125

Rapper BG ordered to have all future songs approved by US government (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 4 months ago by TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 54 points 4 months ago

But the artist known as BG must provide the government with copies of any songs he writes moving forward, ahead of their production or promotion – and, if they are deemed to be inconsistent with his goals of rehabilitation, prosecutors could move to toughen the terms governing his supervised release.

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 77 points 4 months ago

If he wants supervised early release from prison, this doesn't seem terribly out of line.

It's not like this is a part of his sentence, it's a part of him trying to reduce his sentence.

[-] bizarroland@fedia.io 42 points 4 months ago

Yeah, this is a clickbait/ragebait headline.

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Ultimately the headline is true, and using probation as cover to undermine the document that gives them power meanwhile having rich white men disregard the same set of laws in the face of a judge with no punishment makes me wonder what you are on about here.

BG has lost freedom of speech while Trump claimed his free speech was lost for not being jailed for contempt of court.

Other judges in the US literally use electric shocks to stop such outbursts as Trump made in court.

ALL THE TIME.

This isn't "laws for thee" this is straight up "torture for thee".

[-] Ledivin@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Just to be clear, your response to seeing rich people evade justice is that... nobody should have consequences anymore?

You must get really angry at people who use food stamps instead of at people like the Waltons, don't you?

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

No, OP is saying that probation is used to restrain someone from rapping, which is fucking bonkers.

[-] sunzu@kbin.run -2 points 4 months ago

you made that shit up...

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 1 points 4 months ago

Defendants have a constitutional right to be present at all critical stages of their trial. The Marshall Project reports, however, that some defendants have been too scared to return to the courtroom after being shocked or have missed participating in their trial while recovering from being shocked.

[-] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 8 points 4 months ago

Not really, this is basically punishing him for the thoughtcrime of talking about using guns.

They also ordered him to do 400 hours of community service, I guess for the "trouble" of having a hearing. If his songs are too spicy, they can revoke his right to supervised release (AKA send him back to prison).

How many times have you heard of a situation where there's a man threatening to kill his girlfriend and the cops do nothing? Let the man write his lyrics, he was put in prison for illegal gun possession resulting from a traffic stop - he didn't fucking kill anyone.

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

If he wants special treatment to get out of his sentence early, he has to comply with that program.

We can't really be arguing about the validity of the charges here, this isn't a venue where that is entertained but one where the sentence is amended under certain restrictions.

[-] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 14 points 4 months ago

I feel like the charges are important to note, especially given that the prosecutor wanted 25 years for this offence and that black Americans are handed very harsh sentences compared to white offenders.

It really does seem like black Americans and rappers are treated with a different set of standards and government data back me up on that.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/mandatory-minimum-penalties-firearms-offenses-federal-system

Black offenders also generally received longer average sentences for firearms offenses carrying a mandatory minimum penalty than any other racial group. In fiscal year 2016, Black offenders convicted under section 924(c) received an average sentence of 165 months, compared to 140 months for White offenders and 130 months for Hispanic offenders. Only Other Race offenders received longer average sentences (170 months), but they accounted for only 2.2 percent of section 924(c) offenders.

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Totally agreed. Sentencing is insane and discretion was taken away from judges by congress long ago.

I'm more pointing out where he is within that system that arguing for reform. I'm not against said reform, but it's a totally different topic.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

How is that not punishment for speech? If this is the new standard you could send ppl on probation back to prison for anything the court deams negative

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

There's no punishment, they're telling him that if he wants early release and intends to perform, that the content of his performance be reviewed ahead of time.

Because he would never have been able to have that performance AT ALL if still incarcerated.

He is asking for early release and it is being granted with certain restrictions.

People on probation get sent back when they break laws, violating the terms of that probation. This guy hasn't gotten to probation yet and is more restricted.

I see your point though, and it would be double jeopardy if they fully released him while continuing to punish him in other ways. That just isn't what's happening here. He's trying to get out early.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Personally I dont see the difference. (I do see the difference between probation and supervised release now). It essentially claims a prisoner (incarcerated or on supervised release) has no freedom of speech.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Right or wrong, the whole point of incarceration is removing freedoms as punitive punishment for committing crimes.

Probation, supervised release, it’s not the same as having served the sentence (and therefore gaining most rights back,). For example, a pedophile is probably going to never be allowed to work around kids and doing so on probation or sup. release is going to see them sent back into jail.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

It's wrong. Incarceration doesn't mean you lose your citizenship and citizens of the US are still entitled to basic rights such as speech. Prisoners supposedly have rights that protect them from the state.

We should all be more upset about this

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Prisoners have rights? As the last constitutionally protected form of slaves?

And yes. It’s wrong.

I just think if we solve the larger problem this won’t be an issue.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Prisoners still have the rights of the 1st, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th amendments. They are many cases of prisoners successfully sueing for having those rights violated.

We shouldn't act like they don't exist simply because some of the powers that be want to pretend they don't

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

You do realize though that freedom of speech does not mean freedom to say whatever you want, yes?

[-] 11111one11111@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Red flag laws maybe? Most of them are very new and obscurly written. I'm just guessing tho.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 48 points 4 months ago

I hope he takes a hard turn into political rap about the prison industrial complex

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

Does the government know what the Streisand effect is?

[-] solrize@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

This seems to give him some pretty good trolling opportunities.

[-] metaphortune@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

I read this article and my main takeaway was: that Bling Bling song sucks.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

with federal authorities’ obligation to enforce the supervised prison release plan which he accepted.

So does this mean he previously wavered his right to free speech when it comes to stuff related to this?

[-] Thcdenton@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago

Man fuck judges

[-] AncientFutureNow@lemmy.world -5 points 4 months ago

no free speech

[-] best_username_ever@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 months ago

It doesn’t matter for you since you can’t read that specific article.

this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024

125 points (89.8% liked)

Not The Onion

12292 readers

1371 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world