top of page


Updated: Feb 16

Daily Mail: "MSNBC legal analyst Charles Coleman and civil rights attorney Ben Crump suggested in a new NBC documentary that the United States should redefine crime in order to accommodate “black culture.”

I suppose that the American law and justice system could be adjusted to accommodate this what is proposed as a special class of American. I suppose that is one solution to the problem of crime and quality of life in America. But then what? Where is the line of rational, Objective and fair law and justice to be drawn?

Is this the "Black Culture" we are instructed to embrace to create a "special class" of American citizen we are now to surrender our Objective in theory American law and justice system to? Or is this just human nature? Illinois 'super mayor' Tiffany Henyard uses cops to harass enemies, puts face on posters across town (

And this? Is this "Black Culture"? He Was Hired by Fani Willis to Prosecute Trump. Now He’s Accused of an Affair With Her. - WSJ How do you make the rational and objective just and fair in the law distinction? That is a rhetorical question, there should be no carve out for the "Black Culture" in the law or in anything else. Not in America anyway.

So given this suggestion of redefining crime to accommodate "black culture" and given the examples of the Eric Garner case and the George Floyd case. Counterfeiting or passing counterfeit money should now be legal? Because the one would indicate the other, no? Unless this new accommodation applies only to those who identify as being a member of the "black culture" in America?

This special class of American proposal to me and I am certain to many others, especially many of the fine, hardworking and patriotic Americans who happen to have an increased amount of melatonin in their skin that I know is a divisive insult!

Wouldn't that have a very destabilizing and erosive effect on the American and the world's entire economic system? Now that would be a very heavy price to pay in order to accommodate one apparently by these lawyers' argument "special" class of people. I don't know, that does not sound very equitable or very American to me. How about you?

Because that is essentially what these lawyers are arguing, George Floyd as I understand it was attempting to pass a bad $20 bill in order to buy cigarettes. And I have to tell you I deal with these kinds of issues all the time. In a neighborhood you come to understand who you have to keep an eye on in retail, and sometimes you get burned. It's a part of doing business. You learn how to spot bad bills and or you have the technology to detect it, and you look the person in the face and tell them their bill is bad and hand it back to them. And the next move is on them, and it usually out the door. And even then, you can get burned in the chaos of doing business with the public. It is in the Objective a learning experience.

And in the Eric Garner case, Mr. Garner knew he was doing something that at the time was illegal by selling loose cigarettes right outside the door of a retailer that also sold cigarettes who also collected taxes on those sales as an agent of the state. And given that he chose as a grown man to do something that he knew was illegal (at the time) and had gone through being arrested for it many times before as I understand it. And he chose to resist the arrest and it ended in a very negative manner based on his free choices.

Neither Mr. Floyd or Mr. Garner needed to die from their activities whether that be as a direct result of their actions OR how they were dealt with by law enforcement. That I am certain of. But there the unknowable and unfortunate results are anyway. These lawyers are using these unfortunate events to serve their IMO very weak, self-serving, very Subjective divisive arguments. They seek to further divide America.

Now I could see dialing down the law on selling loose cigarettes, it is a low level but erosive act committed by some of the more economically challenged let's say in the general public. But again this "accommodation" for the proposed "special class" of Americans in the "black culture" is an economically destabilizing act regarding the state and the collection of taxes. Now I do not like the taxation system in the state and country just as much as you don't like it, but somethings and laws are what they are.

Business regarding such things as the collection of taxes is simple. If you are doing business in a state, the state licenses you and gives you the responsibility to collect sales taxes as its agent. And so, then that must become your religion because the state licenses you to do so. Just collect it and: Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's.

So, in the real and rational world there are people and there are choices. And in the real and rational world there are consequences for choices made. What these lawyers are arguing is that accommodation be made for a special class of American, those who inhabit the self-described "black culture" in America. And the result in the long term? General chaos, instability, division and no one being safe because these civil rights lawyerly attitudes towards a problem regarding such things IS WRONG! Remember, they are lawyers.

Lawyers have a function in society, but it is not in the formulation of such things as the crafting of special classes of people in America. That is un and anti-American.

Are you paying attention yet America? JGL 2/15/24

35 views2 comments

2 comentarios

Obtuvo 0 de 5 estrellas.
Aún no hay calificaciones

Agrega una calificación
15 feb
Obtuvo 5 de 5 estrellas.

We keep hearing about different "cultures," and how they are all equally valid. Personally, I think we should heed the suggestion of Charles James Napier, the Commander-in-Chief in India, regarding the practice of suttee: "This burning of widows is your custom...But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them...Let us all act according to national customs."

Me gusta
Contestando a

BOOM! Behave yourself!

Me gusta
bottom of page