Disturbing, racist post

[Guest]

I

[kimo wires]

In my opinion people devoid of any sense of humor are the scary and dangerous ones.

You know who you are.

Can't take a joke, wouldn't post a joke. Get all offended when they read a joke. Push their ideals on everyone.

Enough already!!!

I'm glad The Lack has the guns and not YOU!

There are some seriously Comically challenged people on PW.

BTW The hawaiians came from the Marquesas Islands.

The real hawaiians were the birds that are now extinct.

[KeaauRich]

To those who say "it's just a joke, have a sense of humor" or urge us to ignore the attempt at humor, I'd like to ask "where do we draw the line"?

If it's funny to say, as Tom did, "we discussed the possibility of shooting some cans if I were there. You know some Africans, Mexicans, Central Americans and other kine can’s. [That Is a joke folks that’s a joke]", is it also funny to say "we discussed the possibility of shooting Tom's wife if I were there. [That Is a joke folks that’s a joke]" or "we discussed the possibility of shooting some N*ggers, S*ics, K*ikes, and F*ggots?. [That Is a joke folks that’s a joke]???

To those who say this is funny, could you please explain to me where the humor lies? In real life, I'm considered a very funny guy, but I don't see the humor in suggestions that members of random minority groups be shot.

I don't know Tom, I'm sure he's a nice guy and not a racist. But words spoken even in jest can be hurtful and hateful, even if not so intended (see note about "assume the best"). Accepting this type of comment -- randomly shooting members of minority groups -- as normal, acceptable behavior (even said in jest) legitimizes the underlying message, something I'm not prepared to do.

I fully support Tom's right to own guns and make jokes. But if he or anyone else makes comments that are offensive, hurtful or demeaning, I have to right to say so, and will do so at every opportunity I get. I'm not arguing, just stating my opinion...

[oink]

OMG!
Tom's "joke" wasn't particularly funny and was probably in poor taste, particularly in this setting and venue. That makes him guilty of telling a bad and/or inappropriate joke. That doesn't make him racist or evil and certainly not deserving of the hate spewed out by Mauka. Criticize his "joke", don't vilify the person. Based on recent posts, who appears to be most consumed by hate and bias? It appears obvious to me.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[Radiopeg]

I didn't find it funny. Why would it be?

[kimo wires]

Please...

I rest my case

[leilani__]

Please, it is what it is, a racist joke. period.

[freestate]

Strange to take this point of view, but...

Tom's joke may have been many things, but I think to say it makes him a dangerous person is a stretch. Because once you decide someone is dangerous usually means its OK to take action in response to the danger. Making a bad joke or even harboring racist thoughts is not against the law.

Its pretty uncool but it ain't illegal.

Tom posts things to get a rise. Sending a BB gun as a gift when he most likely knew it was unwelcome (if its a true story). Well, you can decide how to describe that kind of behavior.

But to decide someone is dangerous based on some impolite comments on Punaweb...can't go along with that.

And the anti-America tangent isn't earning any points either.

[konadave]

quote:

---

Originally posted by hawaiideborah
and a racist joke is not ok, period.

hawaiideborah

---

Apparently it is okay since the moderator has decided to allow it to stay. If it was NOT okay the moderator would have removed it. Period.

The Ka'u Web
http://www.kauweb.com

The Kona Forum
http://www.konaforum.com

Da Kine Web Hosting
http://www.DaKineHosting.com

[DaVinci]

@Mauka: anonymity. I would have let it go but you typed it that way twice.
@MarkP: Well done. Loved the backstory. Loved the relevant point about all the Hawaiian occupiers throughout the course of her history.
@Lack: Yes, you are too a troll. And it was a bad joke, in bad taste, and masks an intolerance of others not like you.
@Rob: What is so wrong about priming the pump of a discussion? Why is argument immediately condemned here?
@KeaauRich: Apt observations. But is Chris Rock allowed to joke about n*iggas, while Michael Richards is vilified? Or should there be a level playing field? Most comedy relies on someone being the butt of a joke. Jerry Seinfeld, Jon Stewart (and a raft of others) poke fun at Jews all the time. And we laugh. Are Gentiles who laugh at Seinfeld merely closeted anti-semites? No. So at the end of the day, it is a complex topic at best. Lack's joke was not funny, and I don't defend it. But follow the logic to its extreme, and no joke would ever pass muster, as there would always be a party who might claim to have been offended. (Told any "blonde" jokes recently?)
@All Who Played The Free Speech Card: Lack's joke is precisely the kind of speech that requires protection. Kind and loving words filled with Aloha do not engender a desire in anyone to have them suppressed. If we begin parsing the kind of speech that "deserves" protection, we have lost Free Speech forever. (Some would argue that we already have...)
@PunaWeb: Great forum. Great thread. Peace.