Teen charged in NJ Walmart racial comment case

Anyone who is black and hears over the Wal-Mart PA that they have to leave because they are black would feel racially intimidated

If they're a huge *****.

This isn't 1955 dillweed.
Precisely.
No one will be intimidated by some voice on the speaker telling them to leave unless it is accompanied by "Stay calm there is no need to rush, move quietly and calmly to the nearest exit, everything is under control."
Then people might panic.

I understand the victim mentality that leads to people being angry about the prank, but unless the video records show a big migration by black people toward the exits just after the announcement then no one was intimidated.

One of the black witnesses said he wasn't going anywhere as he suspected there were people outside planning on shooting the blacks that came out.

I believe it was a prank. I also believe the boy responsible is black and that's why they're not releasing his race, telling everyone it's a non-issue. It's only a non-issue if he's black. Anybody else and it's racism and that's a big issue.
 
Wow.. really? This is America, you're allowed to be a racist, we don't arrest people for being racists. Gee, look at all the anti-Semites in the current administration!!! That seems ok to some.
 
We dont need you to defend our causes you slime bucket. It is people like you that are all about PC crap and you make mountains out of mole hills.

And all you are really doing is confimring to yourself that you are not a racist.

You are a selfish asshole that knows squat about racism....so take your "I am not a racist; ALl people are equal; I can vote for a black man" elitist attitude and shove it up your ass.


Hey buddy, I'm sorry the New Jersey state law is offensive to your overly sensitive feelings. Maybe instead of bitching about it here, you should relocate to New Jersey, make it your place of residence, run for local office, and free New Jersey from the yoke of laws which make racial intimidation a crime. Then you and your son can go from county to county intimidating all the blacks you please.
 
if they're a huge *****.

This isn't 1955 dillweed.



hey you're a ***** if you disagree with me and I am the sole decider of who is and is not reasonably offended at something because only MY opinion matters - the biggest ***** of them all, manifold
 
Last edited:
One of the black witnesses said he wasn't going anywhere as he suspected there were people outside planning on shooting the blacks that came out.

I believe it was a prank. I also believe the boy responsible is black and that's why they're not releasing his race, telling everyone it's a non-issue. It's only a non-issue if he's black. Anybody else and it's racism and that's a big issue.



It doesn't matter what color the kid was. What matters is how a reasonable person would take his comments.
 
Wow.. really? This is America, you're allowed to be a racist, we don't arrest people for being racists. Gee, look at all the anti-Semites in the current administration!!! That seems ok to some.

He wasn't arrested for being racist. He was arrested for unlawful intimidation, the specific form of intimidation being bias intimidation.
 
if they're a huge *****.

This isn't 1955 dillweed.



hey you're a ***** if you disagree with me and I am the sole decider of who is and is not reasonably offended at something because only MY opinion matters - thebiggest ***** of them all, manifold

Fail.

I was responding to you're claim that they were intimidated, not offended.
 
So did Wal-Mart bring charges against the boy or not?

The only one that should be allowed to press charges in this incident is Wal-Mart but even then these charges are seriously overblown.
 
The only one that should be allowed to press charges in this incident is Wal-Mart...
:clap2: I agree! State government should never be allowed to enforce the law for things that happen on Wal-Mart's property. Its just not right. States just don't have the right to enforce their laws, I agree with you. Certainly, if I'm on Wal Marts property, and commit the crime of intimidation and/or harassment against another customer, the state has no right to enforce that law without Wal Marts permission
 
Last edited:
The only one that should be allowed to press charges in this incident is Wal-Mart...
:clap2: I agree! State government should never be allowed to enforce the law for things that happen on Wal-Mart's property. Its just not right. States just don't have the right to enforce their laws, I agree with you. Certainly, if I'm on Wal Marts property, and commit the crime of intimidation and/or harassment against another customer, the state has no right to enforce that law without Wal Marts permission

Are you back to the idea that he was guilty of trespass when the story clearly says it was speech-related?
Can you make up your mind here so we know which ignorance and stupidity to dispel?
 
The only one that should be allowed to press charges in this incident is Wal-Mart...
:clap2: I agree! State government should never be allowed to enforce the law for things that happen on Wal-Mart's property. Its just not right. States just don't have the right to enforce their laws, I agree with you. Certainly, if I'm on Wal Marts property, and commit the crime of intimidation and/or harassment against another customer, the state has no right to enforce that law without Wal Marts permission

Are you back to the idea that he was guilty of trespass when the story clearly says it was speech-related?
Can you make up your mind here so we know which ignorance and stupidity to dispel?

I never said the kid was guilty of trespass. You're still a ******* moron.
 
I'm guessing many people inside walmart during this incident didn't hear about it until after they left.
 
15th post
I also believe the boy responsible is black and that's why they're not releasing his race, telling everyone it's a non-issue.
Well if the perpetrator actually is black then who cares? They're all criminals anyway, might as well shoot him and save trouble later.
Insert Sarcasm Smiley.
 
:clap2: I agree! State government should never be allowed to enforce the law for things that happen on Wal-Mart's property. Its just not right. States just don't have the right to enforce their laws, I agree with you. Certainly, if I'm on Wal Marts property, and commit the crime of intimidation and/or harassment against another customer, the state has no right to enforce that law without Wal Marts permission

Are you back to the idea that he was guilty of trespass when the story clearly says it was speech-related?
Can you make up your mind here so we know which ignorance and stupidity to dispel?

I never said the kid was guilty of trespass. You're still a ******* moron.

Of course you did. And here you are in this post blabbering about being on someone else's property. Make up your mind, assuming you have one to make up.
 
hey you're a ***** if you disagree with me and I am the sole decider of who is and is not reasonably offended at something because only MY opinion matters - thebiggest ***** of them all, manifold

Fail.

I was responding to you're claim that they were intimidated, not offended.



You sound like you're picking crap out of your *****.

Actually, I'm stepping over the crap spewing out of your imbecilic mind.

But by all means, continue to use the terms offended and intimidated as if they're interchangable. It make you look wicked smaht! :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom