Black boys punch and stomp on white 6th grader on bus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that this was a hate crime? The behavior appears motivated by the fact that the victim was a snitch, not because he was white.

right . . .

b/c that makes it all better

He's a snitch so beat the living shit out of him.

one boy against three - seems fair

You're an idiot, PP. Regardless of what the motivation is, it's wrong on ALL levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could you imagine if it was three white kids stomping a black boy and a white school bus driver stood by. It would be an outrage and protests would be taking place all over. Complete double standard. Justice? Ha, I guess only if your black and make enough noise.

Very true. For some reason, in this case, some PPs are implying that the white kid deserved it because he was a snitch. If it was the same situation with a black kid being beat for snitching (by 3 white kids), would those same people say he deserved it?

O
M
G

No one said the victim DESERVED it
People are saying the reason was because he snitched
That is not JUSTIFYING IT
That is EXPLAINING IT

You must have missed "Snitches get stitches". That poster seemed to really think it was the fault of the snitch and not the kids who did the beating. 'Cause, you know, they wouldn't have beat his ass if he kept his fucking mouth shut.

Snitches get stitches
is what folks in that world say
REPEATING as an explanation of the mindset is not the same as CONDONING IT
There are some real NUTBALLS on this thread and posting on DCUM in general as of late

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that this was a hate crime? The behavior appears motivated by the fact that the victim was a snitch, not because he was white.

right . . .

b/c that makes it all better

He's a snitch so beat the living shit out of him.

one boy against three - seems fair

You're an idiot, PP. Regardless of what the motivation is, it's wrong on ALL levels.

YOU ARE CRAZZZZZYYY
The PP was not saying it was ok
Everyone has agreed it was a horrible crime
The pp is speaking of the motivation not the horror of it
It was retaliation for snitching NOT a hate crime
It was not a mugging or a carjacking or a home invasion or insider trading
Saying what type of crime IT WAS NOT is not condoning it in anyway
OH whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy do I feed the trolls??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could you imagine if it was three white kids stomping a black boy and a white school bus driver stood by. It would be an outrage and protests would be taking place all over. Complete double standard. Justice? Ha, I guess only if your black and make enough noise.

Very true. For some reason, in this case, some PPs are implying that the white kid deserved it because he was a snitch. If it was the same situation with a black kid being beat for snitching (by 3 white kids), would those same people say he deserved it?

O
M
G

No one said the victim DESERVED it
People are saying the reason was because he snitched
That is not JUSTIFYING IT
That is EXPLAINING IT

You must have missed "Snitches get stitches". That poster seemed to really think it was the fault of the snitch and not the kids who did the beating. 'Cause, you know, they wouldn't have beat his ass if he kept his fucking mouth shut.

See, this is why diversity is so important. When white boys aren't exposed to or don't understand black culture they get there asses beat down because of it. No snitches people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could you imagine if it was three white kids stomping a black boy and a white school bus driver stood by. It would be an outrage and protests would be taking place all over. Complete double standard. Justice? Ha, I guess only if your black and make enough noise.

Very true. For some reason, in this case, some PPs are implying that the white kid deserved it because he was a snitch. If it was the same situation with a black kid being beat for snitching (by 3 white kids), would those same people say he deserved it?

O
M
G

No one said the victim DESERVED it
People are saying the reason was because he snitched
That is not JUSTIFYING IT
That is EXPLAINING IT

You must have missed "Snitches get stitches". That poster seemed to really think it was the fault of the snitch and not the kids who did the beating. 'Cause, you know, they wouldn't have beat his ass if he kept his fucking mouth shut.

See, this is why diversity is so important. When white boys aren't exposed to or don't understand black culture they get there asses beat down because of it. No snitches people!

yea...tell that to all the dead witnesses in the whitey bulger case going on now...
"snitches" being murdered ----ahem "found dead"
white defendant

[AroundTheBlock]

Anonymous wrote:But in any case where it's white-on-black violence, it's always assumed to be racism.

Okay, just being sure we're clear. Double standard. Yeah, that's cool.

100% correct. Funny how certain people want their cake and eat it too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

See, this is why diversity is so important. When white boys aren't exposed to or don't understand black culture they get there asses beat down because of it. No snitches people!

Or even THEIR asses.

[Anonymous]

AroundTheBlock wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But in any case where it's white-on-black violence, it's always assumed to be racism.

Okay, just being sure we're clear. Double standard. Yeah, that's cool.

100% correct. Funny how certain people want their cake and eat it too.

You, of course, are correct because all black people think alike, have the same background, family history. SES, religion and we are all psychic and no of every case involving white perpetrators and black victims
Thanks for pointing out all of these facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.wfla.com/story/22958589/new-surveillance-video-shows-vicious-bus-attack

Horrible video. Why isn't this a hate crime? What wise words does the president have about this?

Funny how right-wing nutjobs seem to just scour the internet for any instance of black on white violence. I'm honestly curious, why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.wfla.com/story/22958589/new-surveillance-video-shows-vicious-bus-attack

Horrible video. Why isn't this a hate crime? What wise words does the president have about this?

Funny how right-wing nutjobs seem to just scour the internet for any instance of black on white violence. I'm honestly curious, why?

Funny how left-wing nutjobs seem to just scour the internet for any instance of white on black violence. I'm honestly curious, why?

[Anonymous]

Yes, the PP condones it by mentioning it - as do you, moron!


It's a horrible situation all around with NO excuse for that sort of brutal beating. Three kids (black in this case) beat the shit out of ONE boy (white).

So call me a troll. Call me crazy.

But you're the fucking idiot for even supporting the other PP b/c you just don't get it, do you?

Q: What's the point in mentioning the snitch part AFTER someone calls it a hate crime?

A: to show that it's not as bad as it appears, to make it seem as though it's a lesser crime

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that this was a hate crime? The behavior appears motivated by the fact that the victim was a snitch, not because he was white.

right . . .

b/c that makes it all better

He's a snitch so beat the living shit out of him.

one boy against three - seems fair

You're an idiot, PP. Regardless of what the motivation is, it's wrong on ALL levels.

YOU ARE CRAZZZZZYYY
The PP was not saying it was ok
Everyone has agreed it was a horrible crime
The pp is speaking of the motivation not the horror of it
It was retaliation for snitching NOT a hate crime
It was not a mugging or a carjacking or a home invasion or insider trading
Saying what type of crime IT WAS NOT is not condoning it in anyway
OH whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy do I feed the trolls??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, the PP condones it by mentioning it - as do you, moron!


It's a horrible situation all around with NO excuse for that sort of brutal beating. Three kids (black in this case) beat the shit out of ONE boy (white).

So call me a troll. Call me crazy.

But you're the fucking idiot for even supporting the other PP b/c you just don't get it, do you?

Q: What's the point in mentioning the snitch part AFTER someone calls it a hate crime?

A: to show that it's not as bad as it appears, to make it seem as though it's a lesser crime

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that this was a hate crime? The behavior appears motivated by the fact that the victim was a snitch, not because he was white.

right . . .

b/c that makes it all better

He's a snitch so beat the living shit out of him.

one boy against three - seems fair

You're an idiot, PP. Regardless of what the motivation is, it's wrong on ALL levels.

YOU ARE CRAZZZZZYYY
The PP was not saying it was ok
Everyone has agreed it was a horrible crime
The pp is speaking of the motivation not the horror of it
It was retaliation for snitching NOT a hate crime
It was not a mugging or a carjacking or a home invasion or insider trading
Saying what type of crime IT WAS NOT is not condoning it in anyway
OH whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy do I feed the trolls??

to show that the motivation for the crime was not a hate crime but a crime of retaliation
you are crazier than a loon
and i am even crazier for responding

[Anonymous]

It is obvious that people who keep posting hate crime have little knowledge of what a hate crime requires. The primary element of a hate crime is that the crime was motivated because of the victim's race, religion, or sexual orientation. The mere fact that a Christian killed a Jewish person does not rise to the level of a hate crime. However, if can be proven that the motivation of the murder was because the victim was Jewish, then you have one of the primary elements to lable a crime a hate crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.wfla.com/story/22958589/new-surveillance-video-shows-vicious-bus-attack

Horrible video. Why isn't this a hate crime? What wise words does the president have about this?

Funny how right-wing nutjobs seem to just scour the internet for any instance of black on white violence. I'm honestly curious, why?

Scour the internet?! This story is all over the news (CNN etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that this was a hate crime? The behavior appears motivated by the fact that the victim was a snitch, not because he was white.

right . . .

b/c that makes it all better

He's a snitch so beat the living shit out of him.

one boy against three - seems fair

You're an idiot, PP. Regardless of what the motivation is, it's wrong on ALL levels.

Of course it's wrong. What PP was saying is that the motivation for the crime was not race. Racial motivation is required for it to be a hate crime. Not just that it happened between 2 different races. I know you are aware of that, right?