- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Cincinnati city council President Pro Tem Victoria Parks“They begged for that beat down!“
Posted on 8/4/25 at 9:56 am to NIH
Posted on 8/4/25 at 9:56 am to NIH
quote:
Even if they weren’t full of it, a word is not a pass to commit violent felonies.
Yeah because if that was the case there could be a lot of justifiable beat downs of black people.
0
Posted on 8/4/25 at 9:59 am to mudshuvl05
quote:
It goes as expected: they disrapecked an innocent person
And I'm sure the disrespect amounted to them saying "excuse me" or "please leave us alone."
Complete animalistic behavior.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:00 am to Sam Quint
I don’t think there’s any slur someone could call me that would make me want to fight. I simply don’t get offended by that shite.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:02 am to NIH
quote:
Even if they weren’t full of it, a word is not a pass to commit violent felonies.
Oh they're going with the N-defense?
There is some irony in the lady in OP talking about the 1A of that's the case
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:03 am to mudshuvl05
quote:
Now is when the board autist digs in and insists that the law allows violent mobs of "persecuted" black people to attempt murder on whites and the thread spirals into a 32 page slowfp thesis as to why he's right.
The same crowd that championed the lie that Austin Metcalf assaulted his murderer are the same ones giving the "other side" of the story on social media. It goes as expected: they disrapecked an innocent person, that means they had the right to mob up and stomp out a woman and cause her brain damage.
Now let's see you add another quarter million posts explaining to us peons why that's perfectly legal.
What in the ... frick?
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:04 am to Cell of Awareness
quote:
What justification could possibly be given?
That's why I was asking. There isn't a justification (especially for that lady getting dropped). I just wanted to laugh appropriately.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:49 am to Joshjrn
quote:imagine if it was the other way around White people mob jumped a black and a black woman. Then a white council member said “ well they begged for that beat down”. Imagine the outcry
What blows my mind is that she’s doubled down on it:
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:52 am to BowDownToLSU
There has never been a single instance of black on white violence that black people have not universally celebrated. Not one. Not even OJ brutally slaughtering the mother of his children and a complete stranger with a knife. I hope that is eye opening.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:55 am to Joshjrn
quote:
"In this country, we have freedom of speech, however, you may not run into a crowded theater and scream fire," Parks told The Enquirer.
That’s nowhere close to the same thing.
If yelling the n-word causes a violent reaction in a crowd of 100 black people, then it means 100 people couldn’t control their emotions.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 10:56 am to Snipe
quote:
When the pendulum swings the other way...... Gonna be hard to watch.
I’ll take “Things that are way overdue”
for $1,000 Alex
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:01 am to MorbidTheClown
. "We are on the right track as a city! How dare you repeatedly show evidence that proves otherwise!"This post was edited on 8/4/25 at 11:02 am
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:03 am to LordSaintly
quote:
That’s nowhere close to the same thing.
It's also a bit of a silly legal red herring. The case that analogy comes from only used that line in dicta (the instant case was about a speech against the draft), and that case was significantly limited by a subsequent holding. Outside of a few exceptions, it's generally legal to falsely yell "fire" in a crowded theater. This is just one of those "known" legal chestnuts the public clung to for some reason, along the same lines as the "McDonald's coffee" lawsuit.
This post was edited on 8/4/25 at 11:04 am
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:03 am to CocomoLSU
quote:
I haven't heard of this story,
I've been saying this from the beginning... why did we learn of this crime only on social media? Where's the George Floyd type of coverage from the national media?
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:34 am to Sam Quint
quote:
it absolutely is protected speech.
Except it’s defined as hate speech.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:37 am to BowDownToLSU
Just give me 3 bullets to clean this mess up
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:44 am to BowDownToLSU
Posted on 8/4/25 at 11:46 am to kywildcatfanone
Posted on 8/4/25 at 12:35 pm to Joshjrn
She's trying to use the standard for the government to use official sanction against an individual ("yelling fire in a crowded theater") to justify an evil, brutal attack against someone. She's as stupid as she is racist.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 12:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
What in the ... frick?
What’s confusing? It’s one of the most accurate posts I’ve ever seen on this site.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 12:50 pm to Wabbit7
quote:
It’s one of the most accurate posts I’ve ever seen on this site.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News