If we must protect our free speech, we should not have double standard.

As it is right now, the current statutes permits federal prosecution of hate crimes committed against people of different sexual orientations, color, religion, disability or ethnicity to be a violation of the Law Enforcement Act, enacted in 28 U.S.C. 994.

With that being said, when does a hate crime becomes punishable under the current law? Can a white person who calls a black African American the N word be considered a hate crime, or is he exercising his freedom of speech. If we truly have the freedom of speech, those who uses racial slur to express their anger towards others should also be protected under the free speech act.

It would seem that the act of one expressing oneself, whether it is politely, racially or visually, should not be punishable until that person physically broke the law through aggressive behavior that endangered another person well being. As they say, action speaks louder than words. It is the combination of actions plus words that creates the hate crime that becomes punishable under the law. To punish someone because of their racial expression, whether it is visually or verbally can be argued for being a violation of their civil rights.

If we must protect our free speech, we should not have double standard. By allowing members of our society to make exceptions, invite more restriction to our freedom of speech. The moment we start assigning who can say what or who can't say who under the law, we're implementing double standard into our freedom of speech.

If Black man is referring to each other as niggers why is it that the White man can't say the word nigger? That to my estimation is called the double standard of our freedom of speech. If White man is referring to each other as niggers why it is a racial slur when they say it before us or addressing us in similar manner - what's up my nigger?

It maybe a racial slur because of the tone, gesture or the manner in which it is used, but it is not because of the word nigger, besides the word nigger by definition is applicable to anyone who is pure ignorant. If you think of a White man who is pure ignorant and you call him a nigger, it may not be considered respectable in society view, but the imbecile which in your view is a particular white man would still be a nigger. And the opposite is also true with the black man who is pure ignorant. This Black man would be as equally a nigger as the pure ignorant Whit man. However, it is because of slavery the word "nigger" has been associated with black, but by definition this word is descriptive to all of us who are pure ignorant.

It's OK for my white friend and I to call each other "nigger" in private, but in public he has to be careful so that he doesn’t get Knock out for saying it. The more we give importance to the word, the more hurtful it will become. The word "nigger" is synonymous to the word "Idiot". If the slave masters had use the word ”Idiot" instead of "nigger" than the word "Idiot" would have become a racial slur. So what are we suppose to do now, are we going to let the word nigger dictates what we are or are we going to dictates what we are as a people.

We can only change how people view us through individual effort, educating ourselves and becoming entrepreneurs. Slapping someone for calling us a "nigger" is not going to change our circumstances. So let us explore our minds beyond our ignorance, design our future through true education and stop worrying about the little things that means nothing.

Now, I know some of you might be upset with me and think that I'm a nigger for given this explanation which to your understanding is a nigger opinion. Now, if you think that my claims are equal to a nigger opinion, I have no problem with that, after all that's your opinion. You have the right to opinionate my claims. But the only thing is, if your opinion provides no logical explanation that supports your argument, it's not a valid opinion, it is simply empty statements. As you have seen in the introduction, my claims support the value of free speech and that is the intent of my argument.

Look, as a Black man myself; I understand the history of slavery. My ancestors hate it so much that they physically forth they way out of it, but nonetheless, some of them are still mentally slaves, and that is worst than being physically chain.

As doctor John Henry Clock said, "The history of the Black man did not start with slavery", his history is as old as human existence. Without knowing our ancient history, our thinking will always be limited by our restricted minds. We are all sons of Africa, origin of old people from the Babylonian times, we are not "niggers" for "niggers" is just a word, we are thinkers, philosophers and entrepreneurs. In order to explore our capabilities, we must not be prisoners of our limited minds; we must break free by becoming the explorer of dimensions.

What I'd like for you to understand here is that the White man who called the Black man the word nigger maybe less of a racist than your White boss who promoted you as his supervisor. You can not assume that someone is a racist just simply by the word he/she uses. It is true that word matters, but you must also analyzed the actions behind the words. White people do call each other niggers sometime, when we're not around them, but that doesn't make them racist because of that. The word "nigger" is sometime said by whites vaguely without much thought, especially among their friends.

The word nigger by definition means someone who is incapable of thinking for themselves. This is why society assigns some people to think for them. Well, from that understanding, if you take the word nigger in its literally sense, there are lots of Blacks and Whites niggers here in this country, running around calling each other the N word while they know not what the word means. Some simply know that the N word is associated with black, meanwhile the word is meant for people like themselves who is stupid enough to think that anyone who is black can be a nigger.

I understand that some have indicated to me that the word nigger does not imply white people regardless of the situation. But we can also say that the word 'nigger' does not imply black people as well. We have become associated with the word because it was assigned to us just like a parent named their child.

The word became a racial slur because of the bad memory that is attached to it. So when white people say the word "nigger" every branches of hair on our back rises because the word is associated with slavery. However, what has happened now is that the word nigger has been redefined by the new generation. The meaning of the racial slur nigger has lost momentum, it's no longer means the same for some of us. Its meaning now depends on who said it, in what context it was said and for what reason.

For example If Tim Wise who is a white person said the word nigger, without thinking about it, those of us who knows what he stand for in our society would not think that he meant it in a racist way. Why? Because as a white person, he has demonstrated enough reason for us blacks not to think of him as being racist. So, as you can see, Tim Wise saying the word nigger doesn't bring bad memory, but when someone else who is white said it, every branches of hair on our body stands up.

So now I ask you, is it really the word nigger or the memory associated with it the word. It is no different than the white teen who says to his black friends, whom he knows all his life what's up my niggers with a big smile on his face as if he had won the lottery; this to me does not imply racism. As it should be known, the word nigger is quite different from the term my niggers. Whereas the term my niggers can imply my people, the word nigger seems more offensive without knowing exactly how it was used, by whom and in what context.

Although some of you may think that my argument is daring is not surprising. It is really not that daring if one placed reason before feelings. As Immanuel Kant stated, " only when we act from duty does our action have moral worth. When we act only out of feeling, inclination, or self - interest, our actions - although they may be otherwise identical with ones that spring from the sense of duty - have not true moral worth." In that sense, It is in our advantage as people, if citizen's rights were not violated for exercising their freedom of speech, had that been so, some people would feel more freely to express themselves.

It can also be said without our freedom of speech many civil rights protest would not have been possible. So in a way, our freedom of speech is our foremost right, because without it, no other rights would uphold. Our freedom of speech precedes all rights under the constitution.

By punishing those who are racially motivated, we have deterred them from expressing their hatred publicly; instead they have carried it over the internet. By not having racial public expression does not mean they are less racism in our society. By punishing them, we have simply hid those who are racially motivated from exposing themselves. Had we known who they were, the consequence for their racial expression could have been more hurtful later in their lives, when representing the US government or in some private sector jobs.

It maybe unnecessary now to know why someone used the word nigger, but when come to running for government office, such as senator, governor or even CEO of some familiar companies, if detected those who have used the word nigger, in the past, even at this point in their lives maybe question for having said it, and that would be an unnecessary disadvantage.

As it should be known, some companies have zero tolerance for racism, whether it's from a black person, still does not change the fact that its racism. Although some of us "blacks" may hold the position that we have a reason to be racist is understood, but to have really applied it would not have made it better for future progress.

You see, allowing the racist person to express his/her racial expression would reveal to some Americans that racism still exist in this country. You and I both know that it exist because we have experienced it, and witness it live on the Internet. However, the fact that those who are racist are sometime punished for having publicly exposed their racism caused them to be fearful. This hate crime bill not only violate their civil rights, but at the same time, the fear of being punished hide the racist person from society, while giving ordinary Americans the illusion that racism is no longer a factor.

According to the first amendment of the United Stated Constitution, the Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making laws that forbid the free practice of religion, freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. It also limit the right to peaceful assemble or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Now, with that said, how is it possible that citizens are placed in jail on the premise of disorderly conduct for having exercised their freedom of speech.

According to testimonies, some have said to have been jailed for having used profanity against an officer. And the charges that have been known to accompany these behaviors have been misdemeanor for disorderly conduct. Can someone be arrested for using profanity against an officer without disobeying the law? It may not be advisable for anyone to do that, since respect is two way street, disrespecting the officer can fuel tensions that can provoke him to disobey the law, and arrest the citizen for disorderly conduct. However, the point is, if the citizen were to address an officer in such fashion, this behavior shouldn't be a violation of the law, for there is no provision in the first amendment rights that allow this to happen. Thus, arresting a citizen for freely expressing himself is a violation of the first amendment rights under the United State Constitution? Now the question is, how come as a society we have allowed this to happen, aren’t we "free" to express ourselves under the constitution.

Well, one can argue, since as a society we have prevented some to expressed themselves as their wish, this prevention has somehow invite more restriction into our First Amendment Right.

It's a new generation of Whites folks who grew up under the hip pop explosion - and yes a lot of them are not racially motivated but some of them will get together and stop you from advancing ahead in the company. And that is not racist, its call survival of the fittest, and since we don't have our people in the higher up branch of the company to stand for us, as black employees, we often lose this combat. And we being unaware of the facts sometime refer to it as racism at the work place.

It is true that blacks are sometime faced with racial attacks at the work place, but most time the intent behind it is never because of ones skin color but rather the position the black person hold. In this case, envy is the classification that provoke the need for the provoker to act racial, the history of racism may not be present in that person past experiences

And we should also remember, as Tim Wise said, white privilege is often the reason why some white people feel superior. Those who are in position of power wants to remained in power, had it been black people in power, like the Moorish people, they did not slave the whites but they did impregnated their wives. So those who are in power, wants to remain in power, this is why even without the intelligent, individuals from the powerful race will always expect to be ahead or in charge of those individuals of the inferior race regardless of their intelligence. This is a condition that derived from being considered the superior race for all these years.

It is no coincident why white folks feel this sense of superiority, it's like an automatic respond, because if you get eight black guys and two whites to solve a problem. One on of the two white guys would assume control until one of the eight black guy’s shows that he is intelligent enough to assume control. Whites are expected to be more intelligent than blacks. The white would assume intellectual power simply on the bases of race, and that is an automatic respond. This is why when the black child looks around him, he sees all these people who are in charge are whites it becomes harder for him to think that he is equal.

As a society, we now understand that the physical master that Blacks once had, exist no more. What we have now is a universal master that controls everyone, and that master is the dollar bill. Those who possess too much of it, have the advantage of dictating our future, bossing us around and exploiting us. That is one aspect of life as people we'll never be able to accept, so because of that we fight.

Nonetheless, what is more obvious in our society is the implementation of systematic racism which as almost eliminated the needs for any racially motivated White to behave racist towards Blacks. The activist Dr. Tim Wise is more of a preferred public speaker on that subject. In his book White like me, he has outline how the system works in the advantage of whites through the implementation of governable laws.

I honestly think as a society we've made the biggest mistakes by punishing those who express themselves racially. Had we not done that, the possibility for us to detect those that are racially motivated would have been much easier. We would have known which racial group they belong in, they professions and why they behaved that way. After all, you can't catch a bird alive by throwing rocks after it each time the bird eats your con; you must let the bird roaming free so that you become familiar with its moves.

To end this debate, I will conclude that as a society, we have made some good progress against racism in this country, but our freedom of speech should not be compromised because of it, not even for racial tensions between the races. By compromising our freedom of speech to punish those who have expressed themselves racially, without the physical act which makes it punishable under the law, we have violated their civil rights while at the same time diminishing our freedom of speech.

The fear of continuing to restrict our freedom of speech by allowing government to set their own standard, in the long run may result to no freedom of speech. One example of that is the elimination of amplified sound for the use of public expression. This is something that the fathers of the constitution were afraid of; restricting our freedom of speech is the stepping stone to its elimination.

As a society we must become aware of that condition, and make every attempt to make sure that our freedom of speech remains strong. People should really have the right to say whatever they wish without being punish for it, their freedom of speech is their right to be, and it should remain so as long as the constitution exist. If I didn't have the freedom to express myself as I wish, I would not have been able to caution my society of this matter. Calling me a nigger doesn't remove a feather off my back, less off move my spirit. Although it maybe not advisable for any whites to express their racism in that fashion, nonetheless those who have chosen to use the word "nigger" as a racial slur have expressed their freedom of speech.

Remember I told you that there are no good lies without some truth in it. Claiming yourself free human being simply because you have the right to express yourself is the biggest lie, but the truth of the matter is that you do have the right to express yourself when in some countries people don't have that right.

Warning to all off duty black officers - if you're not working please leave the guns at home. And for the black undercover, be careful when operate out of your district - if not you're putting your life at stake, because to the white officer, the likelihood of you being a cop is about 1/9 chances. In which case his first intent is to shoot first and ask question later, and by then it will already be too late. The question that should derived from this incident below should be - why is it that there's not even one case where a black officer mistakenly shot an off duty white officer?