• Rapper Chief Keef's live-streamed hologram benefit concert shut down by police after being banned fr
    34 replies, posted
[url]http://www.stereogum.com/1818438/banned-by-chicago-mayor-chief-keef-says-hologram-show-will-go-on-in-a-secret-location/video/[/url] [url]http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/71/823902/confusion-reigns-chief-keef-concert-venue[/url] [quote=Stereogum]Last weekend, Chief Keef tried to play a benefit show for the family of Dillan Harris, a one-year-old who was recently killed by a hit-and-run driver on the South Side of Chicago. (The drivers had apparently just shot and killed Capo, a Keef associate, in a drive-by shooting.) Because of outstanding warrants, Keef can’t come back home to Chicago, so he was going to perform live via hologram from Los Angeles at Chicago’s Redmoon Theater. But apparently it’s not just Keef that’s banned from Chicago. Even his motherfucking hologram is banned.[/quote] [quote=Chicago Sun-Times]Controversial rapper Chief Keef appeared briefly Saturday night by hologram at a hip-hop concert in Hammond, Indiana, before police shut the concert down and cleared the venue. Keef appeared even after a concert promoter assured police that Keef would not be showing up in any format. Earlier in the night, Keef’s Twitter account said the hologram appearance would be at a music venue on the North Side of Chicago, which was false. The controversial rapper appeared by hologram on stage about 10:15 p.m. Saturday at the hip-hop event, Craze Fest, at the Pavilion at Wolf Lake in Hammond, but his song didn’t last for long. Police cut the power, which they vowed to do, if Keef appeared. Hammond Police Lt. Patrick Vicari expressed his displeasure at the concert promoters. “Even though I was told no Chief Keef by the promoters, they tried it anyway, so we shut it down. We turned the power off, we’re closing the park down,” Vicari said. In an emailed statement from wealthy businessman Alki David, the backer of the Chief Keef benefit concert, David wrote: “Shame on the mayor and police chief of Hammond for shutting down a voice that can create positive change in a community in desperate need. And for taking away money that could have gone to help the victims’ families. This was a legal event and there was no justification to shut it down besides your glaring disregard for the First Amendment right to free speech. You’ve clearly been bullied by the proud mayor of the Murder Capitol of the U.S., Rahm Emanuel. Mark my words if you censor us you only make us stronger. Plus we’ll be back to sue your a—-.”[/quote] Bit of a clusterfuck and a long story: Chief Keef's friend Capo and a one-year-old kid named Dillan Harris were killed in Chicago recently, so Chief Keef wanted to host a benefit concert in order to raise money to help the families of his friend and Harris. Because he had outstanding warrants (for child support), the city of Chicago refused to let him perform in the city. So Keef decided to have a hologram show where he wasn't physically present anywhere in the city, instead performing live from Los Angeles. The Chicago government then banned him from holding that show, effectively banning his [I]likeness[/I] from the city, with the reasoning that he was "a threat to public safety." So Chief Keef said he was going to have a surprise concert at an undisclosed location, which turned out to be at a hip-hop festival in Hammond, Indiana. Moments after the hologram was turned on, Keef spoke briefly about ending violence in Chicago before launching into a song - and the police immediately cut the power. Video below. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3md-FLG0Rw[/media]
That is one of the coolest ideas for a performance, and one of the shittiest endings to said performance. Why has he let all of that pile up though?
I have little sympathy for people who perform and whatnot and fail to pay fucking child support. You made a kid, you aren't exactly poor, at least pay the goddamn support if you don't have the spine to actually take care of the kid personally.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48297218]I have little sympathy for people who perform and whatnot and fail to pay fucking child support. You made a kid, you aren't exactly poor, at least pay the goddamn support if you don't have the spine to actually take care of the kid personally.[/QUOTE] yeah fuck nonprofit charity
[QUOTE=bitches;48297221]yeah fuck nonprofit charity[/QUOTE] No, not fuck nonprofit charity, fuck this guy and fuck everything he tries to do until he gets his shit together and pays his dues.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48297227]No, not fuck nonprofit charity, fuck this guy and fuck everything he tries to do until he gets his shit together and pays his dues.[/QUOTE] Did he personally hurt you or something.
[QUOTE=bitches;48297221]yeah fuck nonprofit charity[/QUOTE] I think there is an inherent problem if you think you can break the laws and evade by replacing your existence with a hologram. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Luxuria;48297229]Did he personally hurt you or something.[/QUOTE] You don't have to be personally involved with someone to be offended by their actions.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48297227]No, not fuck nonprofit charity, fuck this guy and fuck everything he tries to do until he gets his shit together and pays his dues.[/QUOTE] How dare someone who owes child support try to [I]raise money for a family who had their one year old child killed in front of their eyes[/I]. I think it's way more disgusting for a city mayor to effectively ban somebody's [I]likeness[/I] from a city because he has gang roots and his lyrics can be seen as promoting violence. It's a gross first amendment violation, no matter how much you hate the guy.
[QUOTE=Luxuria;48297229]Did he personally hurt you or something.[/QUOTE] I consider abandoning your child while you clearly have the resources to at least ensure it is materially supported absolutely abhorrent and near the level of violent crimes as it's something that only creates more people with nothing but further antisocial experience to beginning of their life. He tries to paint himself as a gansta and at the same time doesn't have the balls to take care of his fucking kid. It seriously sickens me. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=.Isak.;48297247]How dare someone who owes child support try to [I]raise money for a family who had their one year old child killed in front of their eyes[/I]. I think it's way more disgusting for a city mayor to effectively ban somebody's [I]likeness[/I] from a city because he has gang roots and his lyrics can be seen as promoting violence. It's a gross first amendment violation, no matter how much you hate the guy.[/QUOTE] Yeah maybe if he wasn't exactly fucking his own family over I would be less of a sceptic of his actual intentions. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] And don't pull goddamn first amendment violation on a case of criminally charged performer, you only further remove the little of the meaning the amendment might still have.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48297248]I consider abandoning your child while you clearly have the resources to at least ensure it is materially supported absolutely abhorrent and near the level of violent crimes as it's something that only creates more people with nothing but further antisocial experience to beginning of their life. He tries to paint himself as a gansta and at the same time doesn't have the balls to take care of his fucking kid. It seriously sickens me. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] Yeah maybe if he wasn't exactly fucking his own family over I would be less of a sceptic of his actual intentions. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] And don't pull goddamn first amendment violation on a case of criminally charged performer, you only further remove the little of the meaning the amendment might still have.[/QUOTE] he's a career criminal who's been arrested numerous times, child support is the least of his crimes. banning him from performing the city is reasonable, but banning his likeness from the city when he's halfway across the country is just unreasonably oppressive, especially when the reasoning behind it is essentially "he scares us and people like him so they might be violent!" it's basically the city of Chicago blaming a musician for the violence in the city instead of addressing the fact that their incompetence is a primary reason that the violence exists in the first place.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48297247]How dare someone who owes child support try to [I]raise money for a family who had their one year old child killed in front of their eyes[/I]. I think it's way more disgusting for a city mayor to effectively ban somebody's [I]likeness[/I] from a city because he has gang roots and his lyrics can be seen as promoting violence. It's a gross first amendment violation, no matter how much you hate the guy.[/QUOTE] Here's my thing: If he were out on that stage, what would have happened? Would he have been arrested? Because if so, why does he get to do whatever he wants because of his holographic representation? Is it because they can't arrest the hologram?
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48297265]Here's my thing: If he were out on that stage, what would have happened? Would he have been arrested? Because if so, why does he get to do whatever he wants because of his holographic representation? Is it because they can't arrest the hologram?[/QUOTE] Because he's not the hologram. He's not physically in the state where he has an outstanding warrant. It's a legal loophole, absolutely, but it's like preventing him from skype calling anybody that lives in Illinois. It's draconian. He's not in the state, he's not in their jurisdiction - banning his [I]entire likeness[/I] from being in the city is absurd.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48297266]Because he's not the hologram. He's not physically in the state where he has an outstanding warrant. It's a legal loophole, absolutely, but it's like preventing him from skype calling anybody that lives in Illinois. It's draconian. He's not in the state, he's not in their jurisdiction - banning his [I]entire likeness[/I] from being in the city is absurd.[/QUOTE] sounds like they're banning the [I]concert-context performing[/I] instead of his likeness
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48297266]Because he's not the hologram. He's not physically in the state where he has an outstanding warrant. It's a legal loophole, absolutely, but it's like preventing him from skype calling anybody that lives in Illinois. It's draconian. He's not in the state, he's not in their jurisdiction - banning his [I]entire likeness[/I] from being in the city is absurd.[/QUOTE] Was he hosting the concert in his name - as in are there legal grounds to prevent him from holding an event in his name because of the warrants for his arrest? Because if so, then I totally agree. He needs to figure his shit out. More importantly, I don't like the idea of celebrities find a loophole in their warrants and not dealing with them. He needs to figure his stuff out. Trying to hide under the guise of altruism while his life is fucked up doesn't mean that he gets off the hook.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48297278]Was he hosting the concert in his name - as in are there legal grounds to prevent him from holding an event in his name because of the warrants for his arrest? Because if so, then I totally agree. He needs to figure his shit out. More importantly, I don't like the idea of celebrities find a loophole in their warrants and not dealing with them. He needs to figure his stuff out. Trying to hide under the guise of altruism while his life is fucked up doesn't mean that he gets off the hook.[/QUOTE] AFAIK, no legal grounds for that specifically. I'm not defending Keef, I think he's an absolute shithead, I'm attacking the Mayor of Chicago. The reasoning behind their decision was that he was "a public safety threat," which is absurd, because none of his concerts have led to deaths or violence of any kind as far as I know. He mentions gang feuds in his lyrics and his lyrics are violent, which is enough for the Chicago government to go "oh this is how we can look like we're doing something about gang violence!" Chicago's apparently cracking down on rap artists of varying levels of fame across the city in relation to vague "gang activity." Keef's a bad example because he is actually tied to gangs, but that shouldn't be reason enough to prevent him from streaming video into the city. Hell, he streamed it to a different state where he [I]didn't have a warrant.[/I] The concert was in Indiana, not Illinois, and it was still shut down - he had no warrant in the entire state of Indiana. No precedent whatsoever - just because "he's scary."
[quote]3:08 AM - isak: and responded again 3:08 AM - isak: he performed in indiana 3:08 AM - isak: not in chicago 3:08 AM - isak: no warrants in indiana 3:08 AM - isak: no legal precedent 3:08 AM - isak: basically boils down to "he's scary" 3:10 AM - wauterboi: So wait, he's performing in a different state but gets in trouble for problems associated with the original state? 3:10 AM - isak: Yep. 3:10 AM - isak: It was across the border in Indiana. 3:10 AM - isak: Not technically even in Chicago, just bordering it. 3:10 AM - isak: And he streamed it from LA afaik[/quote] Alright then, so both people suck.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48297248]I consider abandoning your child while you clearly have the resources to at least ensure it is materially supported absolutely abhorrent and near the level of violent crimes as it's something that only creates more people with nothing but further antisocial experience to beginning of their life. He tries to paint himself as a gansta and at the same time doesn't have the balls to take care of his fucking kid. It seriously sickens me. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] Yeah maybe if he wasn't exactly fucking his own family over I would be less of a sceptic of his actual intentions. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] And don't pull goddamn first amendment violation on a case of criminally charged performer, you only further remove the little of the meaning the amendment might still have.[/QUOTE] I'm pulling the first amendment right because the state of Indiana and the city of Hammond, Indiana had no right to pull his video footage. He had warrants in Illinois, not in Indiana, and even then he wasn't even physically present. It's a bit of a legal grey area, but his label is already planning to sue over it. Even if he's criminally charged, doesn't matter much. When a career criminal with ties to gangs across Chicago comes out condemning gang violence and raising money for a murdered one-year-old child, you praise that. Chief Keef has a much stronger ability to get a message out than a police officer or an urban outreach volunteer or some shit. Instead, you're supporting Rahm Emanuel, who closed 100 Chicago schools exclusively in minority areas a few years ago in order to end a teacher's strike. Because everyone knows the best way to combat gang violence is to close a bunch of schools and then go after the musicians born from gang violence.
The people defending a celebrity criminal in this thread are hilarious. He's behaving like a child. Mom said I can't play videogames because I didn't do my homework, so I'm gonna go over Jimmy's house and play videogames instead. Aw fuck, mom came and grounded me! But I was playing videogames with Jimmy because he broke his arm! It's not fair! If Chief Keef actually wanted this benefit to be a benefit, he'd have handled his child supprt and then performed. This is a publicity stunt to demonize the police. Stunning to think a rap artist would do this. :eng101s:
[QUOTE=bitches;48297221]yeah fuck nonprofit charity[/QUOTE] This is so irrelevant it's amazing.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48297372]The people defending a celebrity criminal in this thread are hilarious. He's behaving like a child. Mom said I can't play videogames because I didn't do my homework, so I'm gonna go over Jimmy's house and play videogames instead. Aw fuck, mom came and grounded me! But I was playing videogames with Jimmy because he broke his arm! It's not fair! If Chief Keef actually wanted this benefit to be a benefit, he'd have handled his child supprt and then performed. This is a publicity stunt to demonize the police. Stunning to think a rap artist would do this. :eng101s:[/QUOTE] Oh, how startling, a thin blue line avatar comes and says that something unjust is just "demonizing the police." How unpredictable. I completely agree that he should just deal with his child support, but it's ignorant to say that the city of Chicago is handling the fight against gang violence properly. Dedicating such an absurd amount of resources to [I]prevent[/I] a well-respected local musician known for his ties to gang violence from [I]condemning gang violence[/I] is ridiculous. I would have no problem if they just said "he can't perform because he has outstanding warrants, and we won't let the hologram perform either." Calling him a "threat to public safety" is hilariously overblown. Hey, Emanuel, if you want to combat gang violence [I]don't shut down 100 schools in areas rife with gang violence.[/I]
[QUOTE=Sonador;48297372]The people defending a celebrity criminal in this thread are hilarious. He's behaving like a child. Mom said I can't play videogames because I didn't do my homework, so I'm gonna go over Jimmy's house and play videogames instead. Aw fuck, mom came and grounded me! But I was playing videogames with Jimmy because he broke his arm! It's not fair! If Chief Keef actually wanted this benefit to be a benefit, he'd have handled his child supprt and then performed. This is a publicity stunt to demonize the police. Stunning to think a rap artist would do this. :eng101s:[/QUOTE] How is this demonizing the police.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48297392]Oh, how startling, a thin blue line avatar comes and says that something unjust is just "demonizing the police." How unpredictable. I completely agree that he should just deal with his child support, but it's ignorant to say that the city of Chicago is handling the fight against gang violence properly. Dedicating such an absurd amount of resources to [I]prevent[/I] a well-respected local musician known for his ties to gang violence from [I]condemning gang violence[/I] is ridiculous. I would have no problem if they just said "he can't perform because he has outstanding warrants, and we won't let the hologram perform either." Calling him a "threat to public safety" is hilariously overblown. Hey, Emanuel, if you want to combat gang violence [I]don't shut down 100 schools in areas rife with gang violence.[/I][/QUOTE] I really don't see how [I]someone with an arrest warrant[/I] being denied [I]permission to hold a public event[/I] is unjust. Maybe I'm just failing to see how it being held for charity has any point or bearing on the event, but god damn, if I can evade body attachments just by donating a few bucks to the Ronald McDonald House, sign me up. Oh, and by the way? My avatar isn't always the thin blue line. It is now because about 3 days ago, an officer in a local police department was [I]shot in the face[/I] and killed during a traffic stop. Something that's actually unjust, if you need an example before using that word next time. [editline]26th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Luxuria;48297460]How is this demonizing the police.[/QUOTE] 'POLICE SHUT DOWN CHARITY EVENT' sounds like a pretty obvious example.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48297464] 'POLICE SHUT DOWN CHARITY EVENT' sounds like a pretty obvious example.[/QUOTE] That isn't false though. They did forcefully shut down a charity event due to the virtual representation of a person was there. Are they going to start cutting off peoples internet which listen to his streamed music or videos with him in it?
[QUOTE=deadoon;48297487]That isn't false though. They did forcefully shut down a charity event due to the virtual representation of a person was there. Are they going to start cutting off peoples internet which listen to his streamed music or videos with him in it?[/QUOTE] Of course not. You home internet connection isn't a public event that requires permits from the city. That's a pretty silly argument. And it's not false, but do you really think anyone cares about the full story? Have a look at the arguments made in this thread, people are already up in arms about it.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48297464]'POLICE SHUT DOWN CHARITY EVENT' sounds like a pretty obvious example.[/QUOTE] thats exactly what they did though
[QUOTE=Sonador;48297491]Of course not. You home internet connection isn't a public event that requires permits from the city. That's a pretty silly argument. And it's not false, but do you really think anyone cares about the full story? Have a look at the arguments made in this thread, people are already up in arms about it.[/QUOTE] Wonder if they have banned local radio stations from airing his music yet, or news organizations from showing his picture. By shutting down something for charity, they basically showed how petty they are in their vendetta against him. Who profits from this move? Nobody. Who loses? The public who went there for a show, the charities which were to get the proceeds from the event, and the city's image. There is no "winner" in this situation. Shutting it down made it a mutual loss for everyone involved.
So, I'll own up to bad reading, I responded when I started reading the dissenting comments and missed what Wauterboi posted. I still think it's scummy that Keef's obviously dodging child support and being impunitive about it, but there was no real legal grounds to shut the event down that I can see, unless there's some sort of jurisdictional agreement, which does happen. There were an a million other ways this could have been done, including using his connections with the entertainment industry to get another headliner to run the event. Instead, he had to make an appearance and show that he could do what he wanted regardless of his arrest warrant. Just keep in mind, there's a pretty clear message being made here: "We don't care what pretenses you try to make it out of, if you're wanted by the police, you need to get it sorted before doing things like this." Sorry about that.
That's cyberpunk as fuck
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48297248]And don't pull goddamn first amendment violation on a case of criminally charged performer, you only further remove the little of the meaning the amendment might still have.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the lecture on the first amendment, Czech mix. If support comes to the people who need it, I don't care who shows up to promote.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48297265]Here's my thing: If he were out on that stage, what would have happened? Would he have been arrested? Because if so, why does he get to do whatever he wants because of his holographic representation? Is it because they can't arrest the hologram?[/QUOTE] So you're saying that any media of him is banned in the state?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.