Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do some people want this so badly to be some sort of hate crime?

I've noticed the same trend; it's like many people are desperate to make this a hate crime without regard to any of the facts known.

Why?

It seems like Mike Huckabee desperately wants to make Beyoncé the embodiment of what's wrong with America - who the hell knows why people become obsessed with things. Blame it on the times...we're a generation of hyperfocused hand-held device holders that are simultaneously on opposite ends of the spectrum seeing how we've got both obsessive–compulsive disorder and attention-deficit disorder.

Anonymous wrote:Why do some people want this so badly to be some sort of hate crime?

I've noticed the same trend; it's like many people are desperate to make this a hate crime without regard to any of the facts known.

Why?

Here is another interesting article from the Post about the often conflicted relationship between atheists and Muslims:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/02/11/chapel-hill-killings-shine-light-on-particular-tensions-between-islam-and-atheism/

I can imagine that atheists never expected to put in the position that this murder puts them. But based on the reactions described in this article, they are reacting very responsibly.

Edit: Since I'm on this topic, here is another good article on the same subject:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121036/chapel-hill-muslim-murders-show-atheism-has-violent-extremists-too

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's an article in this morning's WaPo - note Parker's comment about headlines.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/02/11/the-irresponsible-reporting-in-the-chapel-hill-killings/

Agreed. The OP was equally irresponsible in his post, which didn't belong in the political section. But I guess that makes me an idiot.

I would be more persuaded by your and Parker's argument if the media didn't almost universally believe that religion is an important thing to mention when Muslims are assailants rather than victims.

The fact of the matter is that we are unlikely to know the truth of what happened in this murder. The police can interview the alleged killer and his wife, but they can't interview the victims. The goal of the alleged perpetrator and his wife will be to avoid the death penalty and their best strategy for that will be to show that the killer was acting irrationally -- such as in response to a parking dispute.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's an article in this morning's WaPo - note Parker's comment about headlines.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/02/11/the-irresponsible-reporting-in-the-chapel-hill-killings/

Agreed. The OP was equally irresponsible in his post, which didn't belong in the political section. But I guess that makes me an idiot.

Three shots to the head is close enough to call an execution. I realize that you want to split hairs on this, but the honest truth is that it's nearly impossible to shoot a room full of people this way if there is an altercation.

Anonymous wrote:Here's an article in this morning's WaPo - note Parker's comment about headlines.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/02/11/the-irresponsible-reporting-in-the-chapel-hill-killings/

Psssst... That's not an "article," that's Parkers "opinion."

"Muslims" was in the headline because it's unusual. Unfortunately in America today, three people getting shot by some crank is not unusual.

Anonymous wrote:Here's an article in this morning's WaPo - note Parker's comment about headlines.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/02/11/the-irresponsible-reporting-in-the-chapel-hill-killings/

Agreed. The OP was equally irresponsible in his post, which didn't belong in the political section. But I guess that makes me an idiot.

Here's an article in this morning's WaPo - note Parker's comment about headlines.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/02/11/the-irresponsible-reporting-in-the-chapel-hill-killings/

There's no parsing words, OP. The fact -- the FACT -- remains that NO ONE IN AUTHORITY HAS DESCRIBED THIS AS AN "EXECUTION" OR "EXECUTION-STYLE" MURDER.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy executed them. I have no objections to Jeff's use of the word as that's the net result of his actions. And Jeff will tell you we don't often agree.

This was a heinous act.

You're wrong. He killed them, yes. Whether or not it was "execution-style" (the exact phrase used) remains to be seen, pending the investigation. This is "execution style":



The phrase has a very specific visual and definition.

I understand that. I don't argue with that from the definition's point of view.

What matters to me is that this guy rendered them defenseless and shot them in cold blood. I consider that an execution.

I'm not a fan of parsing words and phrases in this fashion. Frankly, whether or not its considered a hate crime is of no never mind in my eyes. There is absolutely no doubt these three people are dead, and this man killed them, and they are not coming back. It's a disgusting, sick act.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hows this hate crime.investigation going?

" Zemir Begic died protecting fiancee Arijana Mujkanovic, when hammer-wielding teens allegedly attacked them on a city street.
Insistence by St. Louis officials that the beating death of a Bosnian man was not a hate crime is being met with skepticism and anger, according to leaders of the city’s 70,000-strong Bosnian community, and the victim’s brother is calling on authorities to “investigate every possible motive.”"

It won't go anywhere. Unlike Inge chapel hill case, they do not have their religious hatred documented on the Internet. And since a survivor said it wasn't a racial attack, there will be no federal charges.

That said I find it odd that conservatives were so certain it was a hate crime, but in this case they think its a parking dispute.

I'm.actually just curious about it. It was in the news in nov / Dec briefly and since then nothing. Couldn't even find a news article since then. Do u have a link to recent information. His girlfriend said it wasn't racially motivated? What did she say caused her fiance and herself to get attacked with hammers etc?

Anonymous wrote:Why do some people want this so badly to be some sort of hate crime?

Want?? Some people believe it's a hate crime.

It's this simple: the guy demonstrated his hate online. And there was the crime. The only question is whether the hate motivated the crime, or whether he tracked down three people in an apartment and shot them in the head because of a parking space.

Why do some people want this so badly to be some sort of hate crime?

Anonymous wrote:Found one. Los Angelos. Fatal stabbing over parking space in Oct/2014

http://abc7.com/news/woman-fatally-stabbed-over-swap-meet-parking-space/363742/

This sounds like an altercation on the lot that got out of hand. In the Chapel Hill case, the man went into their apartment and shot three people. Entirely different situation.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Man-Shot-Killed-Fight-Parking-Spot-Queens-258178901.html

More common than you think. Here's another. There are pages of results on a google search of fights over parking spaces.