RE: Was This A Hate Crime?

RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

JVoV -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 2:05:32 PM)
A couple of links... http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1992/1992_92_515 http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/hate-crime-laws-protection.html As I said, it is up to the prosecutor & the judge.

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 2:20:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV Hate crimes are determined by the motivation behind targeting the victim. And can unfortunately only apply if the victim is a defined & protected class, regardless of what the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment says. Unless you have a prosecutor with the balls to actually do it. In this case, extortion does seem to be the primary motive. Murder was likely to get rid of the witnesses. What was done to the boy deserves a special place in Hell, but I doubt a proper sentence could ever be given by our courts. "A protected class"? Why arent we all a protected class, is the point. Why are the laws racist In regard to the case I linked to in my OP, I am sure that the extortion could have been accomplished without resorting to actual physical torture. Why would the physical act be required when the mere threat would surely suffice The perps were in complete control, over many hours That the actual torture of the child occurred in front of his family suggests a motive of hate and disparagement, of viewing the victims as subhumans fully deserving of the treatment they received An especially heinous murder, burning someone alive, a child... Wouldnt that alone be grounds for suspecting that racial hatred was a motivation? Except and unless the victims were white, and the offender was black of course

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 2:41:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy When asked to make the case, you oddly get offended and refuse to do it. When asked to explain your obsession with me you break down and cry

JVoV -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 2:54:36 PM)
Sanity, I'm not sure what you're arguing with me. The laws to make this a hate-crime, if it can be proven that the victims were targeted because of race, are already on the books. It will be up to the prosecution to determine if those charges will be brought. I think adding hate crime charges may confuse the jury, putting a guilty verdict at risk.

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 3:46:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 George Herbert Bush......... signed into law the Hate Crime Statistics Act. So GWB and his Government must have thought hate crimes existed, whatever else he certainly isnt left wing. A question for you, and not meant maliciously. If you havent spent a lot of time researching the issue, why do you argue on points brought up by those on the left, and in my case, on the right ? Very few people in Europe, left or right (Obviously not the far right) have any issue with hate crime laws. Apparently, combined with duplicitous implementation, few people in Europe, left or right, minded putting Jews in gas chambers either. Hey shithead...... you said you would agree with me if I gave you proof, yet you ended up invoking the holocaust. I thought you had a little class but alas you are just an ignorant lying arsehole.

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 3:48:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV Sanity, I'm not sure what you're arguing with me. The laws to make this a hate-crime, if it can be proven that the victims were targeted because of race, are already on the books. It will be up to the prosecution to determine if those charges will be brought. I think adding hate crime charges may confuse the jury, putting a guilty verdict at risk. Not necessarily arguing with you, more stating my pov about the whole situation

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 3:51:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD This is a great example of how language matters. If they (correctly) called them thought crimes nobody would support them. But call the same thing a hate crime and, well who wants to come out in favor of hate. And you wonder why some think you are stupid. Your post only confirms the notion. Wrongly you assume a hateful thought isnt hateful.

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:00:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Oh shoot! PS I think I need a better link. This one didn't work. Add stupid to my description of you.

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:00:42 PM)
You call Hunter "shithead"... quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Apparently, combined with duplicitous implementation, few people in Europe, left or right, minded putting Jews in gas chambers either. Hey shithead...... you said you would agree with me if I gave you proof, yet you ended up invoking the holocaust. I thought you had a little class but alas you are just an ignorant lying arsehole. Then you call Bama "stupid" quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD This is a great example of how language matters. If they (correctly) called them thought crimes nobody would support them. But call the same thing a hate crime and, well who wants to come out in favor of hate. And you wonder why some think you are stupid. Your post only confirms the notion. Wrongly you assume a hateful thought isnt hateful. And you call yourself "polite"? I hate to be the one to break it to you... But youve got everything totally backwards

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:04:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity You call Hunter "shithead"... quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Apparently, combined with duplicitous implementation, few people in Europe, left or right, minded putting Jews in gas chambers either. Hey shithead...... you said you would agree with me if I gave you proof, yet you ended up invoking the holocaust. I thought you had a little class but alas you are just an ignorant lying arsehole. Then you call Bama "stupid" quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD This is a great example of how language matters. If they (correctly) called them thought crimes nobody would support them. But call the same thing a hate crime and, well who wants to come out in favor of hate. And you wonder why some think you are stupid. Your post only confirms the notion. Wrongly you assume a hateful thought isnt hateful. And you call yourself "polite"? I hate to be the one to break it to you... But youve got everything totally backwards You can guess what I call you though. And while it isnt polite, it is apt.

JVoV -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:12:34 PM)
From DC's hate crimes faq. http://mpdc.dc.gov/page/hate-crimes-faqs In order to successfully prosecute a hate crime, the government must establish beyond a reasonable doubt both that the defendant committed the crime, and that he or she was motivated by prejudice because of an actual or perceived difference. It is not sufficient to merely prove that the defendant belonged to a different group than the victim; the criminal act had to have been motivated by the prejudice. If a person is found guilty of a hate crime, the court may fine the offender up to 1½ times the maximum fine and imprison him or her for up to 1½ times the maximum term authorized for the underlying crime. D.C. Official Code § 22-3703.

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:19:24 PM)
I dont get your point. It seems obvious to me all prosecutions for hate crime need to establish intent. That is as true here in the UK as it is in the US.

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:22:59 PM)
Thank you for posting that JVoV, you are proving yourself a very respectable sort though I am sure we disagree on many issues I suppose that to prove a hate crime in this case he would have to admit that race was a motivation, or there would have to be surveillance recordings as evidence, or he sent some incriminating texts or other messages. Perhaps witness testimony could do it if substantiated through other means Or if blog or a journal were found...

HunterCA -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:26:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 George Herbert Bush......... signed into law the Hate Crime Statistics Act. So GWB and his Government must have thought hate crimes existed, whatever else he certainly isnt left wing. A question for you, and not meant maliciously. If you havent spent a lot of time researching the issue, why do you argue on points brought up by those on the left, and in my case, on the right ? Very few people in Europe, left or right (Obviously not the far right) have any issue with hate crime laws. Apparently, combined with duplicitous implementation, few people in Europe, left or right, minded putting Jews in gas chambers either. Hey shithead...... you said you would agree with me if I gave you proof, yet you ended up invoking the holocaust. I thought you had a little class but alas you are just an ignorant lying arsehole. Quit being cranky. I'm still waiting for proof. What you sent wasn't related to the discussion.

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:30:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I dont get your point. It seems obvious to me all prosecutions for hate crime need to establish intent. That is as true here in the UK as it is in the US. You dont get it because he is being polite, helpful and is making a real substantive contribution to the thread topic. We havent as yet seen anything posted regarding the requirements to prosecute in D.C. Observing nontrollish behavior of that sort will probably always mystify people such as yourself

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:36:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Quit being cranky. I'm still waiting for proof. What you sent wasn't related to the discussion. .

HunterCA -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:39:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 The tired bullshit that this is all somehow just something the left have introduced, isnt borne out by the facts, not even in America. Okay, link me PS. Let's discuss it. If you're right I'll agree. It's not something I've spent a lot of research upon. Just what I've read in the news. Here was the deal. In response to it you said GW (how I personally don't consider conservative. But I won't argue that point.) signed a law that allowed hate crimes to be tracked. Maybe he signed that law because he wanted the statistics to prove there is no such thing. That's just as valid an arguement as yours. So, you show me where some conservative group actually pushed hate crime legislation or where part of defining a thought control law.

Politesub53 -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:40:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I dont get your point. It seems obvious to me all prosecutions for hate crime need to establish intent. That is as true here in the UK as it is in the US. You dont get it because he is being polite, helpful and is making a real substantive contribution to the thread topic. We havent as yet seen anything posted regarding the requirements to prosecute in D.C. Observing nontrollish behavior of that sort will probably always mystify people such as yourself None so blind as those that cannot see. It must hurt you to think racism, homophobia etc is being seen for the hate that it is.

HunterCA -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:45:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 The tired bullshit that this is all somehow just something the left have introduced, isnt borne out by the facts, not even in America. This is what you said. Show me the facts you say have been borne out both in the UK and the U.S. Surly since you're researched up on the facts you can provide me a link or two where any conservative group was actively involved in pushing thought control laws.

Sanity -> RE: Was This A Hate Crime? (5/26/2015 4:49:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I dont get your point. It seems obvious to me all prosecutions for hate crime need to establish intent. That is as true here in the UK as it is in the US. You dont get it because he is being polite, helpful and is making a real substantive contribution to the thread topic. We havent as yet seen anything posted regarding the requirements to prosecute in D.C. Observing nontrollish behavior of that sort will probably always mystify people such as yourself None so blind as those that cannot see. It must hurt you to think racism, homophobia etc is being seen for the hate that it is. Thats pure straw man fallacy, its really very immature and it only serves to undermine the discussion

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875