RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing?

RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Owner59 -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 6:33:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Uwin, about 6 years ago I took a woman out to dinner and found out she was an ACLU supporter. There wasn't a second date. They're like fuckin' Lepers in my book! Cucumber and onion sandwhich eating m...r f...r's! quote: ORIGINAL: uwinceismile omg,,,the aclu has lost all of its credibility with me....and that happened some time ago Wow,....how manly.....rotf,lmao Guess you`re home alone, masturbating to pix of Ann Colter.What`s with her Adam`s apple anyway?

Owner59 -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 6:45:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Azriel308 It was simple at one time. You killed someone, it was murder. Then they had to add if you thought about it before you did it, or not... Somehow that makes a difference to the dead guy. Then they wanted to add some warm and fuzzy laws. This made all the yuppies/liberals/cry babies/ACLU fools feel like they had actually fought crime in some way. Who cares if you killed the person for his $20, or because they where black/white/red/brown? They are dead. Charge them with murder, and put them away for the amount of time a murder conviction calls for. Another 10 years just becuase they killed the victim because they where (incert whatever you want here) is just stupid and arrogant. Making some class or group more "protected" (do you really think criminals think about the special laws over one group or another before committing crimes?) then another by making it worse for someone if they kill a person from that group soley becuase they where this or that? Get over yourselves. You are not special because someone killed you because you where gay or brown. If you want to play things that way, then gangs who kill others from rival gangs should be sentenced under "hate" crimes too. They killed someone because of their clothes/affiliation. Wait...Then we would have to prosecute all murderes under a hate crime. This one was killed becuase he had a car that this person wanted, so he was killed for it. He hated that he didn't have the car. How about the husband that comes home early and catches his wife in bed with someone else? He gets the elevated sentence becuase he killed her and her lover in hate. It really is just stupidity to me. I have never heard of someone murdering someone out of love. You do nothing, really, nothing at all by making these "special" (I think of them as short bus laws...) laws that supposedly protect one group more then anyone else. The only thing you accomplish is confusing the courts, giving lawyers ways to slip their clients through the loop holes with all these laws. To top it off, they are seldom used. Maybe if a politicion wants headlines, otherwise no one really cares if the murder was sentenced under a hate crime law or just sentenced under murder. As long as the killer is off the street. Get over it, the laws are nothing more then headaches for offiers and prosecuters. Murder is murder. Assualt is assualt. No one should get special treatment under the law. It is a slap in the face to others. Azriel308 ,....fighting for the rights of bigoted killers,...everywhere and in a town near you.......

popeye1250 -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 7:07:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Uwin, about 6 years ago I took a woman out to dinner and found out she was an ACLU supporter. There wasn't a second date. They're like fuckin' Lepers in my book! Cucumber and onion sandwhich eating m...r f...r's! quote: ORIGINAL: uwinceismile omg,,,the aclu has lost all of its credibility with me....and that happened some time ago Wow,....how manly.....rotf,lmao Guess you`re home alone, masturbating to pix of Ann Colter.What`s with her Adam`s apple anyway? Gee, I think I'll just let that remark speak for itself.

Owner59 -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 7:07:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: instynctive Try being a white Yankee living in the south.. NO ONE (even other whites) likes you. LOL I moved here to Myrtle Beach, SC from New Hampshire 3 years ago and I love it here! I find the "rebels" here very friendly. I bet you`re right at home....

ModeratorEleven -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 7:09:49 PM)
Settle down, folks. Next time the thread gets locked down. XI

thompsonx -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 7:45:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: uwinceismile is it important to add 10 yrs to someones sentence because they say something during the act of a crime? or because the crime was perpertrated against another race? i would prefer that they just did away with plea bargaining when the crime was that viscious. and enforce the laws that we have on the books. the the fullest extent of the law. i mean honestly, does it matter if i am called a stupid effing white man, if the attacker is a different race? cant he be sentenced for the attack effieciently? what difference does it make if the person is a rascist, if he is killing another human being? cant we just procecute for murder?and not concern ourself with the idea that he did not like the other persons race? whats important is the crime committed,,and how we procecute it,,,not that the perp didnt like my skin color uwinceismile: You pose an interesting question. All laws are made in response to some input from the constituency of the law makers. There was a time not so long ago when if a black man was lynched and the perpetrators were brought to trial the charges might be reduced to malicious mischief or littering (leaving a dead body in public). This is why there are enhancements on hate crimes. There was a time when all police and fire departments were white, all postal workers all government employees and the list goes on and on...not because there were no qualified applicants that were not white, but because of institutionalized bigotry. If you were to study the history of our country you will find that this behavior is not uncommon. In my short life (63 years) I have seen segregated restrooms, schools, drinking fountains, restaurants and so forth. If you think that institutionalized bigotry does not exist then consider how many times in the past ten years Denny's has been successfully sued for it. To the point that Denny's corporate headquarters has issued a notice to all franchise holders that the next successful suit will result in the loss of that persons franchise (I have heard that a Denny's franchise can run to several millions of dollars). That there have been miscarriages of justice I do not doubt. That the case that has been discussed here could be overturned on appeal is highly likely given the facts as stated. My point is that those who are now crying about how white people are being discriminated against are receiving a small infinitesimal taste of what it may have been like to be non-white in the past. I hear the continual whining about how unqualified women,blacks, Mexicans and asains are put in jobs in preference to white people. Is it possible that this is true????perhaps but every time I have done any research on the subject I have found that one of two things have been true. That the accused incompetent was not incompetent or that an incompetent person had been chosen over a competent person for the express purpose of showing why the program would not work. Are there abuses in the system? Without a doubt there are. Are these abuses as egregious as what preceded them? No and not by any meaningful order of magnitude could they be compared. So many people speak of a level playing field and everyone competing on the same scale and let the best rise to the top. Were that true in practice as it seems in theory then there would be no need for quotas and special training classes. The reality is that if you expect a grammar school football star to compete with a NFL player you are hardly using a level playing field. It was not so long ago that an employer could require you to work 16 hours a day for two dollars a day. If you sought to unionize others to seek better wages you were not only beaten by the company guards but the local police would arrest you. Many who are the recipients of the benefit's of their fathers and grand fathers struggles now feel that there is no need for the union and that management will treat them fairly without the bargaining power that a union can bring to the table. There is one active poster on these boards who belongs to a union that claims six figure a year wages for its members...how many blue collar workers do you know who make that kind of money and do not belong to a union? There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a man making six figures a year. Management has no problem paying itself those kinds of wages. Witness the recently fired CEO of Home Depot who received nearly a quarter of a billion dollars ($220,000,000) in severence pay. Is their contribution to the product any more important than the man who actually makes the product for them? You will always have someone who will say I am black,brown,female,asain or what ever and I don't want to be part of a quota. Ok then don't be part of a quota but that person speaks only for themselves. Do not presume to ascribe that persons position to all who are entitled to a quota. If you are a home owner you have a preference over those who are renters by virtue of your home owners exemption on your income tax. If there were one person who said they felt they were not entitled to that special exemption would you feel you should give up yours? Why do you get such a special tax deduction that amounts to tens of thousands of dollars a year? Because some law makers constituency sought out a special privilege for themselves at the expense of those who do not qualify. You will notice I have not used the term race in this rant. There is a reason for not doing so. Contrary to what you may have learned in school or what may still be in some dictionaries, there is but one race on this planet...that would be the human race. I have lived in many different countries in my short life and even the most homogeneous (such as Japan) find subtle differences in one another so as to be able to exercise some form of bigotry. When one lives in a less homogeneous society such as the U.S, where there are people of all different colors and hues and ethnicities it is far easier to point out the not so subtle differences and use that to make ourselves feel better than "them" in some fashion or another. I would hope that one day before I die I would be able to see my country unified and not divided by our diversity. But I am a cynic and a realist and I know that just as this thread is filled up with whiners telling how the niggers and the spic's and the gooks and the queers and oh yes don't forget the bleeding heart liberals and the war mongering fascists that have ruined the country for those "god fearing" hard working yadda yadda yadda among us who support this country with our hard work....geeze if it were not so fucking pathetic it would be funny. thompson

Owner59 -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 7:53:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CollarMaster1 blacks were not the only people enslaved...thru history..virtually all people have been slaves at one time or another..blacks are merely the last...they need to get over it .. Really,...get over it, eh? Well , how about targeting black soldiers,overseas,with "caging" techniques? And recently. In 2000,and in 2004,hundreds of thousands of votes were made invalid,by "caging" black solders and others,who the republicans know vote mostly democratic.They would search military profiles for non-Caucasians,and mail a letter to their home,in the states.If the letter came back unopened,that soldier`s vote,either in person or by absentee ballot while overseas,would be tossed out,with no recourse.Take that technique,add a staff of hundreds,and millions to spend on computers and expenses,and you have a crime know as election fraud.BTW,the republicans were already under court orders,not to engage in "caging",but they`ve been caught again. http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4594 So,...that was just a short time ago.Should those blacks, and the others targeted get over that too?How long should we give`m? True, slavery was long ago.But Jim Crow and segregation and red-lining,and lynching and discrimination persist to this day.For some, that`s no big deal.Doesn`t affect them, no problem.For others,they know and don`t care,tough luck.They might not be able to comprehend what "caging" is,but they know it helped bush get it the White House,so they`re all for it.How would feel if you knew your vote was stolen,because of your race?Or over anything, for that matter. I would ask,that if you`re not going to help,please get out of the way. I mean that in the general way,not personally.[;)]

Level -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 7:59:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: SeeksOnlyOne not one bit feeling aimed at......amazed is a better word.... The feeling is mutual: I have been speechless at some of the things that were posted on this thread too. What's wrong with a little classism, aye? If racism's not a crime in the eyes of many, I don't see how they could allow themselves to be offended by my virulent dislike of pale-skinned garbage. Et toc. So, everyone that lives in a trailer is garbage?

uwinceismile -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/7/2007 9:46:51 PM)
thompson, i for one enjoyed that rant ..... i didnt agree with every sylable, but i enjoyed the writing , and i respect the time and thought you put into it. thank you\\

SubinMaine -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 2:13:25 AM)
uwince, i think you posed a very good question. Obviosly there are some extremely emotional and unshakeable opinions on the matter. At least you got people to think...whether or not the outcome was constructive or just plain condescending. One thing i noticed is that a lot of people who think "words" shouldn't play a part in hate crime sentencing are viewed as bigots by those who do, it's all good, to each their own. It's my own personal opinion that something can be labeled "hate" when that's not the circumstance at all...shrug it happens. i knew when i posted that it'd probably cause people to think bad of me....but hey, again, i own that smile Sinergy, thanks for that post. i wouldn't have known those odds and, while i wouldn't expect to find myself in that situation again, it's good to know if i move away instead of jumping to a defense that i have a pretty good chance smile i think my friend just wanted to get the upper hand and not give this guy a chance to pull a gun out of his pocket. i'm also sure that he wishes he DID wait now 'cuz then he'd have seen there was no gun at all...just big talk...and maybe things would have been different? Who knows, it's all in the past now (thank god).

RPutnamJr -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 2:42:04 AM)
The whole concept of Hate Crimes is stupid to me...if its a crime then it is a crime...and to be punished more for a crime because its one a select group that you may or may not like is stupid...so is the concept of various degrees of punishment for doing the same crime as somebody else...why do some people get off with lesser punishments than others for doing the same crime just because they seem more remorseful than the other person. They are remorseful because they got caught, found God because they got caught, had their lives interrupted because they got caught. Get less time because they can afford a better lawyer than the next person. And all penalties should be the same for the crime committed...fixed sentencing period. If you do the crime you should do the time...equally. If sentencing is not enough of a deterrent to stop the crime then adjust the sentencing upwards until the crime is either eliminated or appropriate for the crime committed. Then also fix the way lawyers are hired after all why should one that is poor not be given the best possible defencse verses another that is rich and is able to afford better and higher priced lawyers, consultants, etc to get out of the crime that they commited just because they have the money to throw around that a poor person does not have yet they committed the same crime.

NorthernGent -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 3:13:50 AM)
Good post, Thompson. 'Enjoyed reading that. 'Not sure how you have it over there, but it's a popular misconception that we have positive discrimination i.e. ethnic groups are given preference at interviews etc. In actual fact, we have positive action, where local councils aim to provide access to interviews by ensuring jobs are advertised in ethnic communities - e.g. printing the advert in Urdu or something. Once at the interview, there is no discrimination - it's every man/women for him/herself. The idea is to provide access to opportunity, rather than discriminate, but you know the power of propaganda. This discrimination theory is firmly lodged in some peoples' minds. All available studies, here, suggest there is still discrimination against ethnic minorities in the workplace. In France, it's worse. The recent riots were a backlash against this. What's really interesting about France is that they don't allocate the best/most experienced teachers to the "best schools" - which is great. Much better than England where struggling schools with large ethnic populations get the worst teachers, and thus the cycle is repeated. In France, schools in inner-city areas have some of the best teachers, and, as a result, many French-North African kids are coming out of school with good grades and a good education. Problem is that when they apply for a job, their application forms go straight in the bin when an Arab name is seen on the top of the form. It always makes me wonder why sections of the right are so afraid of providing equal access to opportunity - maybe they don't have the self-confidence to believe they can succeed without the odds being stacked in their favour.

MellowSir -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 8:28:48 AM)
It's not the COLOR that matters, it's the ATTITUDE

domiguy -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 8:47:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RPutnamJr The whole concept of Hate Crimes is stupid to me...if its a crime then it is a crime...and to be punished more for a crime because its one a select group that you may or may not like is stupid...so is the concept of various degrees of punishment for doing the same crime as somebody else...why do some people get off with lesser punishments than others for doing the same crime just because they seem more remorseful than the other person. They are remorseful because they got caught, found God because they got caught, had their lives interrupted because they got caught. Get less time because they can afford a better lawyer than the next person. And all penalties should be the same for the crime committed...fixed sentencing period. If you do the crime you should do the time...equally. If sentencing is not enough of a deterrent to stop the crime then adjust the sentencing upwards until the crime is either eliminated or appropriate for the crime committed. Then also fix the way lawyers are hired after all why should one that is poor not be given the best possible defencse verses another that is rich and is able to afford better and higher priced lawyers, consultants, etc to get out of the crime that they commited just because they have the money to throw around that a poor person does not have yet they committed the same crime. Is there a point to this post? Help?

domiguy -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 9:00:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Uwin, about 6 years ago I took a woman out to dinner and found out she was an ACLU supporter. There wasn't a second date. They're like fuckin' Lepers in my book! Cucumber and onion sandwhich eating m...r f...r's! quote: ORIGINAL: uwinceismile omg,,,the aclu has lost all of its credibility with me....and that happened some time ago Wow,....how manly.....rotf,lmao Guess you`re home alone, masturbating to pix of Ann Colter.What`s with her Adam`s apple anyway? Gee, I think I'll just let that remark speak for itself. The ACLU defends your constitutional rights...Your civil liberties They choose the hard cases...The most vile cases to dig their toes in the sand....Whether it be pornographers, MAMBLA or Rush....If you defend the rights of MAMBLA you are defending the rights of all! Popeye you tout your membership to the NRA....They have drawn their line....Not to give an inch...Cop killer bullets, assault rifles..on and on...They re afraid that to give an inch is to give a mile....The ACLU works entirely the same way...If the ACLU defends the constitutional rights of the most disgusting aspects of human behavior....They are insuring that my rights will continue to be protected...... Have you ever wondered how many people would view this site as sick and would like to see it closed down? You should be thanking the ACLU instead of sending them your criticism.

MstrssPassion -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 9:14:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: RPutnamJr The whole concept of Hate Crimes is stupid to me...if its a crime then it is a crime...and to be punished more for a crime because its one a select group that you may or may not like is stupid...so is the concept of various degrees of punishment for doing the same crime as somebody else...why do some people get off with lesser punishments than others for doing the same crime just because they seem more remorseful than the other person. They are remorseful because they got caught, found God because they got caught, had their lives interrupted because they got caught. Get less time because they can afford a better lawyer than the next person. And all penalties should be the same for the crime committed...fixed sentencing period. If you do the crime you should do the time...equally. If sentencing is not enough of a deterrent to stop the crime then adjust the sentencing upwards until the crime is either eliminated or appropriate for the crime committed. Then also fix the way lawyers are hired after all why should one that is poor not be given the best possible defencse verses another that is rich and is able to afford better and higher priced lawyers, consultants, etc to get out of the crime that they commited just because they have the money to throw around that a poor person does not have yet they committed the same crime. Is there a point to this post? Help? I think its just best to ignore it since the poster ignored all the dialog in the previous 10 pages where these points (were they points) were pretty much already addressed.

Owner59 -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 4:06:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RPutnamJr The whole concept of Hate Crimes is stupid to me...if its a crime then it is a crime...and to be punished more for a crime because its one a select group that you may or may not like is stupid...so is the concept of various degrees of punishment for doing the same crime as somebody else...why do some people get off with lesser punishments than others for doing the same crime just because they seem more remorseful than the other person. They are remorseful because they got caught, found God because they got caught, had their lives interrupted because they got caught. Get less time because they can afford a better lawyer than the next person. And all penalties should be the same for the crime committed...fixed sentencing period. If you do the crime you should do the time...equally. If sentencing is not enough of a deterrent to stop the crime then adjust the sentencing upwards until the crime is either eliminated or appropriate for the crime committed. Then also fix the way lawyers are hired after all why should one that is poor not be given the best possible defencse verses another that is rich and is able to afford better and higher priced lawyers, consultants, etc to get out of the crime that they commited just because they have the money to throw around that a poor person does not have yet they committed the same crime. Oh my...<chuckles> I think what you described is available,....on the moon,.... maybe. I`m waiting to hear the argument, that defending the rights of criminals to hate,is a free speech issue. Now back to reality folks...

uwinceismile -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 5:41:17 PM)
subinmaine, thank you . there are many ideas and thought here. from a pretty good cross section of america and abroad . obviously we arent all going to agree on everything all of the time. i knew when i posted the thread it would open up discussions :) what i didnt know was how strong the opinions would be, or better yet, how some would consider what they had to say to be so vastly more important then the other guy. damn shame really, we will never come together on an issue, when we cant even talk about it in a manner befitting the topic. the best debates ive ever had, and most constructive, were with with folks who could make a point with class, and not berate you for not agreeing with them. a lotta work around here to get to that point ... i guess what makes it so difficult for me to understand, is the lack of tolerance for anothers views, with in a group of folks who preach tolerance and acceptance of others lifestyles. costa

caitlyn -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 7:55:34 PM)
My dear thompsonx ... That has to be one of the finest posts I have read in all my time here. With admiration ... cait

uwinceismile -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/8/2007 8:01:02 PM)
If the ACLU defends the constitutional rights of the most disgusting aspects of human behavior....They are insuring that my rights will continue to be protected...... (domiguy) I`m waiting to hear the argument, that defending the rights of criminals to hate,is a free speech issue. (owner59) well, i think we have found who you can contact to fight that battle for you :)

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875