Ghetto Games

Minister Faust of Bro Log Fame and author of a number of books has posted his this months "Bamoozled Awards". This particular edition got my attention because of what the award was granted for:

TORONTO -- A shoeless, elderly drunk is tormented by a group of thugs who laugh hysterically as they douse his head with antifreeze, drop his personal belongings into a storm sewer and knock him to his knees with a milk crate.

"In another scene, a young man is dragged from his parked car and beaten repeatedly outside a liquor store; his head stomped into the pavement until he loses consciousness. One of his attackers steals cash from his pocket as he lies lifeless in a parking lot.

"In the final act, eight men stomp, punch and kick a shirtless male to cries of 'Pound 'em out' and 'I'm gonna kill you bitch.' Knocked out cold, the victim is dragged across the pavement. The camera operator remarks smugly, 'I think that (expletive) is dead.'

"Roll credits: It's Ghetto Fights 2, one of a series of DVDs that feature actual home videos of violent street fights and group beatings, available at your local HMV, Music World and other retail outlets across Canada for about $16 each.

There is something very wrong with a particular segment of black youth who think that this behavior is acceptable but I think that images such as these explains statements I saw in another article in the NY Times in which race relations between "Hispanics" and "Blacks" in Georgia are discussed. Relevant to this discussion is the following comment:

The killing of six Mexican farm workers in a robbery last year in Tifton, about 30 miles away — and the arrest of four black men in the case — has heightened the friction. Nothing so violent has occurred here, but some Hispanics say black criminals focus on immigrants in this town, too...

Mr. Gaona, who said his perceptions of black Americans were shaped in Mexico by news reports of crime and violence in poor urban areas, recalled, “I was thinking: ‘He’s black. Who knows what he wants from me?’ I was just trying to keep my distance.”

So we have a company in California that solicits video tapes of felony assault and we have retail outlets willing to sell this material of felony assaults directly to the public not to mention the internet in which anyone anywhere can watch the videos which results in people like Mr. Gaona to think that black people are "moyos" and think that they are criminals.

You simply cannot put this kind of material out in the public and then be surprised when police and other people treat black youth with no respect.

Beyond that I am curious about the legality of the material. In the instances of other "adult" material such as sexual material, it is arguable that the activities seen on sexually explicit material is between one, two or more consenting adults and that said activities are in and of themselves not illegal (Sodomy laws having been deemed unconstitutional in the US). On the other hand the activities described at the head of this post do not involve consenting adults IF they are in fact not staged events. Assuming these events are not staged (as the solicitation for the tapes implies) then what we have are tapes of actual prosecutable criminal actions. Are these solved cases? Were these individuals arrested and tried for these felony assaults? If not why haven't these tapes been seized as evidence of a crime and the videographers tracked down and arrested for accessory to a crime should they refuse to name the persons on tape?

Congress recently passed a law that requires persons who produce sexually explicit material to have on record the age verification and related items. Is there an equivalent law for these Ghetto Fights? If not why not? Are we saying that Americans find felony assault more acceptable than an image of a woman with her breasts showing?

Equally disturbing is that media retailers such as HMV who as of April 2006 reported a profit of 1825.9 Million Pounds or roughly $3.4 Billion, sees a need to stock and sell video that features felony assault? As if they could not afford to take a stand on principle and say we don't need to make a another million (if that) selling videos of felony assault even if our competitors will.

On an equal note I would like to point out that the US government saw fit to try and convict a blind cleric that the individuals who first bombed the World Trade Center, based on the fact that he provided inspiration for those acts. I am on record as being opposed to such a conviction as it criminalizes speech rather than action. However; given that such a conviction actually occurred why is it that companies that trade in the videography of actual (not simulated) criminal behavior is not being prosecuted along the same lines? It is arguable, beyond reasonable doubt, that the existence of such videos may encourage others to act out and film similar criminal acts with the hopes of being paid for such a production. Indeed that Well known MC's are on record as endorsing the videotaping of actual criminal acts would also make them similarly liable as was Rahman. If those individuals cannot be held legally responsible for endorsing clearly criminal acts then Rahmans conviction should be overturned.

Anyway you look at it it's dirty.