English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-25 17:26:08 · 5 answers · asked by kimmyisahotbabe 5 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

mckenziecalhoun, really good answer. But why do you think Nifong would not have gone after 3 white athletes accused of raping a black girl during his election? They could have gone there on scholarship, or their parents could be well off, but not rich enough to spend millions on defense lawyers.

2007-06-25 18:22:36 · update #1

5 answers

poor people dont play lacrosse or go to duke, so the question is an impossibility.

2007-06-25 17:28:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

That's the trade off.

See, news isn't about real life. It's about the strange, the unusual. And as much as we'd like it to be true, it isn't.
White people don't commit gang rape as often as many other ethnic groups do.

It isn't a matter of superiority, just place and time, culture and ethics, which change drastically within short periods of time, historically.

The crime rate for people of African ancestry for a long period after they were freed from slavery was the lowest of any group around. You wanted ethics? Deal with a black man.

Because Duke lacrosse players aren't normally thought of as gang rapists, it became news.

The same act, committed by multiple other groups that same year? No news.

Trade off? It gets more attention.

The whine? "How come they always publicize the white people?"

The answer? "Because it's rare."

The whine? "How come they don't publicize black/Asian/Hispanic/etc. crime?"

The answer? "Because it is common, done often, unlike rich white people who don't do it as often, much like our representatives, priests, military men and women. They commit crimes rarely, so when they do, it is news. In addition, when we do put such events on the news, we get accused of bigotry, showing minority criminals."

You can't have it both ways. I don't say that in a mean way. I mean literally, if you have it one way, you lose the other way.

However, it is likely that they would have not gone to jail because the desire to "get them" would have been minor and no motivation for Nifong to pursue it. The lack of real evidence would have given him enough pause to drop the case, let alone the multiple stories the girl gave.

No, they probably would have been freed early on without Nifong feeling like he had something to hide...because he would have had nothing to gain, either.

Just so that you don't misunderstand, when was the last time you saw a poor ex-felon white mentioned in the news?

When was the last time a rich black girl ended up in the news? Frequently, if you remember Whitney. People get their kicks out of kicking those they are jealous of. It's sick, but it's average behavior.

Just remember that the news is about the odd, strange, the weird, and you should be fine.

2007-06-26 00:39:17 · answer #2 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0 0

Well.. he probably would not have gone after them to begin with the way he did,

He was up for re-election, and announced he was prosecuting the 3 rich, white, elite boys at an African American meeting to get the black votes.

If they had been poor nobodies, it would not of been the political "hot-topic" he made it become.

2007-06-26 00:32:35 · answer #3 · answered by Dina W 6 · 1 1

If they had been poor, they probably wouldn't have been playing LaCrosse or attending Duke.

2007-06-26 00:28:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

No.

2007-06-26 00:51:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers