this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
29 points (100.0% liked)

Art

688 readers
1 users here now

This is a community for art in any medium. Welcome!

Rules:

  1. This is a community to discuss all things related to art. Posts should be relevant to art, such as sharing art or news about art. To clarify, when we say "any medium," this includes media such as painting, film, music, literature, performance, video games, etc.
  2. Keep things civil. Critiquing art is fine but attacking other users for their opinions is not.
  3. Avoid excessive self-promotion. Yes, this is subjective and will be based on how popular this community becomes overall. If you can see a post about your own work on the first few pages, don't post another.
  4. Follow site-wide rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Delphia 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I absolutely agree, but also see where this is coming from. You cant just turn a blind eye to parole violations and in turn people coming out of prison and going back to lets just call them "Problematic behaviors". Thats entirely what the whole supervised release and parole system is for... How can you have this guy write songs for profit about shooting people while out on parole for gun charges and then with a straight face say that he is trying to rehabilitate?

"Your honor, my client has been working and can show a legitimate income and has an apartment. His latest single "Ill shoot the pig who tries to take me back to prison" has done really well and theres no reason to believe he may reoffend"

I have to agree with you in principle that this is bullshit, because if the person who gets to review his lyrics and who he performs with is a 70yo racist "good ole boy" he is utterly fucked, If he gets someone who gets the rap culture and understands the braggadocio in it, he will probably be fine but we cant base legal decisions around biases like that.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

The line is when the work is about a specific crime. It's why convicted persons can't write a movie or book about their crime and sell it. A song would be no different.

But you and I can write whatever kind of crime story we want. I actually do, I'm two books deep in a supernatural mystery series. If I had been convicted of anything at all, that should have no bearing on my first amendment rights, until and unless I'm trying to profit from that crime. Me writing about murder and violence is not the fullness of me as a human being.

If this guy writes a song about shooting a pig before going back to jail, it is a song, and nothing more. He's already open to surprise inspections of his person and property to discover if he has illegal goods, including firearms. By being a felon on parole, possession of those type of things is grounds for his parole to be revoked. While I would consider it dubious at best, should his lyrics point towards a potential plan of action, the state already has recourse to prevent bad acts.

That recourse can be used after release of the track just as well as before, without any need to interfere in his first amendment rights, or his livelihood.

Writing a song is not a bad act, period. One can debate if writing a bad song is a bad act, but that's a separate subject lol.

Tbh though, I have problems with the way parole works in general, and the imprisonment of non violent criminals as well. So I do have bias here. It doesn't really factor in much, but it is there. As parole is supposed to function currently, this specific restriction steps outside of the intent and purpose of parole, so it isn't just me griping about the state of the justice system as it is. This is an unusual decision on the part of the officials involved.