Hate Crime
-
The point is that if this had been white on black crime, the prosecution would certainly have used hate as a means of increasing the possible penalties against the perps. It almost always gets thrown into the mix in such cases. At the very least they would have tried to make it stick. The press would have picked up on those charges and ran with it, because thats their script and they are sticking to it. But, because charging blacks with similar hate crimes would tend to promote the agenda of the four guys in a trailer park in Mississippi who comprise the modern KKK/Nazi/Whatever hate "groups", they will never even try to use it in cases like this. It would just make the legal system look all "racist" and everything. That is precisely why hate crime laws are such a very sad joke.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
The point is that if this had been white on black crime, the prosecution would certainly have used hate as a means of increasing the possible penalties against the perps. It almost always gets thrown into the mix in such cases. At the very least they would have tried to make it stick.
I know you prefer anecdotes to statistics, but here is the 2003 FBI report on these matters. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03hc.pdf[^] On p. 5 we read: "In 2003, law enforcement reported 4,574 single-bias offenses that were motivated by the offender’s bias against race. Among those offenses, 66.3 percent were perpetrated because of an anti-black bias, and 21.2 percent were due to an anti-white bias. Just over 6 percent (6.1) of racially-motivated hate crimes were driven by an anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias, 1.8 percent involved a bias against American Indians/Alaskan Natives, and 4.7 percent were directed at groups of individuals in which more than one race was represented (multiple races, group)." And on p. 7: "In 2003, a total of 6,934 known offenders were identified in 7,489 bias-motivated incidents. (See Table 1.) Of the known offenders, 62.3 percent were white and 18.5 percent were black. Groups comprised of individuals of varying races (multiple races, group) accounted for 6.3 percent of known offenders. Reporting agencies identified Asian/Pacific Islander as the race for 1.3 percent and American Indian/Alaskan Native for 0.9 percent of the known offenders. For 10.7 percent of known offenders, the attribute of race was unknown. (Based on Table 9.)" Putting together those two sets statistics suggests that black offenders and white offenders are about equally likely to be accused of hate crimes. <edit> Missing from the above statistics is information on the percentage of crime committed by blacks. Apparently, around 30 percent of people arrested are black. This, in combination with the above figures, suggests that blacks are about 2/3 as likely to be accused of hate crimes as whites. Whether this reflects bias in law enforcement or less racism among blacks than whites is an open question. </edit> <edit2> Actually, the figures show that blacks are accused of more hate crime than their share of the population (13% of the total). On the other hand, they show that blacks are accused of hate
-
Frankly, I'm shocked that it's not being blown up in the direction that it's gone. I mean, I've seen US television. Either way, the color of the victims and/or the attackers, does nothing to change the shocking nature of the crime.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
Either way, the color of the victims and/or the attackers, does nothing to change the shocking nature of the crime.
How are you sure of that? It could have been racially motivated, you don't know what they were thinking when they committed the crimes.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Either way, the color of the victims and/or the attackers, does nothing to change the shocking nature of the crime.
How are you sure of that? It could have been racially motivated, you don't know what they were thinking when they committed the crimes.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
How are you sure of that? It could have been racially motivated
He is not disputing that. He is saying that, regardless of all that, the crime is shocking.
John Carson
-
-
Captain See Sharp wrote:
How are you sure of that? It could have been racially motivated
He is not disputing that. He is saying that, regardless of all that, the crime is shocking.
John Carson
-
Why is it that when I ask Mr. Grauss a question someone else gives me an answer? Some, like you, go so far as to tell me what he was thinking.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why is it that when I ask Mr. Grauss a question someone else gives me an answer? Some, like you, go so far as to tell me what he was thinking.
I am prepared to back my literacy skills when it comes to interpreting his meaning.
John Carson
-
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why is it that when I ask Mr. Grauss a question someone else gives me an answer? Some, like you, go so far as to tell me what he was thinking.
I am prepared to back my literacy skills when it comes to interpreting his meaning.
John Carson
-
John Carson wrote:
I am prepared to back my literacy skills when it comes to interpreting his meaning.
Then back them.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
John Carson wrote:
I am prepared to back my literacy skills when it comes to interpreting his meaning.
Then back them.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Then back them.
I am afraid you haven't correctly understood my meaning.:-D I meant that the reason why I was willing to answer a question directed at Christian was because I had confidence that my literacy skills were good enough to interpret his meaning on this occasion.
John Carson
-
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Then back them.
I am afraid you haven't correctly understood my meaning.:-D I meant that the reason why I was willing to answer a question directed at Christian was because I had confidence that my literacy skills were good enough to interpret his meaning on this occasion.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
I meant that the reason why I was willing to answer a question directed at Christian was because I had confidence that my literacy skills were good enough to interpret his meaning on this occasion.
So you are saying you are some literacy genius who can basically read the minds of whoever typed the text? I'm afraid the people in the soapbox are not as smart as they think they are. Its just a zoo of dumbasses trying to let loose their superiority complex disorders by claiming they are so intellectually superior that they can read the thoughts of others.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
John Carson wrote:
I meant that the reason why I was willing to answer a question directed at Christian was because I had confidence that my literacy skills were good enough to interpret his meaning on this occasion.
So you are saying you are some literacy genius who can basically read the minds of whoever typed the text? I'm afraid the people in the soapbox are not as smart as they think they are. Its just a zoo of dumbasses trying to let loose their superiority complex disorders by claiming they are so intellectually superior that they can read the thoughts of others.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
So you are saying you are some literacy genius who can basically read the minds of whoever typed the text?
No, I am saying that I am confident of being able to do it on this occasion. As Josh Gray has remarked, figuring out what Christian meant on this occasion is not difficult.
John Carson
-
Christian Graus wrote:
One would imagine the guy starting to yell something racist as he was being attacked, and that just making the attackers more mad.
Good point. However, that sort is scenario is not what one would ordinarily think of as a racially motivated hate crime.
John Carson
I don't see how else it can *become* racially motivated, and that's what they're saying.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Captain See Sharp wrote:
So you are saying you are some literacy genius who can basically read the minds of whoever typed the text?
No, I am saying that I am confident of being able to do it on this occasion. As Josh Gray has remarked, figuring out what Christian meant on this occasion is not difficult.
John Carson
-
I don't see how else it can *become* racially motivated, and that's what they're saying.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
I don't see how else it can *become* racially motivated, and that's what they're saying.
I don't either. Most racially motivated hate crime would be racially motivated from the start. If a crime is initiated for non-racial reasons and then there is a racial exchange later, then it becomes a matter of the exact wording of the relevant hate crime legislation whether the crime falls within the ambit of the legislation. I don't know how the legislation is worded so I don't know the answer to that question. The fact that the police say it wasn't racially motivated and they are not prosecuting it as a hate crime may suggest, Stan's contrary opinions notwithstanding, that whatever happened doesn't fall within the ambit of the legislation.
John Carson
-
I have to agree. It's like the South Park episode. While certain ethnic groups, homosexuals, racial groups, etc may 'targeted' more than a white heterosexual male, I think all crimes are hate crimes. Murder is murder.
__________________ Bob is my homeboy.
leckey wrote:
I think all crimes are hate crimes.
5. Not sure why you got voted down, leckey.
-
-
John Carson wrote:
though just how one's motivations can become racist partway through is unclear.
One would imagine the guy starting to yell something racist as he was being attacked, and that just making the attackers more mad.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
One would imagine the guy starting to yell something racist as he was being attacked, and that just making the attackers more mad.
So the story is really about white racism after all? Nice job of staying on the script.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
The point is that if this had been white on black crime, the prosecution would certainly have used hate as a means of increasing the possible penalties against the perps. It almost always gets thrown into the mix in such cases. At the very least they would have tried to make it stick.
I know you prefer anecdotes to statistics, but here is the 2003 FBI report on these matters. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03hc.pdf[^] On p. 5 we read: "In 2003, law enforcement reported 4,574 single-bias offenses that were motivated by the offender’s bias against race. Among those offenses, 66.3 percent were perpetrated because of an anti-black bias, and 21.2 percent were due to an anti-white bias. Just over 6 percent (6.1) of racially-motivated hate crimes were driven by an anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias, 1.8 percent involved a bias against American Indians/Alaskan Natives, and 4.7 percent were directed at groups of individuals in which more than one race was represented (multiple races, group)." And on p. 7: "In 2003, a total of 6,934 known offenders were identified in 7,489 bias-motivated incidents. (See Table 1.) Of the known offenders, 62.3 percent were white and 18.5 percent were black. Groups comprised of individuals of varying races (multiple races, group) accounted for 6.3 percent of known offenders. Reporting agencies identified Asian/Pacific Islander as the race for 1.3 percent and American Indian/Alaskan Native for 0.9 percent of the known offenders. For 10.7 percent of known offenders, the attribute of race was unknown. (Based on Table 9.)" Putting together those two sets statistics suggests that black offenders and white offenders are about equally likely to be accused of hate crimes. <edit> Missing from the above statistics is information on the percentage of crime committed by blacks. Apparently, around 30 percent of people arrested are black. This, in combination with the above figures, suggests that blacks are about 2/3 as likely to be accused of hate crimes as whites. Whether this reflects bias in law enforcement or less racism among blacks than whites is an open question. </edit> <edit2> Actually, the figures show that blacks are accused of more hate crime than their share of the population (13% of the total). On the other hand, they show that blacks are accused of hate
How could one possibly know if those statistics are true or not? How could one possible know if this crime were committed precisely because this couple was white? It will not be added to the statistics as a hate crime because a hate crime was not charged by the authorities. Therefore, it was not a hate crime whether it really was or not. I'll stick to my anecdotes. I have never known the murder of a black by a white to not become associated somehow with the phrase 'hate crime', either by the authorities or the media, and I have never know the murder of a white by a black to be called anything but murder by anyone.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
I hope you had your pointy white bed sheet suit on when you posted this. I know it would increase your level of enjoyment.
led mike
led mike wrote:
I hope you had your pointy white bed sheet suit on when you posted this. I know it would increase your level of enjoyment.
Can't let the script change now can we?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Considering the level of violence involved, and the lack of any other possible motive, one could assume that some sort of strong negative emotions were involved. But, obviously, it might not have been racial. Perhaps they just didn't like people who drive SUVs. :rolleyes:
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about