daddy. The whole family and the entire Hmong community should’ve stuck with their original story of being sorry for the lives that were taken. Instead, they are blaming society and culture and those retarded redneck deer hunters in northern Wisconsin where walking upright is a relatively new concept. There weren’t just fathers, there were sons, uncles, cousins, husbands, daughters, brothers, sisters, and fiances. There were friends and neighbors. They were enjoying a yearly tradition that has lasted for decades. Then they were killed.
Unless normal protocols are changed (and they are for occasional high-profile cases), soon this man will come to me. So if that happens I will post of it no further, as it would no longer be appropriate.
But I did want to say just how strong this attitude of “I was disrespected, so what I did was right and just” is in the incarcerated population that I serve. It certainly is not unique to any particular ethnic group. And that attitude seemed to drive a lot of the behavior which resulted in these folks being in prison in the first place.
Frankly, after listening to their stories out of their own mouths, a lot of these people haven’t done anything to be respected for. But in their minds, being shown lack of proper respect is a corporal, if not capital, offense.
I guess you missed my other post, so i’ll ask again.
Where, exactly, did i assert that white hunters are racist liars?
Here’s the thing. You hit ‘shift’ at the beginning of sentences, and for things like the Dope. It seems that you only use lower case for the first person singular. Just my observation, amd probably not all that astute. FWIW. It doesn’t weird me out or anything. Just a little mystery about a poster I admire.
Which is what prompted me to call bullshit on the family’s charges of racism, and the self-defense argument. They convicted him for firing at least 9 shots at 8 people, killing 6 people, not for being Hmong and killing 6 people. By flying the flag of racism, and defending his actions, they are making things worse for the Hmong community.
Vang says he was shot at as he attempted to leave, and then he started in with mowing people down. Sounds good to me. If I’ve got my back turned on a group of blatently or presumably hostile folks, away from public view, I might be a little concerned that I was in deep shit. Fire a shot at me, or in the air for that matter, and I’m going to assume I’m about to disappear forever.
So dude knocks several of 'em down before they process what’s going on, then like anybody else, they run for cover. Who among them has got the gun? Who might have one concealed? If I’m in an established combat situation I’m not going to display an ounce of chivalry and spare my enemies a wound in the back just so they can get to cover and commence firing! Fuck that! It’s not like this guy set up on a playground and nailed a bunch of 3rd graders. SOMETHING happened to make him think he needed to open up. I highly doubt that his intrusion on private property was handled with any kind of civility. Every hunter I know, if they ever made such an error as stumbling onto private land, would immediately apologize, reaffirm their location and then scamper the hell back on course. I’m not sure Vang is as guilty as he’s being made out to be, but then it’s difficult to take either party’s word for what happened.
One thing’s for sure: He hit, what, nine times? Anyone know of a deer rifle with a 9-round magazine? This guy had time to reload at least once! So what really happened?
If you really want to be depressed, check out the local Hmong newspaper and the comments being left:
And as far as his family being proud of him, I wonder how much of that pride is based in culture? I’m not really up on Laotian culture, but given the general nastiness in that neighborhood I’m going to assume that folks have endured for quite some time a choice of “die like a dog” or “fight like a man” to a degree that we 'merkins haven’t seen.
I read the reports and I just shake my head. Let’s assume just for the hell of it that they “disrespected” him. So what? Isn’t shooting people and leaving them lying in their own blood pretty damn disrespectful? And what about the hunters shooting first? I imagine police can and do check firearms to see if they have been used (probably were since it was hunting season) but more importantly, police can check the area and see where these “they shot first” bullets went. Maybe not all the bullets, but at least enough to say “yeah the white guys did shoot”. But the police probably wouldn’t find anything because Vang is (not haveing ALL the facts as some might insist) a liar as well as a killer. That the white guys were shot in the back is important. If they were shooting at Vang, unless they are all Annie Oakley doing trick shots, they would be facing him. If Vang chased them down and was hunting them, and shot them in the back, that is murder. As for the “good people” who cheer Vang on, and justify what he did, over an insult that MAY have not even happened, this country has laws and does not allow this sort of thing. They can either fit in or get the fuck out.
If that sounds racist, I’m sorry it isn’t what I intend. But, that’s it. Either fit in or leave. Obey our laws and rules or go back to what you fled from. Don’t bring your old bullshit here. Murder and backshooting are not “cultural quirks”.
Sorry, you didn’t, my mistake. But you did say that the victims could be lying about the circumstances of the crime. I pointed out that the one most likely to be lying is the murderer.
OK. I have a friend who’s been following this story. The weapon was aparently an SKS 7.62mm Soviet assault rifle. 10 round mag. Still, 9 shots, 8 hits and 6 kills? That’s some shooting!
IIRC, from the initial incident (I looked for an older article yesterday and couldn’t find it) he was a sharpshooter for one of our armed forces.
Thanks stpauler for reminding us that some of the Hmong community doesn’t defend Vang’s actions. If I implied that they did, I’m sorry. Also, it turns out that his mom released this statement:
“All of this could have been prevented if we could just learn to respect each other. Please I beg you, remember these words.”
So I would like to formally exclude her from my indictment of his family members.
I agree with your OP, and the rest of what you are saying in this thread in general, but surely you don’t mean what I think you are saying in this particular bit. If the people of a certain state exert enough racism, then members of that race should “do as the Romans do” and … not go there?
Everybody is in favor of mutual respect, but her statement admits a wide range of interpretations. Based on what everyone else in her family was saying, she may well have meant “If those guys hadn’t insulted my son, he wouldn’t have had to shoot them,” which is not only contemptible, but also assumes that they did in fact insult him, which is highly debatable.
Now, if she meant, “If my son had learned to respect people’s private property and freedom of speech, this wouldn’t have happened,” that I could agree with.
I am saying that if you are going to a place where you know that people are probably armed and very defensive of their private land and there has been a history of tension over trespassing by members of your ethnic group, you’d be an idiot to trespass. The culture in rural Northern Wisconsin is highly defensive of their hunting land. I am white and I wouldn’t dream of trespassing on private land, especially during deer hunting season.
In response to Hyperelastic I interpreted her comment both ways. Her son should have had more respect for their private land and their lives and the victims should have had more respect for Vang by not calling him names. It may be hard to determine, since it was a written statement by someone with little English skill.
The point I’ve been trying to make throughout this entire thread is that the only evidence that anyone called Vang names is the testimony of Vang himself, who had everything to gain and nothing to lose by making it all up. I find it appalling that so many people, including the news media, take Vang at his word. A man who would mow down a group of mostly unarmed people would certainly be capable of lying to save his sorry hide.
Not true , but the point everyone else is making is that it doesn’t matter who said what, you can’t shoot someone for namecalling and a property owner has the right to kick people off their property and report them to law enforcement.
Every claim of racism in that article, which was written before the testimony began, was from the defense attorney’s opening statement. The prosecutor did say that someone swore at Vang, but that’s all. The reports I’ve read of the actual testimony say that the hunters admitted using profanity, but not racist profanity.
Can you Google? Still not true link link link link