White man charged with 'knockout game' hate crime. Racial hypocrisy?

[classical_hero]

I think it reads better now.

So you think that a white man can be charged for attacking a black man with and extra charge and yet a similar crime where a white man attacks another white man, but he gets less of a sentence just because the victim has a different skin colour. Here I thought justice was meant to be blind, but hate crimes make it more punishment for something different between the victim. Again if you have the motivation for a crime that you can prove, then you can easily get a harsher sentence and no need for unequal punishment.

 

[bugwar]

If a rapist has a very low opinion of women and calls them "slut", "whore", etc., then at least one could say that the crime is driven by prejudice. One might also argue that the rape of a woman by a man always carries an implicit message about the status of women, e.g. that they are property.

Couldn't that thinking apply to all crimes?
In that the criminal gives the implicit message about the status of their victims, e.g. that they are prey.

 

[KmDubya]

The hate element of rape is already represented in the harsher penalty for rape compared to assault and battery. If I hit you with my hands it is assault, if I hit you with my genitalia it is rape. Now this is clearly oversimplified but the basic concept is what I am trying to show.

With hate crimes a man who wants to rape a black women gets a harsher penalty than a man who wants to rape the next women he sees. Both crimes should be punished rigorously but the punishment should be the same for both.

 

[Kyriakos]

nevermind. happy holidays

 

[Flying Pig]

So you think that a white man can be charged for attacking a black man with and extra charge and yet a similar crime where a white man attacks another white man, but he gets less of a sentence just because the victim has a different skin colour. Here I thought justice was meant to be blind, but hate crimes make it more punishment for something different between the victim. Again if you have the motivation for a crime that you can prove, then you can easily get a harsher sentence and no need for unequal punishment.

It's not just because the victim has a different skin colour; if a black man beats up a white man for spilling his drink or looking funny at his wife, he'll get the same punishment as if his victim were black, Chinese or Martian. If six white people walk around an area with baseball bats, chance upon a black man, tell him 'we don't want your kind here' and proceed to beat him up, they're committing a hate crime. If those white men do their walk every night for six months and silently beat up ten people, all of whom are black, they're also committing a hate crime.

 

[Kyriakos]

It's not just because the victim has a different skin colour; if a black man beats up a white man for spilling his drink or looking funny at his wife, he'll get the same punishment as if his victim were black, Chinese or Martian. If six white people walk around an area with baseball bats, chance upon a black man, tell him 'we don't want your kind here' and proceed to beat him up, they're committing a hate crime. If those white men do their walk every night for six months and silently beat up ten people, all of whom are black, they're also committing a hate crime.

What if some people of a 'minority' get media positions so as to keep on talking about how members of another "race" are putting them down and hating them? Is this a hate-crime, a hate-whine, a hate-incomesource, or just plain-old greed and scapegoating?

Cause it is very likely that the above phenomenon plays quite the role in this new nice "KO game".

 

[Flying Pig]

Surely a hate crime has to be a crime in the first place. So complaining about 'white people putting us down' isn't a hate crime, because complaining about 'people putting us down' isn't a crime. However, complaining that John Smith is a racist could be a hate crime, because slandering John Smith is a crime in itself.

 

[Kyriakos]

Surely a hate crime has to be a crime in the first place. So complaining about 'white people putting us down' isn't a hate crime, because complaining about 'people putting us down' isn't a crime. However, complaining that John Smith is a racist could be a hate crime, because slandering John Smith is a crime in itself.

Sure, but i asked how linked it is to the current KO-fatality-'finish him' game which the president of the US linked to hate-crime himself.

In my view if any race or other such distinct large group is continuously (through mouthpieces) arguing that other races/groups are to blame for their own state, it can only lead to a worsening of the original situation anyway. Imagine another racial group in the US making a thing out of openly accusing other analogous groups for its own problems, in similar degree and open manner. I don't think it ever leads to good. It is a fallacy to think it can lead to good as long as the race doing it is supposedly more righteously allowed to do so. We do not live here for 2000 years so as to have a few centuries to give away in a noble attempt to make all others be better-off.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

There have been numerous fake hate crimes happening.

There's an interesting claim. Do you have statistics for that?

 

[Flying Pig]

Sure, but i asked how linked it is to the current KO-fatality-'finish him' game which the president of the US linked to hate-crime himself.

In my view if any race or other such distinct large group is continuously (through mouthpieces) arguing that other races/groups are to blame for their own state, it can only lead to a worsening of the original situation anyway. Imagine another racial group in the US making a thing out of openly accusing other analogous groups for its own problems, in similar degree and open manner. I don't think it ever leads to good. It is a fallacy to think it can lead to good as long as the race doing it is supposedly more righteously allowed to do so. We do not live here for 2000 years so as to have a few centuries to give away in a noble attempt to make all others be better-off.

In this country, 'inciting racial hatred' is a crime. So it's not illegal to claim that whites discriminate against blacks, or blacks discriminate against whites, but it is illegal to do so in a way which is likely to lead to trouble between the two groups. Obviously, that's definitionally a hate crime.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Sure, but i asked how linked it is to the current KO-fatality-'finish him' game which the president of the US linked to hate-crime himself.

You seem to have missed the part where Barrett turned it into a hate crime based on what he stated on the videos in hie cellphone. From the article in the OP:

The FBI said that in a video from Nov. 24, the day of the assault, Mr. Barrett said he wanted “to see if I were to hit a black person, would this be nationally televised?” The video shows him stopping his car, approaching the 79-year-old man and asking, “How’s it going, man?” — before “a loud smack is heard and the victim falls to the ground.”

“Barrett laughs, says ‘knockout,’ and then flees,” the FBI affidavit says.

In other videos, the FBI said, Mr. Barrett uses racial epithets and says blacks “haven’t fully experienced the blessing of evolution.”

Texan charged with hate crime for 'knockout game' hit denied bail

Barrett filmed the attack on his cellphone, prosecutors said. And in other videos on his phone, he used a derogatory word describing black people and suggested he “found the perfect African American suspect” to go after, according to the federal criminal complaint.

And you do understand the difference between the president and the Justice Department? Do you have any proof that the president was personally involved in this matter?

 

[classical_hero]

There's an interesting claim. Do you have statistics for that?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fake+hate+crimes

 

[Flying Pig]

The fact that the first result is subtitled 'various alleged hate crime hoaxes, some of them proven' says a lot, I think. Of course, that's not to discredit the value of anecdotal evidence. I once won an argument with an anecdote, and it later turned out I was right.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fake+hate+crimes

So that's "none" then. Duly noted.

 

[Borachio]

It may not be "none".

A Chesterfield County man convicted of setting fire to his own house on March 15 to stage a fake hate crime was in federal court Friday, charged with lying to the FBI.

Olander Cuthrell, 41, a former minister of music at Gospel Shepherd Baptist Church, appeared briefly before U.S. Magistrate Judge M. Hannah Lauck. Peter S. Duffey, an assistant U.S. attorney, told Lauck that a plea hearing in the case has been set for Monday.

If convicted, Cuthrell faces a maximum of five years in prison, a $250,000 fine and three years of supervised release.

Cuthrell was sentenced to two years in state prison last month in Chesterfield County Circuit Court for setting the fire after spray-painting a racial slur on the sides of his rented home. He told the judge he was overwhelmed by financial problems.

He was charged in federal court Nov. 13 with making a false statement to a special agent of the FBI on March 21 for allegedly reporting that he did not know who set the fire or painted the graffiti.

Cuthrell spray-painted the graffiti on his house in the 7800 block of Little Ridge Court to divert attention from himself as the arsonist and to bolster his claim of being the target of a racially motivated attack.

He then used oil and gasoline to set fire to his porch and car, went back inside his house and got into bed. His oldest son discovered the porch fire and extinguished it with water. The car fire burned out on its own.

The incident prompted Chesterfield police and the FBI to investigate the matter as a possible hate crime.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/25/olander-cuthrell_n_4328484.html

In fact, I'd be very surprised if it were "none". In the same way that women can, I believe, falsely accuse men of rape, why couldn't someone falsely claim to be a victim of hate crime?

 

[Flying Pig]

Your analogy is a good one, since its prevalence must be on a par with that. Just as the number of men falsely accused of rape is dwarfed by the number of rapists never accused, so focusing on 'fake hate crimes' creates the impression that they are anywhere near as frequent as, well, real hate crimes.

 

[JollyRoger]

We should take theft off the books since people can and do falsely claim they are victims of theft.

 

[Borachio]

Your analogy is a good one, since its prevalence must be on a par with that. Just as the number of men falsely accused of rape is dwarfed by the number of rapists never accused, so focusing on 'fake hate crimes' creates the impression that they are anywhere near as frequent as, well, real hate crimes.

I don't disagree.

 

[Berzerker]

There have been blacks charged with hate crimes for such incidents under New York law.

Do you have a source? I was looking but did not see any.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...Upstate-New-York-Arrest-Police-218825421.html

http://news.yahoo.com/knockout-game-suspect-charged-hate-crime-100039465--abc-news-topstories.html

the links dont identify the race of the attackers, but Jews are a protected group, not whites

the 1st link is about 3 kids shooting paintballs at Jewish neighborhood watch volunteers on patrol. Other volunteers followed and cornered their car until cops arrived. Now thats ironic

 

[FredLC]

We should take theft off the books since people can and do falsely claim they are victims of theft.

Yup!

Many of the opinions here seem to have issue with the fact that the special condition of a "hate crime" have to be proven for the penalty to ensue, failing to realize that dealing with intentions is a very common tenet of criminal justice.

It really seems to me that we are debating about the least controversial aspect of that law.

Regards .