Lesbian couple and their children attacked by 15 men.
Prince Of Dorkness
Posts: 3,763
Someone recently brought up and questioned the need for "hate crimes" laws. I wanted to find a good example of a crime motivated by nothing but blind hatred. I didn't have to look very far.
Things to note:
1. This happened in a Church Parking Lot.
2. 15 men threatened to kill two parents and their children... in front of the terrified children.
3. They shot fireworks at them, pulled a knife and a GUN on them.
4. they were called (in front of the children) "pussy licking whores" and dykes.
5. one of the women suffered contusions and fractures.
6. other injured people include the two children and an 80 year-old grandmother.
Now... I'm not saying that gay people should have "special rights." If a family of Christians is attacked in the same manner just for being Christians... that is also a "hate crime."
And you cannot deny that this was motivated by nothing but hate. This family did not provoke the attack, it was not by anyone they knew. This wasn't a random crime, it was targeted directly at them because they were lesbians.
The Kentucky Equality Federation has asked the U.S. Justice Department to look into a report of an attack on a lesbian couple, Misty Turner and Brandy Standifer, and their children which took place on July 4 in Pathfork, a town in southeast Kentucky, at a fireworks display in a church parking lot.
The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that a group of people shot fireworks at the couple and their children, taunted them with anti-gay slurs, and threatened to kill them.
Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/2011/08/kentuc ... z1WALJknyA
Things to note:
1. This happened in a Church Parking Lot.
2. 15 men threatened to kill two parents and their children... in front of the terrified children.
3. They shot fireworks at them, pulled a knife and a GUN on them.
4. they were called (in front of the children) "pussy licking whores" and dykes.
5. one of the women suffered contusions and fractures.
6. other injured people include the two children and an 80 year-old grandmother.
Now... I'm not saying that gay people should have "special rights." If a family of Christians is attacked in the same manner just for being Christians... that is also a "hate crime."
And you cannot deny that this was motivated by nothing but hate. This family did not provoke the attack, it was not by anyone they knew. This wasn't a random crime, it was targeted directly at them because they were lesbians.
The Kentucky Equality Federation has asked the U.S. Justice Department to look into a report of an attack on a lesbian couple, Misty Turner and Brandy Standifer, and their children which took place on July 4 in Pathfork, a town in southeast Kentucky, at a fireworks display in a church parking lot.
The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that a group of people shot fireworks at the couple and their children, taunted them with anti-gay slurs, and threatened to kill them.
Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/2011/08/kentuc ... z1WALJknyA
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
There should not be special crimes for select groups of people.
Why not?
If I bomb a Mormon church because it's a Mormon church... shouldn't that weigh more than if I bomb a tool shed in the back yard of someone I know and dislike?
"law enforcement agencies that participate in the national hate crime program collect details about an offender’s bias motivation associated with the following offense types: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation, robbery, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, and destruction/damage/vandalism of property."
and maybe it is ... I don't know... to me rape is hate
I think that might be the same for any crime against me ... any crime is horrible
but might not be identified a hate crime cause the crime committed against me
didn't fit the definition cause I'm not in the group :?
horrible acts done to anyone is horrible we would all be the same victim
in the end... we would all feel the same
but I guess the crime would never have been committed if there was no hate
this why the laws exist.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Alpine Valley Resort is etched in my brain!!!
if you demonstrate that you are the person who would commit a crime like that for no apparent reason other than wanting to target a minority... I kinda want you out of society for a bit longer.
It's still arson, regardless of what was burned. I don't think crimes should be defined on motivation. A crime is a crime. Crimes can be defined on intent, as I wanted to burn that to the ground, or someone intended on killing someone.
I also don't believe a crime is committed if there is no victim, but that's another issue.
Agreed... trying to determine the reason behind the intent is pointless.
Ok then.
Should burning a cross on a black person's lawn be the same as burning your own garbage in the street?
(don't give me the "trying to determine the reason behind the intent" in this story. The intent was pretty freaking obvious. :roll: )
No, because one person started a fire on a street and another in someones yard.
There should be no law mandating a higher sentence for burning a cross on a black persons lawn opposed to burning a circle on a white persons lawn.
A judge(or jury, depending on jurisdiction) can impose harsher sentences for crimes they feel are more horrific.
There already is a crime called harassment, not to mention trespassing.
Burning a cross on a black family's front yard is not "harassment" and it's not "trespassing."
It goes MUCH deeper than that. And if you can't see that, you really never have experienced discrimination.
so... you support "hate crimes" longer sentences so long as it's not called that and we just leave it up to the judge or jury?
Um... ok. That works. :?:
Correct, though I don't care what you call it.
I oppose any mandatory minimum legislation. The judge and jury actually sat through the proceeding, the legislature didn't. I have zero problem with a jury imposing a march harsher penalty on a person for a crime they deem to be horrific and despicable. I have a serious, legal, problem with the federal government telling states how to prosecute criminals. I have a moral objection to the states legislating that, but I do respect their right to do so.
Ok but... that's what it is.
See... like I said before, the "hate crimes" part goes to motive... it's so the prosecutors can bring that up as a motive... otherwise.. the judge and jury don't hear that evidence. That's the whole point.
So if you burn a guys house down for kicks. Your crime is arson. But if you burn a guys house down because he is gay - the victim suffers a psychological trauma as well as having his house burnt down.
That's the simplistic version. As a victim of a hate crime - you will carry that scar and fear of another attack as long as they are part of the community that was targeted.
Good points. This is also why educating kids- to what ever degree possible- away from hate is important. This kind of thinking is learned at an early age. Also, psychological trauma incurred at an early age-- everything from what these kids went through to bullying at school-- sticks around for a long time if not all of one's life. I still gringe when I think about the guy who sat behind me in my Spanish Language class who repeatedly pounded my back with his fist and wrote "fuck you" on my coat and it was merely because I was a geek, not because I was black or brown or gay or Muslim or what ever. And hate crimes suck far worse than that.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Consider a murder charge. We have 1st, 2nd degree murder and manslaughter. The only thing which separates the three acts is intent. If motive was irrelevant there would be no need for the three distinct charges. When you consider that justice is also supposed to be restorative, you need to consider the motivation of the offender. I feel that a pure and irrational hatred of your fellow human beings is not something that should be casually discarded.
or we could just give them a hug and tell them we'll spread the love and let them go. whichever.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
This really bothers me:
A lawyer named Otis Doan is representing the other parties.. while testifying he questioned me about my lifestyle, he was very discrimating and ask me "do you promote this kind of life?" and made the comment "your a lesbian and live in Harlan county"
like, really? REALLY? I know you're a lawyer and that's your "job", but REALLY?
That reminds me of the argument that if you're dressed slutty you suddenly deserved to be raped... What if you're a lesbian you deserve to be beaten up and fireworks shot at your kids?
"With our thoughts we make the world"
if we have a certain punishment because one group was targeted
then it should be just as tough on a perp who's victim did not fit into any particular group
they are victimizing a person any way you look at it
have the same punishment ... the harsher punishment when it it violent crime
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
this ^^