Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:
No, it said:

“It’s best not to be hanging around this area after dark”.

And I would agree, it is best NOT to be hanging around.

Ah, yes, right you are, I misread.

So I was wrong in thinking this is a crazy weirdo with bad pun making skills. He is in fact a crazy weirdo with perfectly adequate pun making skills.

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:
No, it said:

“It’s best not to be hanging around this area after dark”.

And I would agree, it is best NOT to be hanging around.

Ah, yes, right you are, I misread.

So I was wrong in thinking this is a crazy weirdo with bad pun making skills. He is in fact a crazy weirdo with perfectly adequate pun making skills.

...that probably wears sheets and a pointy cap to parties.

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.

I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn.

I think what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon is probably sufficient.

But seriously, no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.

I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn.

I think what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon is probably sufficient.

But seriously, no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard.

No, it is actually a thing. Significant numbers of generally white people are genuinely convinced that some black/Mexican/Arab guy is going to break into their house and steal/rape/murder so they need to have guns for protection. Of that group, there is a distinct set that looks forward to the opportunity. There are also rather vocal members who seem to believe some sort of race war/invasion/etc. is inevitable.

I doubt that broadcasting a hostile message via nooses precludes having such views....

 jmurph wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.

I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn.

I think what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon is probably sufficient.

But seriously, no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard.

No, it is actually a thing. Significant numbers of generally white people are genuinely convinced that some black/Mexican/Arab guy is going to break into their house and steal/rape/murder so they need to have guns for protection. Of that group, there is a distinct set that looks forward to the opportunity. There are also rather vocal members who seem to believe some sort of race war/invasion/etc. is inevitable.

I doubt that broadcasting a hostile message via nooses precludes having such views....

And of course you have data to back this up. You wouldn't be casting racial accusations without it, right?

 djones520 wrote:

 jmurph wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.

I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn.

I think what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon is probably sufficient.

But seriously, no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard.

No, it is actually a thing. Significant numbers of generally white people are genuinely convinced that some black/Mexican/Arab guy is going to break into their house and steal/rape/murder so they need to have guns for protection. Of that group, there is a distinct set that looks forward to the opportunity. There are also rather vocal members who seem to believe some sort of race war/invasion/etc. is inevitable.

I doubt that broadcasting a hostile message via nooses precludes having such views....

And of course you have data to back this up. You wouldn't be casting racial accusations without it, right?

You mean like studies showing that about 20-30% of whites identify "many" or "almost all" blacks as violent? (http://themonkeycage.org/2013/07/trayvon-martin-and-the-burden-of-being-a-black-male/). Or show that when shown groups containing larger portions of black men whites tended to support more severe sentencing? (http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/august/prison-black-laws-080614.html). Or how about studies showing perceptions of racial stereotypes as seeing blacks and Hispanics as physically larger than they are? (http://cholbrook01.bol.ucla.edu/Holbrook_Fessler_Navarrete_Status_Threat_Size_EHB.pdf)

Trying to pretend like there isn't still racial bias or a very virulent racist faction comes across as apologetics.

 jmurph wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.

I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn.

I think what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon is probably sufficient.

But seriously, no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard.

No, it is actually a thing. Significant numbers of generally white people are genuinely convinced that some black/Mexican/Arab guy is going to break into their house and steal/rape/murder so they need to have guns for protection. Of that group, there is a distinct set that looks forward to the opportunity. There are also rather vocal members who seem to believe some sort of race war/invasion/etc. is inevitable.

I doubt that broadcasting a hostile message via nooses precludes having such views....

I don't think I ever said racial prejudice doesn't exist.

I specifically said ...."I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn." and ...."no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard."

The 2nd comment was specifically talking about the "get off my lawn" sort of people, maybe there's some neo nazi weirdos who write "kill all jews and blacks" on toilet walls, but for the most part if you want to kill people you don't advertise it like that on your own front lawn.

The 1st and 2nd Amendments guarantee the rights to do exactly that and have the means to enact the idea. The Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws grant a degree of immunity from prosecution, thereby encouraging putting things into action.

 jmurph wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 jmurph wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
There seems to be a bunch of people who are just slavering at the thought of finally getting to kill someone who stepped onto their lawn. It's a messed up way to go about life, imho.

Yep, that's my thought entirely. That to me is more problematic than any possible racial implications.

I doubt there's "a bunch" of people slavering at the though of killing someone who stepped onto their lawn.

I think what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon is probably sufficient.

But seriously, no one who actually wants to kill people is going to put nooses up around their yard.

No, it is actually a thing. Significant numbers of generally white people are genuinely convinced that some black/Mexican/Arab guy is going to break into their house and steal/rape/murder so they need to have guns for protection. Of that group, there is a distinct set that looks forward to the opportunity. There are also rather vocal members who seem to believe some sort of race war/invasion/etc. is inevitable.

I doubt that broadcasting a hostile message via nooses precludes having such views....

And of course you have data to back this up. You wouldn't be casting racial accusations without it, right?

You mean like studies showing that about 20-30% of whites identify "many" or "almost all" blacks as violent? (http://themonkeycage.org/2013/07/trayvon-martin-and-the-burden-of-being-a-black-male/). Or show that when shown groups containing larger portions of black men whites tended to support more severe sentencing? (http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/august/prison-black-laws-080614.html). Or how about studies showing perceptions of racial stereotypes as seeing blacks and Hispanics as physically larger than they are? (http://cholbrook01.bol.ucla.edu/Holbrook_Fessler_Navarrete_Status_Threat_Size_EHB.pdf)

Trying to pretend like there isn't still racial bias or a very virulent racist faction comes across as apologetics.

Right, because "racial bias" equals significant numbers of "white" people just hoping for the chances to kill people of color.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The 1st and 2nd Amendments guarantee the rights to do exactly that and have the means to enact the idea. The Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws grant a degree of immunity from prosecution, thereby encouraging putting things into action.

...I think you're still missing what I'm saying.

There might be crazies sleeping with a gun under their bed, but the number of people actively waiting and hoping for a trespasser to kill are so few they you can hardly call them "a bunch".

Secondly, if there are crazies who want to shoot people for trespassing I don't think they are going to be the same people who put nooses up around their yard to scare kids away.

sebster wrote:It's kind of weird that it is apparently okay to threaten people with death for trespassing, but not okay if its racist.

I was thinking about the whole shooting trespassers issues before coming into this thread...I don't understand America.

d-usa wrote:It grows on you, but so does cancer...

Does it grow in you as well?

Col. Dash wrote:When did nooses become a racist thing?

Somewhere around 100 years ago. Is history taught in school anymore?

Kilkrazy wrote:The 1st and 2nd Amendments guarantee the rights to do exactly that and have the means to enact the idea. The Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws grant a degree of immunity from prosecution, thereby encouraging putting things into action.

Does either of those laws basically allow you to shoot trespassers willy-nilly? No warning, no actual threat, just you're on my law effer, BOOM!

That would be completely insane and downright evil.

I don't know of any law stating you must give a warning before firing. You do have to perceive a threat, but many castle doctrine laws allow that someone breaking into your house is a threat.

 trexmeyer wrote:

Col. Dash wrote:When did nooses become a racist thing?

Somewhere around 100 years ago. Is history taught in school anymore?

So the gallows that I have for my Wild West games is an indicator of racism? I wonder if 4Ground and the other companies that make them are aware of this.

All the film makers making Westerns where folks get hanged must be racists too.

Could you be more facetious?

Also let's see...2016-100=1916...so WWI and the Wild West were concurrent? That's new.

The first lynchings date back to the 1870's...and carried on well past Wild West hangings.

I have no idea what the point of your post was [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - Alpharius]

Well, some native american tribes here in Oklahoma used the swastika on their basketball uniforms, and the 45th Infantry Division used the swastika as their symbol 80 years ago. So clearly Native Americans and parts of the army were nazis.

Or we can pretend that context matters and just as the swastika had a different meaning prior to WW2, and still has a different meaning with some populations today, a noose in the form of a gallows or in the broader context of a state-sanctioned judicially administered death penalty has a different meaning than a noose hanging from a tree with the threat of an extrajudicial resolution in a state with a known history of lynchings.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Could you be more facetious?

Also let's see...2016-100=1916...so WWI and the Wild West were concurrent? That's new.

The first lynchings date back to the 1870's...and carried on well past Wild West hangings.

I have no idea what the point of your post was [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - Alpharius]

Thanks for the insult.

My point: If nooses are automatically racist TODAY, then making toys of them to play games with would by default have to be racist as well, as would using them in movies.

Clearly we can agree that is not the case.

It's pretty obvious that the issue is not the noose by itself, but as D-USA said that they are being placed in trees as an extrajudicial threat.

That would require someone to see the context of the situation instead of leaping to erroneous conclusions.

 Ahtman wrote:
So both nooses and a reference to being a 'sundown town'* while denying understanding any racial element. Either the owner is an idiot or a fool, or perhaps both.


*For those who don't know there were (and in some cases still are) parts of the US where if you were there after the sun went down you would most likely be killed for not being the right type.

No bro, I'm pretty sure he was just advertising he was down for some tabletop wargaming in a Wild West setting.

trexmeyer wrote:

Col. Dash wrote:When did nooses become a racist thing?

Somewhere around 100 years ago. Is history taught in school anymore?

trexmeyer wrote:

Also let's see...2016-100=1916...so WWI and the Wild West were concurrent? That's new.

For someone bemoaning the lack of history taught in schools you seem rather ignorant of the fact that the American Frontier period lasted until ~1912 with the admission of Arizona and New Mexico into the Union. So let's see 1914 - 1912 = 2 years. Looks pretty close to WW1 to me...

That's still 102 years, which is more than 100, so I get a point for pedantic internet argument victory.

See, I'm not sure if this is relevant to this, but as a Brit, I've never associated hangings with any kind of racism. Hence my confusion when many people called it that. For me, it's a form of execution which has been around for a hell of a long time - nooses themselves, to me, ring no racist alarms.

I really do doubt this guy was necessarily planning it - I'd say he was just an idiot who thought a tree would be the best place to hang some nooses.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
See, I'm not sure if this is relevant to this, but as a Brit, I've never associated hangings with any kind of racism.

So you knew it wasn't part of your history or culture but thought you'd throw in a comment showing a lack of understanding on the history of it in a different culture. Good work.

The US has a slightly different history with regards to the symbolism of nooses.

 trexmeyer wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:The 1st and 2nd Amendments guarantee the rights to do exactly that and have the means to enact the idea. The Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws grant a degree of immunity from prosecution, thereby encouraging putting things into action.

Does either of those laws basically allow you to shoot trespassers willy-nilly? No warning, no actual threat, just you're on my law effer, BOOM!

That would be completely insane and downright evil.

"Stand your ground" laws only apply outside your residence and "Castle doctrine" laws don't give you legal justification for shooting people that are merely trespassing.

That is correct in the narrow legal sense, however the social effect of the combination of all these laws is to shift some people's perception towards the idea that it is acceptable to shoot people who are merely trespassing.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
See, I'm not sure if this is relevant to this, but as a Brit, I've never associated hangings with any kind of racism. Hence my confusion when many people called it that. For me, it's a form of execution which has been around for a hell of a long time - nooses themselves, to me, ring no racist alarms.

I really do doubt this guy was necessarily planning it - I'd say he was just an idiot who thought a tree would be the best place to hang some nooses.

You're really unaware of lynchings ?

Good grief.


RIP Billie Holiday .

Ahtman wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
See, I'm not sure if this is relevant to this, but as a Brit, I've never associated hangings with any kind of racism.

So you knew it wasn't part of your history or culture but thought you'd throw in a comment showing a lack of understanding on the history of it in a different culture. Good work.

Well, I figured, as a public forum, I'd be okay to throw in the opinion of someone who is from a different culture explaining why someone might be unaware of a cultural perception seen in a certain country. Apparently, I can't even say that unless I'm part of that culture. /shrug

I meant it in innocent terms - I've never associated racism with hanging, therefore the man in the OP may not have either. I'd appreciate less snark, but hey.

reds8n wrote:You're really unaware of lynchings ?

Good grief.


RIP Billie Holiday .

I'm aware of lynching, of course! I just haven't associated all references of nooses with it, seeing as nooses have been used in a vast amount of situations aside from that.
Plus the whole KKK movement and lynching were far less prominent in the UK than America - it's not really covered as much here, as far as I'm aware.

 reds8n wrote:

You're really unaware of lynchings ?

A lot of Brits know that a lynching involves killing extrajudical killings (and were generally used on black people) but not the method used.

The first thing I think of when lynching is mentioned is hanging black people.

I can however understand that people from Britain may not immediately associate lynching with hanging black people.

Your mileage may vary.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Well, I figured, as a public forum, I'd be okay to throw in the opinion of someone who is from a different culture explaining why someone might be unaware of a cultural perception seen in a certain country. Apparently, I can't even say that unless I'm part of that culture. /shrug

The problem isn't having an opinion, and no one has said you can't have one either, but the way it was presented it, starting with the caveat that you knew it didn't really apply.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I've never associated racism with hanging

That is nice and is easy to say but doesn't change the reality that in the USA, where it happened, that lynching (not hanging) is associated with oppression and bigotry.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Well, I figured, as a public forum, I'd be okay to throw in the opinion of someone who is from a different culture explaining why someone might be unaware of a cultural perception seen in a certain country. Apparently, I can't even say that unless I'm part of that culture. /shrug

The problem isn't having an opinion, and no one has said you can't have one either, but the way it was presented it, starting with the caveat that you knew it didn't really apply.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I've never associated racism with hanging

That is nice and is easy to say but doesn't change the reality that in the USA, where it happened, that lynching (not hanging) is associated with oppression and bigotry.

Well, I can speak as an American, and I don't know that I agree that a noose is automatically a racist symbol so take that for what it's worth. But hey, I'm, sure you'll try and invalidate my opinion on the subject as well since it doesn't mesh with your narrow world view.