Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Tuesday July 28 2015, @09:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the can't-touch-this dept.

At a hip-hop festival called Craze Fest in Hammond, Indiana, just outside of Chicago, rapper Chief Keef appeared on stage as a hologram. But his Saturday night performance only lasted one song before the police shut it down.

Chief Keef, born Keith Cozart, originally planned to hold a benefit concert for his friend and a toddler who were both killed during a shooting this month. The concert was to be held at a theater in Chicago, but Mayor Rahm Emmanuel's office reportedly pressured the theater to cancel the event, according to the Chicago Tribune. The New York Times says the mayor's office called Chief Keef "an unacceptable role model" whose music "promotes violence."

Instead, Chief Keef told his fans that he would perform at an undisclosed location and enlisted Hologram USA to help him appear virtually rather than physically, citing outstanding warrants for his arrest in Illinois. Fans weren't told Chief Keef would be performing in Hammond at Wolf Lake Pavilion as part of Craze Fest until 9pm that night.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Chief Keef performed his hit "I Don't Like" [remix and NSFW] from a sound studio in Beverly Hills, California. "[He] was talking about putting a stop to violence when the power was cut off. Police rushed toward the stage, turning the music off about 10:25pm. Shining flashlights, they ordered concertgoers to leave. Fans who gathered Saturday left the grounds in an orderly fashion, though disappointed."

Wanted in Illinois, appeared as a hologram in Indiana, still shut down by police. Good thing for him he was in California.

Additional material from the BBC.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by JNCF on Tuesday July 28 2015, @07:03PM

    by JNCF (4317) on Tuesday July 28 2015, @07:03PM (#214999) Journal

    What is being claimed is that it is due to imminent harm which would stem from the crowd's reaction to the performance. That's fire in a crowded theatre territory, which is long-established non-protected speech.

    You're paraphrasing case law which convicted a man for the crime of distributing fliers encouraging people not to join submit to the draft during World War I. I think you are correct about how the legal system interprets this kind of thing (not being a lawyer, I could be wrong). I hope you can understand why some folks just don't give a damn about a court ruling meant to convict draft dodgers for undermining an imperialistic war effort, just like we don't care about the slightly more modern case law which says the NSA can spy on us despite the fourth amendment. We see these rulings as being the result of corrupt systems out of our control, intent on undermining the constitution any time it stifles their agendas.

    Can they find a corrupt court ruling that gives them the legal precedence to shut down a hip hop concert? Probably. Does that still go against the letter and intent of the constitution? Definitely.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday July 28 2015, @09:06PM

    by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Tuesday July 28 2015, @09:06PM (#215056)

    If other people react to your speech in harmful ways, that's their doing and no one else's. It's insane to suggest that it's okay to limit speech just because someone might respond to it in a way that is harmful. Not only is the logic nonsensical, but it's completely unconstitutional (According to the actual constitution, not the fake modified one that judges like to use.).

  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday July 29 2015, @12:54AM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Wednesday July 29 2015, @12:54AM (#215148) Homepage
    > I hope you can understand why some folks just don't give a damn about a court ruling meant to convict draft dodgers

    Hell yeah. I learnt almost everything I know about the US constitution from a (vietnam, rather than WWI) draft dodger. However, idealism does not decide legal cases.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves