Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

By the way, is attacking someone because they have red hair a hate crime? I think so. Victoria Police thought so. 90% of the population don't seem to

Hate crime is a legal designation not a real crime on its own in the sense that "Murder" is.

Hate crime is why if I punched someone because they are fat that the courts would charge me with first degree assault instead of third.

As I said "Hate Crime" is sort of a law made to be taken down.

[Reudh]

Yeah. I got gangbashed by a group of 15 teens when I was 16 because "fuckin' rangas should be killed".

It left me with a very poor view of humanity for a while.

[Neonivek]

Yeah. I got gangbashed by a group of 15 teens when I was 16 because "fuckin' rangas should be killed".

It left me with a very poor view of humanity for a while.

Yes but that isn't why I find the Hate Crime designation weird.

I find it weird in the sense that it is almost like the laws arn't sufficient without it. In what way should gangbashing someone with a large group be any different no matter who they are? Why is the law insufficient in such a matter? Why would creating that designation fix anything?

Logic should be at the forefront of my mind. Not rhetorical emotation.

Then again it could fall under these two groups
1) Laws made to make commiting someone easier
2) Law made to make a certain action harsher
3) Both

Breaking and Entering is a law that is the third. Specifically breaking and entering is a way to make Tresspassing harsher as well as making it easier to commit someone without needing to charge them for any other crime. (Breaking and entering is specifically tresspassing with the intent of commiting another crime.)

Hate crime could have been created simply as a way to easily charge people with terrible crimes without much effort put in to actually commit them with those greater crimes.

Mind you I'd have to check when the "Hate Crime" designation was created. It could have simply been made for the second. For example in Canada killing a police officer automatically upgrades the crime to first degree murder even if it was manslaughter (So if you, due to negligence, kill a police officer. Enjoy your life sentence). That is an example of a law that was passed just for making a crime worse (and indirrectly makes it easier to prove, since proving manslaughter is much easier then proving first degree murder).

---

Now the Gay Panic defense is however on the other side of the spectrum

It is within the same area as the Post-Pardum defense for women who kill their babies or abused women who kill their husbands (Wow, women get a lot of these laws). It was created to make a situation easier to defend.

Except where it differs is that it is a defense that lowers the punishment for a crime, not one that negates it. (Given that the example is that it lowers second degree murder into manslaughter. Which can be significant as Manslaughter doesn't carry a life sentence)

[Reudh]

I know this is a derail, but it's only partial given it falls under "wow australia has some silly laws".

You know what those 15 teens got?

We had to argue our hearts out to convince the cops that it was racially motivated; they don't believe discriminating against redheads because they have red hair is a racist act. Isn't it?

Those 15 teens got:

5 got cautions.
5 got suspensions from school, which they probably relished.
5 got SCOTT FREE.

[Neonivek]

I know this is a derail, but it's only partial given it falls under "wow australia has some silly laws".

You know what those 15 teens got?

We had to argue our hearts out to convince the cops that it was racially motivated; they don't believe discriminating against redheads because they have red hair is a racist act. Isn't it?

Frankly I am more surprised that this wasn't second or first degree assault with the other 14 assailants being commited for Accessory to assault. You wouldn't have to tell me the motivation at all to convince me that there should have been a stricter punishment for something that easily could have been life-threatening. If anything the fact that it was motivated by your red hair should be needless information in a case like this.

Wait a minute... school? Teens? Ohhhh... I see. Yeah believe it or not a Hate Crime designation wouldn't have helped a lot in this case. You were hit by Youth offender justice.

[Reudh]

Aye, the thing that satisfies me is that those scumbags will not rise above dogsbody in life, and I couldn't be happier.

I would've taken vengeance into my own hands then, (depressed, at the time, paranoid too) and attacked them one by one.

They had even attacked my TWELVE YEAR OLD SISTER.

People say Australia isn't racist, but frankly, having experienced it firsthand (and seeing the crap that goes on in Frankston), I reckon it is. And how...

[Jackrabbit]

So I get up this morning and check out The Worst Forum in the World, and look what thread I find!  And you even got to meet LoveInVein, Mr. Black People are Genetically Incapable of Maintaining a Functioning Society and Miscegenation is Destroying the White Race!

On topic, I take the same standpoint on this as I do on the She Was Askin' For It Defense.  If a (gay guy hitting on you/girl provocatively dressed) provokes a (homicidal rage/rapacious frenzy) then, regardless of their role in causing you to act that way, there's something seriously wrong with you and you should be put somewhere secure before your lack of inhibitions causes someone harm.

For those outside The Worst Forum in the World,someone posted a copy-paste of Jackrabbit's OP, and the thread was immediately invaded by LoveInVein, this time arguing that the Gay Panic Defense is okay because killing a guy in response to homosexual advances is not premeditated, and therefore not murder.  I'm pretty sure that's wrong anyway, you could definitely make a case that it was still done with malice.  Like I said above, if The Gay provokes a hysterical panic wherein you kill a guy, you're not fit to participate in mainstream society

Yeah, a friend of mine frequents the forums and asked if she could. I don't know the first thing about twocans though, it's not a good forum? I mean, I can see at least one shithead but I don't really know anything about the place.

Aye, the thing that satisfies me is that those scumbags will not rise above dogsbody in life, and I couldn't be happier.

I would've taken vengeance into my own hands then, (depressed, at the time, paranoid too) and attacked them one by one.

They had even attacked my TWELVE YEAR OLD SISTER.

People say Australia isn't racist, but frankly, having experienced it firsthand (and seeing the crap that goes on in Frankston), I reckon it is. And how...

Who says Australia isn't racist? This country has been, can be and in some ways is incredibly racist. Boat people, the widespread attacks on Indians, the Aboriginals. It's a big reason why I still feel we need to move past a 1950s mindset in a lot of ways.

[ggamer]

God Reudh, that sucks. If I was in your position, I'd beat the shit out of those guys.

Then again, these are australian teens we're talking about. They probably secrete poison and benchpress 350 on principle.

[Reudh]

All fifteen of them? I wanted to, but I was content in knowing they'd have horrible lives.

[Neonivek]

All fifteen of them? I wanted to, but I was content in knowing they'd have horrible lives.

I question if the fact that I am not so spiteful is a flaw.

Certainly not the natural reaction is the one I respond in.

[kaijyuu]

Not being spiteful is certainly not a flaw.

Though this might be a perspective thing. It's one thing to say you wouldn't be vengeful if it happened to you, but who knows what you'd do if it actually did.

[Reudh]

It's one of those things you don't know what you do until it happens to you.

[DrKillPatient]

Oh dear. Even as an (unwilling) Texan, albeit one who lives in a somewhat-more-rational-than-average large population center, I haven't even heard of something like this here. I have actually been in such situations before. I am, as far as I can tell, an aromantic asexual, so whenever I'm asked to do something romantic, I will politely refuse and explain that my reasons are totally impersonal. I (male) have only heard requests from females at this point, but if a male were to do so, I'd treat him in precisely the same manner. I can't even fathom why a homophobic individual would take the route of murder; as far as I see it, someone else has still taken a liking to their appearance, and they should recognize it as such, even if turned off by the gender of the person who is issuing the compliment. (Perhaps, as is occasionally the case here in Texas, a man not constantly expressing his disgust with homosexuality-- or even the thought of seeing another man not fully clothed-- would be seen as homosexual? I would suspect that it's related, at least in part, to social pressure between men.)

[Neonivek]

This oddly enough puts a dark spin on cartoons where people will beat people up just for asking them out.

Then again I never thought it was funny...