I live a little north of Flint, and FWIW, that neighborhood is close to 100 percent black, *very *blighted and very high crime. I’m not sure if this sign is violating any sort of hate crime laws (the article doesn’t say one way or the other) and I imagine the reaction would be somewhat different if the homeowner had been a white woman. Although I find the statement by the NAACP spokeswoman amusing, given the widespread use of the N-word in rap music.
Although any empty dwelling in that part of the city will be vandalized and burglarized in very short order, that’s a given. It was naive of her to think nobody would break in and steal whatever they could use, re-sell or sell to a scrap yard.
Personally, I find it offensive (I’m white) but I can certainly understand her frustration. The decay and crime in the city is a lot more offensive than the written N-word, which one hears blasting from cars regularly around here anyway. So my vote is let the sign stay, it’s her house, free speech and all that. It shouldn’t matter what the race of the woman is, but IMO her being black makes it less offensive.
Was this OK of her to do? Should the city make her take the sign down (if, theoretically, they had jurisdiction to do so)?
I think she has every right to put whatever slogan she wants up on her front yard. I think it is probably ill-advised, but I certainly don’t want the state to intervene.
Kinda what MadMonk said… she is free to do so, as I’m sure any decent lawyer could argue that it is clearly NOT hate speech.
But I think it is ill-advised. Ignorant thugs who prey on their community like that are likely to take it as a disrespect to them, with tragic results.
It’s attention getting, that’s for sure. But I doubt it will affect the actions of the type of person (of ANY color) who would brazenly steal windows out of a house.
I think homeowners have a general obligation to maintain their property in such a way as to avoid being a nuisance or eyesore for their neighbors. I don’t see this as a “freedom of speech” issue any more than requiring homeowners to maintain their yards or keep their property free of mounds of festering garbage.
Is that really true though? What if it were an incitement to hatred or criminaility? If the sign said instead “Kill all niggas” or “Gas the Jews” or “Have sex with babies”, would that still be true? How far does personal property and the right to free speech actually extend?
Not far enough, to my mind (unless you’re a member of the Westboro Baptist Church). A sign saying “Kill all niggas” isn’t going to incite me to kill anyone, etc.
I believe to be a hate crime the victims have to be a different race, doing or saying something about your own race, however inflamatory, doesn’t count. A few years ago there was a stabbing in the Valleyfair amusement park parking lot when a man took exception to the perps advances to his girlfriend. The perp was black, and everybody starting clamoring for it to be charged as a hate crime to the DA finally released the fact that the victim and his girlfriend were also black, so they couldn’t.
Saying something about another race doesn’t count either. I am not sure if you have this misunderstanding or not, but there is a popular misconception that there are “hate speech” laws in the US. There are not. Hence the KKK can have their rallies denouncing the blacks and the Jews and this lady can put a sign on her door complaining the niggers, honkies, spics or whoever she so chooses.
I get that it’s Flint, and I don’t think that this obligation comes from Home Owners’ Associations or municipal
bylaws. Actively putting up something which might reasonably offend people who actually live in the neighborhood is jerkish in the extreme.
I was wondering if maybe they were rehabbing the house and the thieves stole new, still in the package construction items rather than removing installed windows.
I’m pretty sure that the 1st amendment gives her the right to put up that sign and it would be a cold day in hell before the city had the authority to make her take it down.
It was ignorant of her to put it up. Being black, I can tell you she’s not doing it for any other reason then to provoke a reaction. I use the word “N***” all the time with my friends but I don’t use it at work, which is mostly white.
She knows darn well what she’s doing, she’s not using free speech she’s just trying to provoke.
That said, she can do what she want, and I feel bad for anyone who gets burglarized, especially and older lady, but the message she is sending doesn’t mean anything.
The article says she’s disappointed in her people. What? That they’d rob a black woman’s house instead of a white one? That they’d rob anyone? What’s the message?
I respect her right to put a sign up and I feel for her, she’s angry and scared, but she’s just out to stir
Isn’t provoking others to action part of our right of free speech? I’m pretty sure that Martin Luther King Jr. didn’t speak for the hell of it, but intended for people to take action upon his words.
Shit, I just relistened to Bring the Pain from Chris Rock last night.
“I love black people, but I HATE niggers! Every time black people try to have something nice, ignorant-ass niggers fuck it up. Can’t keep a movie theater open for more than three weeks, 'cause niggers shooting at the screen! Niggers will rob their next door neighbors then go over the next day and say, ‘Heard you got robbed!’ If I could I’d join the Ku Klux Klan and do a driveby from here to Brooklyn!”
And other such sentiments, which pretty much mirror this woman’s: the fucking idiots who can’t control themselves give everyone a bad name. Of course it’s provocative. That’s the point.
Whether or not their opinions have any validation is something else entirely, but given I don’t live in the same kinds of communities, I’m not going to say jack.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter what message she put on the sign, freedom of speech exists not to protect the idea we agree with, but to protect the idea we hate, etc., etc. If she had decided to fly a confederate flag, that’s her right. It might not be the wisest, or most enlightened decision, but that doesn’t mean the state can or should stop her.