So this is not a hate crime?

jeffbr · January 2017

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).

The media should concern itself with facts, not try to be careful about how they obfuscate or frame things. Are you a proponent of hate crime statutes as they relate to race? If not, then I get that, since I tend to agree with Hedo and think all crimes of violence have a seed of hate. But if you are a proponent, but can't use race as a factor since it doesn't exist, then how do you reconcile that?

Indifference71 · January 2017

Absolutely fucking disgusting. Hopefully these 4 animals never walk the streets again.

mcgruff10 · January 2017

KC138045 said:

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).
Well whenever its a white on black crime they are sure to make the races known immediately. Then comes Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, BLM, and riot an looting in the streets.

100% agree. That shit sells more advertisement time.

Indifference71 · January 2017

mcgruff10 said:

KC138045 said:

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).
Well whenever its a white on black crime they are sure to make the races known immediately. Then comes Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, BLM, and riot an looting in the streets.
100% agree. That shit sells more advertisement time.

Yep. Sensationalism at its finest.

mcgruff10 · January 2017

On a side note, what the hell is going on in Chicago? It seems like a war zone.

PJ_Soul · January 2017

Yeah, the article says that charges are still pending and that charging it as a hate crime is being considered, so I'm not sure where the gall is coming from, OP. If they choose not to try it as a hate crime, that would be the time to get offended, because yeah, it probably should be.

oftenreading · January 2017

jeffbr said:

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).
The media should concern itself with facts, not try to be careful about how they obfuscate or frame things. Are you a proponent of hate crime statutes as they relate to race? If not, then I get that, since I tend to agree with Hedo and think all crimes of violence have a seed of hate. But if you are a proponent, but can't use race as a factor since it doesn't exist, then how do you reconcile that?

Good question (your last point) but more than I can reply to on my phone in the time I have at work, so more later. Right now I'll just say that my point was that I can understand why the media is cautious about identifying people by race. It's a minefield for them.

HughFreakingDillon · January 2017

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).

absolutely. I think, unless being used to describe a criminal at large, saying the races of the accused is useless. all it does is enrage the masses, confirm their own biases. to me it's prejudicial, no different than saying "5 youths wearing Metallica t shirts rob liquor store". there is no reason to bring it up, never was. but you can't put that cat back in the bag.

jeffbr · January 2017

oftenreading said:

jeffbr said:

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).
The media should concern itself with facts, not try to be careful about how they obfuscate or frame things. Are you a proponent of hate crime statutes as they relate to race? If not, then I get that, since I tend to agree with Hedo and think all crimes of violence have a seed of hate. But if you are a proponent, but can't use race as a factor since it doesn't exist, then how do you reconcile that?
Good question (your last point) but more than I can reply to on my phone in the time I have at work, so more later. Right now I'll just say that my point was that I can understand why the media is cautious about identifying people by race. It's a minefield for them.

Fair enough. I'm still not completely on board with the notion of hate crimes (the underlying crime is the important part for me), but if they are statute, then I believe they should be applied in an impartial manner. It looks like it is going to be applied in this case, so for the sake of consistency, I'm glad about that.

KC138045 · January 2017

PJ_Soul said:
Yeah, the article says that charges are still pending and that charging it as a hate crime is being considered, so I'm not sure where the gall is coming from, OP. If they choose not to try it as a hate crime, that would be the time to get offended, because yeah, it probably should be.

In my original post I was referring to what the Police Chief said in the video about not being able to call it a hate crime. They ended up charging all four with kidnapping and a hate crime.

HughFreakingDillon · January 2017

yes, all crimes have a basis of hate or anger in them. but the purpose of a hate crime charge is because the crime was perpetrated on someone because of their appearance, race, ethnicity, belief system, etc. basically I'm going to beat the fuck out of you for no reason at all. I'm not mad at you as a person, I don't want your wallet, I just hate the colour of your skin or the fact you just walked out of a mosque or you are are a trump supporter.

rssesq · January 2017

only a libtard social justice warrior would say that isn't a hate crime. Do you think it would have taken that long and it was j-boy and not w-boy the perps were shouting?
Rahm and the media would have made sure the appropriate charges were leveled in a TIMELY manner.

tbergs · January 2017

Indifference71 said:
Absolutely fucking disgusting. Hopefully these 4 animals never walk the streets again.

Highly unlikely. Even if they try them as adults under hate crime statutes, realistically at the most severe end they'd be free and clear by their mid - late twenties. I doubt they are tried as adults though.

KC138045 · January 2017

tbergs said:

Indifference71 said:
Absolutely fucking disgusting. Hopefully these 4 animals never walk the streets again.
Highly unlikely. Even if they try them as adults under hate crime statutes, realistically at the most severe end they'd be free and clear by their mid - late twenties. I doubt they are tried as adults though.

3 are 18 and 1 is 24. Why wouldn't they be tried as adults?

tbergs · January 2017

oftenreading said:

jeffbr said:

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).
The media should concern itself with facts, not try to be careful about how they obfuscate or frame things. Are you a proponent of hate crime statutes as they relate to race? If not, then I get that, since I tend to agree with Hedo and think all crimes of violence have a seed of hate. But if you are a proponent, but can't use race as a factor since it doesn't exist, then how do you reconcile that?
Good question (your last point) but more than I can reply to on my phone in the time I have at work, so more later. Right now I'll just say that my point was that I can understand why the media is cautious about identifying people by race. It's a minefield for them.

KC138045 said:

tbergs said:

Indifference71 said:
Absolutely fucking disgusting. Hopefully these 4 animals never walk the streets again.
Highly unlikely. Even if they try them as adults under hate crime statutes, realistically at the most severe end they'd be free and clear by their mid - late twenties. I doubt they are tried as adults though.
3 are 18 and 1 is 24. Why wouldn't they be tried as adults?

Ok. I didn't catch their ages. Saw the teens headline so I wasn't sure. Fair enough, all adults.

oftenreading · January 2017

rssesq said:
only a libtard social justice warrior would say that isn't a hate crime. Do you think it would have taken that long and it was j-boy and not w-boy the perps were shouting?
Rahm and the media would have made sure the appropriate charges were leveled in a TIMELY manner.

I don't even know what you're implying in your first paragraph, nor do I want to think too hard about it.

For your second, less than 24 hours isn't timely enough for you?

KC138045 · January 2017

tbergs said:

oftenreading said:

jeffbr said:

oftenreading said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

KC138045 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:
They have charged the four with a hate crime

https://washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/05/4-in-custody-after-group-beats-disabled-man-on-facebook-live-while-shouting-anti-trump-profanities-chicago-police-say/
"Police declined to give the race of the attackers or the victim. In the video and mugshots released by authorities Thursday, the attackers appear black; the victim in the video appears to be white."

Seriously!?! Just saw they were Black and the victim is White.
agreed. hiding this shit that we all know will come out anyway is dangerous. just fucking put it out there. "these are the facts of the case".
Well, the media has to be careful with how they identify individuals' race and other such characteristics. The court can sort that part out.

And HFD, I believe you were among those arguing that race is not based on any scientifically provable differences in people (which is agree with, but just pointing that out).
The media should concern itself with facts, not try to be careful about how they obfuscate or frame things. Are you a proponent of hate crime statutes as they relate to race? If not, then I get that, since I tend to agree with Hedo and think all crimes of violence have a seed of hate. But if you are a proponent, but can't use race as a factor since it doesn't exist, then how do you reconcile that?
Good question (your last point) but more than I can reply to on my phone in the time I have at work, so more later. Right now I'll just say that my point was that I can understand why the media is cautious about identifying people by race. It's a minefield for them.

KC138045 said:

tbergs said:

Indifference71 said:
Absolutely fucking disgusting. Hopefully these 4 animals never walk the streets again.
Highly unlikely. Even if they try them as adults under hate crime statutes, realistically at the most severe end they'd be free and clear by their mid - late twenties. I doubt they are tried as adults though.
3 are 18 and 1 is 24. Why wouldn't they be tried as adults?
Ok. I didn't catch their ages. Saw the teens headline so I wasn't sure. Fair enough, all adults.

Yeah I thought it was strange to call them teens as well.

rssesq · January 2017

they are 24 years old and the kidnapping (an X-Felony) charge carries a 30 year sentence alone. Throw them animals away.
Like nino brown says, "see ya, and wouldn't wanna be ya"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrM4g6Eo-6M

jeffbr · January 2017

HughFreakingDillon said:
yes, all crimes have a basis of hate or anger in them. but the purpose of a hate crime charge is because the crime was perpetrated on someone because of their appearance, race, ethnicity, belief system, etc. basically I'm going to beat the fuck out of you for no reason at all. I'm not mad at you as a person, I don't want your wallet, I just hate the colour of your skin or the fact you just walked out of a mosque or you are are a trump supporter.

Oh, definitely. I understand the reason that hate crime laws exist, and am definitely not supporting any sort of bigotry, hatred, racism, homophobia or other small-minded maladies. But at least in this country, people are allowed to be idiots, bigots, homophobes, and racists. Those things are not illegal. But they suddenly are the basis for extra-legal prosecution when an actual crime is committed. I'm just saying that I think it should be sufficient to punish these idiots for the crimes they have actually committed without needing to get into what they might have thought, or how they might have felt. I'm not passionately opposed to the notion, but it has always made me a little uncomfortable to punish someone a little extra for having legal thoughts or beliefs no matter how idiotic they may be.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · January 2017

jeffbr said:

HughFreakingDillon said:
yes, all crimes have a basis of hate or anger in them. but the purpose of a hate crime charge is because the crime was perpetrated on someone because of their appearance, race, ethnicity, belief system, etc. basically I'm going to beat the fuck out of you for no reason at all. I'm not mad at you as a person, I don't want your wallet, I just hate the colour of your skin or the fact you just walked out of a mosque or you are are a trump supporter.
Oh, definitely. I understand the reason that hate crime laws exist, and am definitely not supporting any sort of bigotry, hatred, racism, homophobia or other small-minded maladies. But at least in this country, people are allowed to be idiots, bigots, homophobes, and racists. Those things are not illegal. But they suddenly are the basis for extra-legal prosecution when an actual crime is committed. I'm just saying that I think it should be sufficient to punish these idiots for the crimes they have actually committed without needing to get into what they might have thought, or how they might have felt. I'm not passionately opposed to the notion, but it has always made me a little uncomfortable to punish someone a little extra for having legal thoughts or beliefs no matter how idiotic they may be.

From the victim's perspective it makes no difference.

I think it is odd to evaluate someone's motive before deciding how to proceed against them.

So this is not a hate crime?

Comments

Categories