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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If you think that "hate crimes" are "a quantitatively greater problem" than standard issue street crime, you might want to refresh your study of crime statistics. Points for honesty, though, most people at least try to pretend that "hate crimes" are a neutral concept, instead of what they are, which is a very definite and left-wing political point of view written into the criminal law.

I know that statistics probably aren't your thing, but 41% of convicted hate crime offenders are minorities. And 61% of hate crime victims are white.

So no this is not a left leaning thing.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

I guess "hate crimes" are the equivalent of the Justice dept's stand on voting rights. It only applies if blacks are the victims.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 3rd dude is not white!

The authorities identified the 3rd guy as a "white male."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

If you think that "hate crimes" are "a quantitatively greater problem" than standard issue street crime, you might want to refresh your study of crime statistics. Points for honesty, though, most people at least try to pretend that "hate crimes" are a neutral concept, instead of what they are, which is a very definite and left-wing political point of view written into the criminal law.

That's only left leaning because lynchings are a right wing activity.

Back when lynchings actually occurred, they were a Democratic party activity. These days lynchings are reserved for likes of Zimmerman, Pagones and the Duke Lacrosse Team. In other words, it's still a Democratic Party activity.

[Anonymous]

that pretty much shut Takoma's mouth didn't it lol...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 3rd dude is not white!

The authorities identified the 3rd guy as a "white male."

he was the driver though, niot the shooter. And not the one who tweeted about taking some "life's."

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Back when lynchings actually occurred, they were a Democratic party activity. These days lynchings are reserved for likes of Zimmerman, Pagones and the Duke Lacrosse Team. In other words, it's still a Democratic Party activity.

You are ignorant scum. Zimmerman, Pagones, and the Duke Lacrosse Team walk freely on the streets. They are not hanging from trees. It says a lot about you that you happily politicize the killing of thousands of innocents. How many black men do you believe have been wrongly charged with crimes? Do you know their names as well? Do you consider them to have been "lynched"?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Back when lynchings actually occurred, they were a Democratic party activity. These days lynchings are reserved for likes of Zimmerman, Pagones and the Duke Lacrosse Team. In other words, it's still a Democratic Party activity.

You are ignorant scum. Zimmerman, Pagones, and the Duke Lacrosse Team walk freely on the streets. They are not hanging from trees. It says a lot about you that you happily politicize the killing of thousands of innocents. How many black men do you believe have been wrongly charged with crimes? Do you know their names as well? Do you consider them to have been "lynched"?

Your race-baiting progressive buddies keep running into reality and facts disrupting their oh so juicy narratives. It's a problem endemic to Progressives in general. There hasn't been an actual lynching of a black person in this country for decades, a fact you Progressives do your very best to pretend isn't so. Let me quote one of the accused in this case:

James Edwards wrote:Ayeee I knocked out 5 woods [that would be short for Peckerwoods] since Zimmerman court lol shit ima keep sleepin shit!

Race-baiting Progressive scum created the whole Zimmerman narrative. Race-baiting Progressive scum have Lane's blood on their hands.

[Anonymous]

I'm a leftist and I have mixed feelings about hate crime legislation, in part because of the issue that OP raised - can this be applied fairly and consistently? I'm definitely opposed to hate speech regulations of the type seen on some college campuses because they can be too easily abused depending on who is deciding what "hate" speech is. I don't know how we should address what are called hate crimes though.

That said, I find OP to be a whiner. So tired of these posts by white people feeling sorry for themselves. Guys, we white people (especially those of us with high SES) have enormous advantages. Any time I walk into a room I know I have instant acceptance because I'm white - regardless of the race of the people in the room. Such a waste of time to spend it complaining over what is basically an anomaly. We white people don't have to worry about being displaced by other groups.

That's unfortunate - it should be different - but it's a fact so stop feeling sorry for yourself, OP.

[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.

That is s disgusting attitude.

All life is precious. All crimes such as these are done in hate. Doing a random murder such as this because the victim just happens to be a different race than you is particularly heinous. These boys deserve to be prosecuted for committing a hate crime.

Don't quantify one victim as less worthy of justice, just because of the color of his skin.

[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.

While that may have been the intent of hate crimes legislation, that's not how the statutes are written. And a statute that is applied to one race in a different fashion that another race is unconstitutional (see many death penalty statutes).

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:that pretty much shut Takoma's mouth didn't it lol...

Nah. I took a little vacation from my computer for a couple of hours.

If I was wrong about the motivation for creating the concept of a "hate crime" (which I doubt), it won't be the first time I was wrong. My biggest mistake, perhaps, was trying to be moderate in my tone. Lynchings were not just something that once happened, they were one of the more gruesome aspects of the way blacks were treated by society, including the police using hoses, dogs, imprisionment, and other forms of intimidation.

The quantitative comparison that I made was not between lynchings and street crime, but between lynchings and lynching-like events against minirities and those perpetrated by mnorities.

And why would you want to shut someone' mouth on a site intended for people to talk with each other?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a leftist and I have mixed feelings about hate crime legislation, in part because of the issue that OP raised - can this be applied fairly and consistently? I'm definitely opposed to hate speech regulations of the type seen on some college campuses because they can be too easily abused depending on who is deciding what "hate" speech is. I don't know how we should address what are called hate crimes though.

That said, I find OP to be a whiner. So tired of these posts by white people feeling sorry for themselves. Guys, we white people (especially those of us with high SES) have enormous advantages. Any time I walk into a room I know I have instant acceptance because I'm white - regardless of the race of the people in the room. Such a waste of time to spend it complaining over what is basically an anomaly. We white people don't have to worry about being displaced by other groups.

That's unfortunate - it should be different - but it's a fact so stop feeling sorry for yourself, OP.

Wow. How incredibly closed minded of you to accuse me of being whiny and feeling sorry for myself because I created a dialogue about whether there is a hypocrisy in the way we look at this law. There is such over-sensitivity among people like you to never acknowledge that racism from minorities does occur or that it can be publicly acknowledged. I lived next to the head of the New Black Panthers for a year and saw first hand how racism exists on all sides. I'm not crying about it though. I'm just asking an honest question if there is a double standard.