Print

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

[smjjames]

Whole situation is beyond fucked. And now the police are saying they don't think it's racially motivated.

Utter bullshit. If four whites kidnapped and tortured a black kid while shouting "fuck Obama" and "fuck blacks" there would be fucking riots.

Exactly. Just because blacks are, well, blacks, doesn't mean that they are incapable of hate crimes. I know and get that African Americans have been the target of hate crimes WAY more than it goes in the other direction, but hate crime does not discriminate who is doing the hating, black*, white*, grey*, rainbow*, or every wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum*.

Though really, the whole idea is the intent here, but hate crime or not, why the bleep would those four think that it's okay to do that, to anybody?

*Though if one wants to be pedantic, white is the reflection/refraction of light, black is the absorption or lack of light. While grey is somewhere in the middle. And rainbow is just the part of the spectrum that we are able to see with the naked eye.

[Pwnzerfaust]

Whole situation is beyond fucked. And now the police are saying they don't think it's racially motivated.

Utter bullshit. If four whites kidnapped and tortured a black kid while shouting "fuck Obama" and "fuck blacks" there would be fucking riots.

Source for police statement? I don't want to believe

http://www.wtae.com/article/attack-of-man-with-special-needs-live-streamed-4-suspects-arrested/8564692

[Neonivek]

I think Hate Crimes have a legal definition that specifically forbades (wow, a fake word) Blacks from actually committing them on white people.

*Checks definition*

Nope... accordingly they can fully be charged with hate crime by racially targeting white people. I cannot find anything in the legal definition.

Whole situation is beyond fucked. And now the police are saying they don't think it's racially motivated.

Utter bullshit. If four whites kidnapped and tortured a black kid while shouting "fuck Obama" and "fuck blacks" there would be fucking riots.

let's wait before judging police statements. if it waere race, it'd be hate crime. if the motive is abusing a disabled person, it's aggravated kidnapping. the difference goes from 10 to 30 years, so there's that.

Hate Crime is in addition to other crimes (it isn't a similar lesser crime to my knowledge). So in theory the person could be in jail for 40 years.

[Pwnzerfaust]

I think Hate Crimes have a legal definition that specifically forbades (wow, a fake word) Blacks from actually committing them on white people.

*Checks definition*

Nope... accordingly they can fully be charged with hate crime by racially targeting white people. I cannot find anything in the legal definition.

Fortunately, the bullshit redefinition of racism by social justice types hasn't made headway into law yet.

[Neonivek]

Also specifically targeting a disabled person?

Also a Hate Crime.

Though even if it were true it would be hard to prove in court. Since it could just as easily be argued that the reason they targeted a disabled person is because they were an easier target.

[TempAcc]

Not to mention the guy got tortured. There's a video bit of them making him drink toilet water.

[smjjames]

The incident is horrible all around, no ifs ands or buts about it, but whether it's legally a hate crime (which is in addition to the assault charges) is up to the lawyers.

In the court of public opinion though, it looks very much like a hate crime.

Still, the whole thing extremely begs the question of "WHY!?!? WHY WOULD YOU DO DIS?!?!" and to top it all off, the guy is apparently an accquantiance (don't know the extent of the relationship) of one of those four people rather than a random person off the street.

[miauw62]

i wonder where all these mysterious SJWs saying that this is perfectly acceptable are, because you people seem to be pretty angry with them!

oh wait, they dont exist.

[origamiscienceguy]

Fun fact, Obama has sorted more land than the state of Texas in his 8 years (including offshore areas)

[Neonivek]

i wonder where all these mysterious SJWs saying that this is perfectly acceptable are, because you people seem to be pretty angry with them!

oh wait, they dont exist.

No it is specifically that some groups (which I won't name to bog down this conversation) define racism as something that takes a group's power away and about power relationships.

As such it is impossible to be racist to a white person because they are on top, you cannot reasonably weaken them as a whole.

No one is bashing people who believe that counter racism is acceptable... We as a society decided those groups aren't worth our time (Dang Purple Pumas!)

[Rolan7]

i wonder where all these mysterious SJWs saying that this is perfectly acceptable are, because you people seem to be pretty angry with them!

oh wait, they dont exist.

Well, there probably are a few somewhere...  But that really doesn't matter, some people will say the craziest things to stand out

What *is* real is that many people are urging us to remember how hard blacks have had it.  Which is true and important, but not really appropriate in *this context*.  It's like if some rednecks beat up an immigrant and someone chimed in "Let us just keep in mind, friends, that there's an unemployment problem".

What we should keep in mind is that racially motivated violence is abhorrent in all directions, and there is no excusing it.  There are underlying reasons like poverty and culturally isolation that we can try to address.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

This is awful, I agree. The question is whether it is racism. And that depends on the definition. This is just a question of "this word can be used in subtly different ways," that's all. Prejudice against white people on the part of PoC, and violence based on that prejudice - nobody's denying that this exists, that it is wrong, that the criminals should be punished. It's just that some people don't define that as "racism".

[itisnotlogical]

No it is specifically that some groups (which I won't name to bog down this conversation)
-snip-
(Dang Purple Pumas!)

You could have just said Black Panthers instead of saying you weren't going to mention them, then making a reference to them anyway. It's okay to talk about them.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

Indeed - the power to derail lies not in the words, but in the ideas they represent.

Philosophical derails are okay, because reasons.

[itisnotlogical]

If you can decide that words mean anything (in a short amount of time, i.e. before the accepted dictionary definition changes), and that is admissible in debate (especially in a court of law), then there is no point of having language at all.