One of the 3 Oklahoma thrill killers hates white people. How is this not a hate crime?

[Anonymous]

takoma wrote:The legal concept of a hate crime was created to protect oppressed minorities. This murder may well have stemmed from racial hatred, but there is an imbalance between the status of whites in America and the status of blacks. It would be a terrible crime if a group of black men lynched a white man, but as a matter of historic fact, that is not something that has happened repeatedly, while white lynchings of blacks were once common in parts of the country.

I have no problem with these kids being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But it seems to me that bringing up hate crimes does lttle more than say that the hundreds of lynchings and other crimes against blacks over the years (or beatings and killings of gays) are somehow less horrible because blacks kill whites also.

All killings are bad, but certain types are a much greater problem in our society. Not that one killing is a greater sin than another, just that certain types are a quantitatively greater problem and merit specific legal remedies.

Realistically, if the application of hate crime laws was as narrow as you suggest, they would be declared unconstitutuional in short order. While they may have been enacted for the reasons you identify, once they are on the books they need to be applied in an even-handed manner. It is not clear this particular murder should be so prosecuted, but it is clear that a black youth was the ringleader and that he had expressed racial prejudice towards whites in the past. He should be removed from society for a very, very long time, at a minimum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that the conservatives are done embarrassing themselves over the Dubois thing, we can get bannock o answer the OP:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/23/20159691-da-teens-accused-in-ballplayers-slaying-wont-be-charged-with-hate-crimes?lite

DA says no evidence to say that race was the primary factor. An offensive tweet does not make a case.

The DA is a Republican in Oklahoma.

That's fine. I think it is incredibly clear there is a double standard in America. But it's just the way it is.

[takoma]

Hypothesis: The kid had a run-in with a group of white kids who said some nasty things to him. He thinks "I hate nasty white people -- and so many of them seem to be nasty. So he tweets that an exaggerated 90% of whites are nasty and that he hates them(nasty whites). Not a terribly unusual situation.

Why do I think he may have meant that he hates nasty whites rather than all whites? Because he went out on his murderous jaunt with a white kid.

Do I think this makes the crime less heinous? No way. I just think bringing up the issue of hate crimes is not useful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the conservatives are done embarrassing themselves over the Dubois thing, we can get bannock o answer the OP:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/23/20159691-da-teens-accused-in-ballplayers-slaying-wont-be-charged-with-hate-crimes?lite

DA says no evidence to say that race was the primary factor. An offensive tweet does not make a case.

The DA is a Republican in Oklahoma.

That's fine. I think it is incredibly clear there is a double standard in America. But it's just the way it is.

The statistics in Hate crimes do t bear it out. The government is quite willing to prosecute nlack people for hate crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good then the plumber should have no trouble putting in your stent.

At this point, I feel you are being deliberately obtuse. A doctor who is only book-educated with no actual patient experience is not capable of putting in a stent either. That's why there are rotations, residencies, etc in the program.

Well then to get back to the point of WEB DuBois, in addition to being the first black PhD from Harvard, he had the real life experience of being a black man living in the early 1900's, who knew Woodrow Wilson. So I guess his residency was in experiencing and overcoming a lifetime of racism.

[Anonymous]

Hypothesis: The kid had a run-in with a group of white kids who said some nasty things to him. He thinks "I hate nasty white people -- and so many of them seem to be nasty. So he tweets that an exaggerated 90% of whites are nasty and that he hates them(nasty whites). Not a terribly unusual situation.

Why do I think he may have meant that he hates nasty whites rather than all whites? Because he went out on his murderous jaunt with a white kid.

Do I think this makes the crime less heinous? No way. I just think bringing up the issue of hate crimes is not useful.

I agree with your hypothesis, but the problem is that if you reverse the black boy and the white boys in this scenario it would be used as evidence that the white boy was racist. We have a double standard.

[Anonymous]

I have never really understood the hate crime classification. To me, a senseless crime is a senseless crime. These kids did perform a hate crime--a hatred of the right to life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never really understood the hate crime classification. To me, a senseless crime is a senseless crime. These kids did perform a hate crime--a hatred of the right to life.

It matters to society. If two people have an argument, and one is killed, it is a tragedy for that person and his or her family.

If someone is killed because they are a minority, or because they are gay or of a certain religion, it strikes fear into the hearts of the members of those societies, more directly than the first murder. And that is why the crime deserves a greater punishment, because the deterrent is more vital.

[Anonymous]

So, if a black person kills a white, it is not a hate crime because the white is not a minority? Even though that is why he was killed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if a black person kills a white, it is not a hate crime because the white is not a minority? Even though that is why he was killed?

For the tenth time on this thread, black people have and will continue to be prosecuted for hate crimes. it is in the federal crime statistics.

[Anonymous]

16:33 true, but Tacoma's hypothesis gave a benefit of doubt that would never be allowed if the tables were turned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:16:33 true, but Tacoma's hypothesis gave a benefit of doubt that would never be allowed if the tables were turned.

Well, he was wrong. Neither the law nor its appolication supports a differential treatment of races under hate crime laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good then the plumber should have no trouble putting in your stent.

At this point, I feel you are being deliberately obtuse. A doctor who is only book-educated with no actual patient experience is not capable of putting in a stent either. That's why there are rotations, residencies, etc in the program.

Well then to get back to the point of WEB DuBois, in addition to being the first black PhD from Harvard, he had the real life experience of being a black man living in the early 1900's, who knew Woodrow Wilson. So I guess his residency was in experiencing and overcoming a lifetime of racism.

And it was STILL his opinion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't worry, Australia is calling it a black on white hate crime and urging people not to come here as students or tourists.
Obama has been silent.

obama didn't comment on Trayvon until a month and a half after the killing.

And other country's presidents and diplomats were on the news saying what on Day 1 (as they are now)?

No need for excuses or distractions. Looks petty.

everything Obana says or does looks wrong to you. The guy can't watch a movie in Saturday night without wingnuts pissed off about it.

Actually, my point was that other authorities are calling it a hate crime. This is very much in the front and center news in Australia and England.

I could care less what or when Obama says, he usually stays silent on international issues for many days, hoping it blows over. Everyone knows that.

The "other authorities" also had this to say:

“The U.S. has chosen the pathway of illogical policy with regard to guns," Australia’s former deputy prime minister Tim Fischer said Friday. "They cannot expect not to have any criticism of it worldwide. I am angry because it is corrupting the world, this gun culture of the United States.”

So how do you like your authorities now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
16:33 true, but Tacoma's hypothesis gave a benefit of doubt that would never be allowed if the tables were turned.


Well, he was wrong. Neither the law nor its appolication supports a differential treatment of races under hate crime laws.

...but that hypothesis is what some of us were responding to.