RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II.

RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (Full Version)

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

Message

VivaciousSub -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:08:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: smilingjaguar Palin's effigy wasn't a hate crime; Obama's was. This is simply because of how the term hate crime is defined. From the FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/hate_crime/index.html quote: A hate crime, also known as a bias crime, is a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin. So far I don't think being motivated by a candidate's stupidity is quite enough to be considered a hate crime. To play the devil's advocate, how do you know the effigy was staged because he was black? Is there a sign on the "victim" saying so? Did the offenders come out and say "because we hate black people"? No! There isn't! It was in seriously poor taste, but it's covered under the First Amendment.

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:10:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And now you ask me to run away...ROFLMAO...listen bunny wabbit,I don't do whiney and cranky...and I don't often lose.But back to point....your whole argument is that because the black person in question happens to be a politician this is not an act of racial bias or a hate crime...does that about sum up your argument.... Please supply a link the last time a politician was hung in effigy at the University of Kentucky,since this is such a time honored form of political expression I imagine you will be right back with this post and attending links....run along now.I will be waiting. Stop trying to obfuscate the issue with your racial propaganda. Symbols can mean multiple things. My girl can wear a slave collar and it means she is owned by me. A Goth girl can wear a slave collar and it means she is making a fashion statement. A black man being hung can symbolize a lynching. A politician being hung can be a political statement. It's a form of political expression that has been used worldwide not just in hangings, but in burnings as well. Nixon to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush. None of these made headlines because they are considered "normal". My memory is good enough to remember all the George W. Bush effigies being hung and burned at the start of the Iraq War. Is yours that bad? Whether Barrack Obama was hung as a black man or as a politician, you don't know. Whether this symbol means a lynching or a political protest, you don't know without proof of intent from the creators. No more then I know whether a Goth girl's collar means "submissive" or "fashion" without proof of intent from the Goth girl. Since your so adamant to conclude that this is a racially charged event, please provide evidence of the intent of the college kids who hung it. If you can't, then this is just a bunch of hot air with no substance. End of story. No ifs ands or buts about it. Just the facts, ma'am (Or in your case just the assumptions).

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:12:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And yet Marietoo there seem to be alot of posters here assuming no malice of a racial nature was intended.Seems to me "assuming"cuts both ways here,none of us are in a court of law. Not drawing a conclusion in light of the abscence of fact isn't assuming. It's...uh....not drawing a conclusion in the light of the abscence of fact.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:16:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Firm I am quite sure that personal responsibilty thing works out fine for you.As you point out no sense in letting historical accuracy muddy things up....your way is much simpler. Try a little more for "coherency" in your post, then I'll likely respond to you. Firm

VivaciousSub -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:17:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And yet Marietoo there seem to be alot of posters here assuming no malice of a racial nature was intended.Seems to me "assuming"cuts both ways here,none of us are in a court of law. Not drawing a conclusion in light of the abscence of fact isn't assuming. It's...uh....not drawing a conclusion in the light of the abscence of fact. I love you! [;)] I am seriously disturbed by the number of posters I've seen leaping to these types of conclusions. I'm against the 'hate crime' designation altogether as I believe people should be punished for their actions, not their thoughts. Where does it stop? Remember Minority Report? Edited to add: "hate crime" designation smacks to me of legislating morality.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:19:27 PM)
This isn't just about how an individual might or might not feel. This is about historical realities and how certain acts (a lynching for example) have iconic meaning. These symbols then affect not just the intended target but an entire community. For example, this is how The New York State Legislture understood it when they enacted the Hate Crimes Act of 2000: Hate crimes do more than threaten the safety and welfare of all citizens. They inflict on victims incalculable physical and emotional damage and tear at the very fabric of free society. Crimes motivated by invidious hatred toward particular groups not only harm individual victims but send a powerful message of intolerance and discrimination to all members of the group to which the victim belongs. Hate crimes can and do intimidate and disrupt entire communities and vitiate the civility that is essential to healthy democratic processes. In a democratic society, citizens cannot be required to approve of the beliefs and practices of others, but must never commit criminal acts on account of them. Current law does not adequately recognize the harm to public order and individual safety that hate crimes cause. Therefore, our laws must be strengthened to provide clear recognition of the gravity of hate crimes and the compelling importance of preventing their recurrence. Accordingly, the legislature finds and declares that hate crimes should be prosecuted and punished with appropriate severity."

marieToo -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:20:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And yet Marietoo there seem to be alot of posters here assuming no malice of a racial nature was intended.Seems to me "assuming"cuts both ways here,none of us are in a court of law. Honestly, mike, I haven't seen anyone here doing that. I see people here trying to view it with an open mind without making any assumptions. Maybe if Obama had been white, they still would have made the effigy. For all we know it was in retaliation of the Sarah effigy. I personally find it all offensive, but whether or not it's a hate crime? I really don't know for sure, since I am not in the heads of the "offenders", furthermore, I am in the camp of if it's wrong for a black man, it's just as wrong for a white woman, and wrong for a practioner of Wicca, or a Jew, or a homosexual, or whathaveyou. Getting outraged over the assumption that the Obama effigy was racially motived, while basically shrugging our shoulders at the Sarah effigy is the very attitude, that I think, exacerbates the racial tensions in our society.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:21:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VivaciousSub Edited to add: "hate crime" designation smacks to me of legislating morality. We legislate morality all the time. For example: I think it's immoral to allow any child to go hungry in my community, therefore I work toward legislation that can eliminate this. That is, in fact, legislating morality.

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:21:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VivaciousSub I love you! [;)] Well, check your email and show some love sometime. [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: VivaciousSub I am seriously disturbed by the number of posters I've seen leaping to these types of conclusions. I'm against the 'hate crime' designation altogether as I believe people should be punished for their actions, not their thoughts. Where does it stop? Remember Minority Report? Ironically, it's the same people who bash McCain in these political threads for "shooting from the hip". Apparently, jumping to conclusions is okay when it creates a racial issue that's in favor of their candidate.

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:26:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything This isn't just about how an individual might or might not feel. This is about historical realities and how certain acts (a lynching for example) have iconic meaning. These symbols then affect not just the intended target but an entire community. For example, this is how The New York State Legislture understood it when they enacted the Hate Crimes Act of 2000: Hate crimes do more than threaten the safety and welfare of all citizens. They inflict on victims incalculable physical and emotional damage and tear at the very fabric of free society. Crimes motivated by invidious hatred toward particular groups not only harm individual victims but send a powerful message of intolerance and discrimination to all members of the group to which the victim belongs. Hate crimes can and do intimidate and disrupt entire communities and vitiate the civility that is essential to healthy democratic processes. In a democratic society, citizens cannot be required to approve of the beliefs and practices of others, but must never commit criminal acts on account of them. Current law does not adequately recognize the harm to public order and individual safety that hate crimes cause. Therefore, our laws must be strengthened to provide clear recognition of the gravity of hate crimes and the compelling importance of preventing their recurrence. Accordingly, the legislature finds and declares that hate crimes should be prosecuted and punished with appropriate severity." Just because I commit an action that can interrupted via historical association to be motivated by racial hatred does not equate to my motivations being of hatred when there is other plausible motivations behind the action. Are you going to condemn people based on interruptation of the action or the actual motivation behind the action? Because if that is the case, then it's enitrely plausible and reasonable for me to scream "hate crime" when my black co-worker offered me some saltine crackers the other day at lunch.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:27:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Because if that is the case, then it's enitrely plausible and reasonable for me to scream "hate crime" when my black co-worker offered me some saltine crackers the other day at lunch. Are you trying to be pathetic?

slvemike4u -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:31:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Firm I am quite sure that personal responsibilty thing works out fine for you.As you point out no sense in letting historical accuracy muddy things up....your way is much simpler. Try a little more for "coherency" in your post, then I'll likely respond to you. Firm What part are you having a problem with Firm....perhaps I can help you with that,let me know?

TheHeretic -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:31:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Still covered by the First Amendment. I realise this; I wonder whether you would care to comment on this incident, particularly in the light of your recent thread on the hanging of Palin's effigy, and knowing that this is the second time something like this is reported to have occurred with an effigy of Obama in as many universities, and in as many months. This particular incident, Kitten? College campus. Prank. Could be a KKKlown initiation, could be the flip side of the ignorant chick who carved a backwards "B" into her cheek. The idiots who did this, didn't do it in their own yard. They are subject to the rules of the university. They should not face criminal prosecution for what they might have been thinking, though. This only reinforces the other thread, Kitten. If hanging Obama in effigy is a crime, then either Palin must be as well, or we are endorsing institutionalized racism in our laws.

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:32:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Because if that is the case, then it's enitrely plausible and reasonable for me to scream "hate crime" when my black co-worker offered me some saltine crackers the other day at lunch. Are you trying to be pathetic? Are you trying to avoid my argument? And why not? It's either the motivations or the interruptation. If we judge based on interruptation, then it's perfectly fine for me to associate his saltine crackers as having iconic meaning with the racial slur "cracker" and decree it racial hatred despite the perfectly reasonable possibility that he just was offering me food for my soup. You know...in comparision to the perfectly reasonable possibility that this is a political campaign...and the hanging of effigies has a well documented history as political expression.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:32:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Because if that is the case, then it's enitrely plausible and reasonable for me to scream "hate crime" when my black co-worker offered me some saltine crackers the other day at lunch. Are you trying to be pathetic? I found it quite witty. I'm a "cracker" too, yanno. Firm

Owner59 -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:32:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VivaciousSub quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u And yet Marietoo there seem to be alot of posters here assuming no malice of a racial nature was intended.Seems to me "assuming"cuts both ways here,none of us are in a court of law. Not drawing a conclusion in light of the abscence of fact isn't assuming. It's...uh....not drawing a conclusion in the light of the abscence of fact. I love you! [;)] I am seriously disturbed by the number of posters I've seen leaping to these types of conclusions. I'm against the 'hate crime' designation altogether as I believe people should be punished for their actions, not their thoughts. Where does it stop? Remember Minority Report? Edited to add: "hate crime" designation smacks to me of legislating morality. So if someone painted swastikas on a temple or something horrible about Jesus on a church or something horrible about you on your home/car,......that would be merely vandalism?

SailingBum -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:32:36 PM)
Yep it sure sounds like somebody didn't like him. I guess that means whem ppl burn the flag or hang palin or burn the cross or burn pictures of the president of the US or any other nation. we should call them ill informed idiots. Their "statement" is no different than the ppl they are protesting. More like differing styles. I for one as sick and tired of seeing hate crimes "everywhere" Since when is it a crime to voice your opinion??? BadOne

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:34:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Firm I am quite sure that personal responsibilty thing works out fine for you.As you point out no sense in letting historical accuracy muddy things up....your way is much simpler. Try a little more for "coherency" in your post, then I'll likely respond to you. Firm What part are you having a problem with Firm....perhaps I can help you with that,let me know? Other than extruding a sense of condescension, your comments originally quoted make no sense. Firm

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:34:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Because if that is the case, then it's enitrely plausible and reasonable for me to scream "hate crime" when my black co-worker offered me some saltine crackers the other day at lunch. Are you trying to be pathetic? Are you trying to avoid my argument? And why not? It's either the motivations or the interruptation. If we judge based on interruptation, then it's perfectly fine for me to associate his saltine crackers as having iconic meaning with the racial slur "cracker" and decree it racial hatred despite the perfectly reasonable possibility that he just was offering me food for my soup. You know...in comparision to the perfectly reasonable possibility that this is a political campaign...and the hanging of effigies has a well documented history as political expression. No, you created a straw man argument and I chose to ignore it. Your tactics cheapen the discussion.

marieToo -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/29/2008 9:34:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If hanging Obama in effigy is a crime, then either Palin must be as well, or we are endorsing institutionalized racism in our laws. This is my feeling as well. If it's wrong for one, it has to be wrong for all. Otherwise, we still continue to promote inequality.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125