Rolling Stones At Altamont thoughts

Yeah, that what was just asking for trouble, as was hiring the Angels as security. Lots of blame to go around in this horrible situation.

 

Anyone know what "Jagger's treatment of them" alludes to? (To the point of wanting to kill the guy!)

 

I'm a bit surprised how far folks will go to defend their musical heroes. Jagger would laugh himself silly.

The film really does demonstrate the silliness of hippie dream. Without the mainstream culture to run these shows, the result was Altamont.

Don't look up to these guys. Don't make excuses and don't defend their actions. They can afford lawyers.

 

I'm surprised and amused at how persistently some people will attempt to prosecute events that took place nearly 50 years ago!

And by the way, if I was going to "make excuses and defend actions", which I haven't done, I will not ask your permission to do so. Please do not tell other people what arguments they may make.

 

I believe it had to do with him distancing himself from the Angels and saying some disparaging things about them after.

I was watching Gimme Shelter again last night and had forgotten Mick's reactions when Barger was on the KSAN call-in show the day after. He said some pretty heavy things about the Stones and Jagger and first, you see Mick's head snap up when he hears his name called, and as Barger goes on you see Mick first literally taken aback, and then he just sits there with this look on his face like all of the blood drained out of it. The guy looked scared you-know-what-less.

 

Indeed. Didn't the Angels try to launch some sort of amphibious assault later to 'get' Jagger?

 

From Telegraph. UK:
Alan Passaro, the killer, parried the gun with his left hand and stabbed Hunter in the back with his right. The Rolling Stones were forced to interrupt their performance, but, unaware that Hunter's stabbing was fatal, they decided to continue playing.
Passaro was arrested and tried for murder in 1972, but was acquitted after a jury concluded that he had acted in self-defense because Hunter was carrying a handgun.

So at least as far as the law is concerned, there was no "murder".

I'm not here to defend the Hell's Angels, who provided plenty of visual evidence of their true nature that day, but they didn't murder anyone.

 

I always thought the look on his face was more, "Who is this peasant who speaks about me so disparagingly?"

 

Old school posted this earlier. Post right below his is paste from Telegraph UK, describing failed attempt. (See previous page)

 

Jagger's listening to the radio? Or is he in studio with Barger?

 

Anyone here see this short film?



It's interesting, but because the director just didn't have a lot to go on, I feel he relied on too many oddly staged b/w shots on the cemetery manager's face to create drama or tension.

That said, considering how well known and documented this event is, it's strange how there is really no background information on Meredith Hunter.

 

They're listening to a playback of the radio show in the studio. Charlie, Mick and a couple of the filmmakers are present.

 

You think so? I thought it was more of a "whoa...they're talking about *me* like I did something wrong?"

 

Thanks - scary stuff. You'd think they would have used bikes though...

No offence to any resident Angels!

 

Well, it's hard to view taking down a guy with a gun as anything other than self-defense, but damn, Meredith Hunter was a teenage kid who was probably being beaten on before he pulled a gun. Now it seems from some accounts that it's debatable whether Hunter intended the bullet for the Angels or the stage, but I always got the impression that he pulled the gun to make the Angels back off and stop beating on him, which unfortunately was a fatal mistake.

Like others have said, Hunter made many bad decisions that day, but it's awfully hard to not feel that he was a sympathetic character.

 

Well, Hunter had an earlier run in with the Angels during the show where they punched him and threw him back into the crowd. He was, by all accounts (and the coroner's report) whacked out on Angel Dust (irony?) and pissed at the Angels for manhandling him (and also perhaps because someone had made a pass at his girlfriend) so when he went charging back and pulled his gun, nothing good could have come of it.

 

At the very least, it seems he looks taken aback at being called an "idiot." He physically recoils at the word. He doesn't look scared to me but he's kinda poker-faced anyway, and I suppose that one would have to presume that he's spooked.

 

I seriously doubt that Hunter was expecting to get beaten up by Hell's Angels at the concert; my first question would be why did he bring a loaded pistol to a music festival? What's an 18 year-old kid doing carrying a loaded gun around? I'm sorry, I just can't relate.

 

Only if you say, please.

So for now...no defending or excuses.

 

Good question, but look how he was dressed, too. Lime green pimp suit and hat...he was styling but he also seemed to want to try and project that image, and drugs + guns doesn't usually = good outcome.

 

Me neither! Maybe someone can enlighten me - was it common practise to carry firearms in California in the 60s?

 

He said "please" in his post.

 

But not pretty please!

 

Probably a stupid kid thing to do, he ran with a pretty hard crowd and maybe he'd waved that pistol around and escaped a beating in a different context. Anyway, the point isn't that he was right to bring and pull a gun, only that it's a damn shame all around.

 

Good luck with that strategy, it's sure to bring a lot of gravitas to your argument.