It's easy to say that they were *only* symbolism when they aren't in your face, when you have no real reason to believe that those nooses would actually be used, much less on you.
No one who actually saw them had that set of privileges.
Yes? Threats (simple assaults) are more common than beatings (aggravated assaults) and, as well, the latter is considered more severe than the other.
Still, still, your comment of "beatings vs. nooses" isn't relevant. There were both beatings and nooses. Even if we confine it to (what I think you meant) being beaten vs. being hung, it isn't relevant--the people who were beaten had absolutely no reason at all, at all, at all to believe that they wouldn't be hung in the near future.
I was contrasting beaing beaten vs the uncarried out THREAT of being hung.
Unless the facts of the case have changed since I last read them: 1.Black individual sits under the "white tree". 2.There is a confrontation over this. 3.Next day, little fake nooses in the tree. 4.Escalating arguing and confrontation. 5.Week or so later, white kid jumped by black kids. 6.Black kid(s) on trial for assualt.
My point here was that the threat inherent in the empty nooses is a lesser offense than the actual act of assault.
Crossing that line is where civilization ends and the state of nature begins.
I hear you. I just think you're waaaaaaaay minimizing the threat, or even assault, factor of nooses in trees. I also think that civilization ends far before the nooses come out.
Realistically, I believe that showing a noose threateningly to a black person in the south is equivalent to waving a gun at him, which is simple assault even to the most biased of judges. It's not unlikely that a random black individual in the south has had close family relatives lynched and knows damned well just how much the law will do to avenge him.
And yes, I agree, civilization is back somewhere amongst caring more about your finals than the color of who is sitting under a tree.
I also think you're over emphasizing the current state of lynching in America. I'll admit, it's better here in San Jose, the last time we had a lynching was 1923 when a blakc man was accused of raping a girl and the twon broke into the jail, injured 6 guards and eventually hung the man.
But in the last 20 years, there have been a severe dearth of lynchings. They're there but rare as all hell and the "good ol boy" network just can't cover itself like it used to. Hell, we're going back and prosecuting those lynchings from the 50s and 60s, what hope does a current one have?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-29 10:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-30 12:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-05 10:27 pm (UTC)There were nooses, is all I'm sayin'.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-05 10:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-05 11:36 pm (UTC)No one who actually saw them had that set of privileges.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 12:50 am (UTC)The easiest way to get someone you don't like kicked out of a club is to scare them bad enough that they swing on you.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 01:06 am (UTC)That's because bouncers aren't especially well trained. They need assault and battery before they're sure, or often times before they notice.
But a cop will recognize a threat like that as being assault, and illegal.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 01:38 am (UTC)But look at most sentencing guidelines and you'll find one has stiffer sentences than the other.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 01:44 am (UTC)Still, still, your comment of "beatings vs. nooses" isn't relevant. There were both beatings and nooses. Even if we confine it to (what I think you meant) being beaten vs. being hung, it isn't relevant--the people who were beaten had absolutely no reason at all, at all, at all to believe that they wouldn't be hung in the near future.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 05:42 am (UTC)Unless the facts of the case have changed since I last read them:
1.Black individual sits under the "white tree".
2.There is a confrontation over this.
3.Next day, little fake nooses in the tree.
4.Escalating arguing and confrontation.
5.Week or so later, white kid jumped by black kids.
6.Black kid(s) on trial for assualt.
My point here was that the threat inherent in the empty nooses is a lesser offense than the actual act of assault.
Crossing that line is where civilization ends and the state of nature begins.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 06:08 am (UTC)Realistically, I believe that showing a noose threateningly to a black person in the south is equivalent to waving a gun at him, which is simple assault even to the most biased of judges. It's not unlikely that a random black individual in the south has had close family relatives lynched and knows damned well just how much the law will do to avenge him.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-07-06 06:18 am (UTC)Shoot a gun.
Nutjob.
Murderer.
There IS a difference.
And yes, I agree, civilization is back somewhere amongst caring more about your finals than the color of who is sitting under a tree.
I also think you're over emphasizing the current state of lynching in America. I'll admit, it's better here in San Jose, the last time we had a lynching was 1923 when a blakc man was accused of raping a girl and the twon broke into the jail, injured 6 guards and eventually hung the man.
But in the last 20 years, there have been a severe dearth of lynchings. They're there but rare as all hell and the "good ol boy" network just can't cover itself like it used to. Hell, we're going back and prosecuting those lynchings from the 50s and 60s, what hope does a current one have?