(January 5, 2017 at 10:43 am)Napoléon Wrote:

(January 5, 2017 at 10:24 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: FBI's definition (which is more or less identical to most definitions) - “a criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity.”

And yeah, it results in tougher sentencing.  The issue is the laws are very unevenly enforced, and sometimes it can be very ambiguous whether or not a crime is a hate crime.  On the other hand, in some situations it's explicitly clear that a crime fits the definition of a hate crime (as in the case in the OP), but it's not classified as such for one reason or another.

I don't think there's any ambiguity here, by any definition this is a hate crime. It's whether some dickhead judge decides to enforce the law.

In terms of whether we really need hate crime laws, maybe there's an explanation somewhere when it was first conceived to have them. It's not an essential component of prosecuted cunts like this but it does help denote the severity of their actions, beyond something that is already pretty heinous. The distinction between a crime fuelled by hate and otherwise, is usually a fairly important one IMO.

Fair enough - if they were enforced equally and consistently I'd be far more amenable to them (hate crime laws).  It's just that they're really not.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:45 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Fair enough - if they were enforced equally and consistently I'd be far more amenable to them (hate crime laws).  It's just that they're really not.

Damn right they're not.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:44 am)Napoléon Wrote:

(January 5, 2017 at 10:39 am)Orochi Wrote: Was there some kind of point to this post?

What a typical asshole response. It has 77 thousand upvotes on reddit but you twats like to say it's not newsworthy.

I never said it wasn't news worthy I said it's not a controversy that it's a hate crime  so why are we painting it as one ? .Did you read the first sentence of my post or did you just jump on the second

(January 5, 2017 at 10:39 am)Orochi Wrote: Of course this is a hate crime why is this even controversy seriously

Because hate crimes against whites are very rarely classified as such.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:39 am)Orochi Wrote: Was there some kind of point to this post?

To discuss it?

It's a forum and you're in the 'News & Current Affairs' section.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:49 am)Bella Morte Wrote:

(January 5, 2017 at 10:39 am)Orochi Wrote: Of course this is a hate crime why is this even controversy seriously

Because hate crimes against whites are very rarely classified as such.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:39 am)Orochi Wrote: Was there some kind of point to this post?

To discuss it?

It's a forum and you're in the 'News & Current Affairs' section.

1.weather they are or not it's classified as such is irrelevant it is a hate crime

2. there is nothing to discuss this is a hate crime plain and simple

3.i have no objection to it being here I find it silly it's needs to spoken off as if there doubt on the matter

(January 5, 2017 at 10:52 am)Orochi Wrote:

(January 5, 2017 at 10:49 am)Bella Morte Wrote: Because hate crimes against whites are very rarely classified as such.


To discuss it?

It's a forum and you're in the 'News & Current Affairs' section.

1.weather they are or not it's classified as such is irrelevant it is a hate crime

2. there is nothing to discuss this is a hate crime plain and simple

3.i have no objection to it being here I find it silly it's needs to spoken off as if there doubt on the matter

Bolded mine.  

That's...actually kind of the point of the conversation.  It really does matter whether or not this is classified as a hate crime both because it has real consequences for the assailants, and because the current use of hate crime laws more or less de facto exclude crimes against white people, which means there's a section of law that is being enforced inconsistently and unevenly - which is a good discussion topic.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:18 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote: I refer you to Boru's thread about whether motivation is relevant to morality or not.

Did I make one of those? Wow. I must be smart as fuck.

Boru

(January 5, 2017 at 10:52 am)Orochi Wrote: 1.weather they are or not it's classified as such is irrelevant it is a hate crime

It's very relevant because if it was a group of white men torturing and humiliating a black man while yelling 'fuck obama and fuck black people', it would almost instantly be classed as a hate crime in court. Why is this not a case for violence against whites?

(January 5, 2017 at 10:52 am)Orochi Wrote: 2. there is nothing to discuss this is a hate crime plain and simple

Oh it's most definitely a hate crime and there is a lot to discuss.

(January 5, 2017 at 10:52 am)Orochi Wrote: 1.weather they are or not it's classified as such is irrelevant it is a hate crime

2. there is nothing to discuss this is a hate crime plain and simple

3.i have no objection to it being here I find it silly it's needs to spoken off as if there doubt on the matter

You don't get it.

No one is acting as if this isn't a hate crime nor is anyone saying there's controversy that it's considered one.

What is in doubt is whether these scum bags will be prosecuted for a hate crime. There's a difference.


Also, the overall reaction is different. If this had happened to a disabled black guy by a bunch of white guys chanting "fuck blacks, fuck Obama", there'd literally be riots on the streets, people all over would be calling for justice. This forum would be on it like a tramp on hot chips.

You can't help but notice the differing response.

It's not an isolated incidence either. Just a couple of months ago we had a case where a gang of morons beat up a girl and televised it on Facebook. There are two things to say on the matter. One, at least people like that make it easy to prove grievous bodily harm in court. The other one the hypocrisy of Facebook. Post a nude pic and it's taken down within seconds. Post your favorite torture footage and it stays there.

I will stop there, since I admit to hate Facebook with a vengeance. So all I could add would be entirely biased.