Do you think Al Sharpton will come out to protest this crime? I doubt it.
Update: For those who want a direct link to the pitiful initial NYT's story on this case, here it is. Notice the bland headline--"Chase Led Man into Car's Path." Here is an updated story from the NYT's from today that gives more information. Luckily, one of the thug's grandparents described his progressive child-rearing plan--just give a kid everything they want so they won't steal from others:
Yep, always best to bribe the kids so they don't take to the streets.
Update: For those who want a direct link to the pitiful initial NYT's story on this case, here it is. Notice the bland headline--"Chase Led Man into Car's Path." Here is an updated story from the NYT's from today that gives more information. Luckily, one of the thug's grandparents described his progressive child-rearing plan--just give a kid everything they want so they won't steal from others:
Rodney Jenkins, a grandfather of one of the 15-year-olds, said he spoiled his grandson so he would never be lured into the thuggery that upends the lives of so many young black men. "He has a jacket for every day of the week and stack of jeans," Mr. Jenkins said. "We do that so he won't have to go to the street to sell drugs."
Yep, always best to bribe the kids so they don't take to the streets.
posted by Helen at 7:12 AM
21 Comments:
Our hostess addressed her question to the Rev. Al, not the NYT. Perhaps she could have linked to the NY Slimes article if there had been much of one.
Quasimodo
Is it open season on NYU students this year? I guess I'm glad I stay South of 50th street (I'm an NYU 1L)...
The way the media is treating this case makes me sick. I've been watching the New York local TV news, and they've covered it...by showing a clip of one of the murderers' uncle talking about what a wonderful kid he is. I'm tempted to start protests of NYU students, except that I doubt our wimps would bother.
Horrible crime. To quote a man "Why can't we all just get along?"
Please note that the New York chapter of the ACLu is arguing for charging the defendants with bias crime as well.
anonymous 3:09:
Yes, but apparently, politics plays a role:
"Norman Siegel,a civil rights lawyer and former executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, expressed disappointment at the department's decision not to treat Mr. Hehman's death as a bias attack. He said he thought the police were shying away from the hate-crime designation for political reasons.
"They don't want to have increased racial tension, racial divisiveness and violence," he said. "They'd rather ignore what's painfully real, which is that there are still racial tensions in this town."
Helen:
I don't doubt for one minute that that is largely the department's motive.
I just wanted you to give props to the ACLU for once.
I haven't heard anything from Sharpton about this. Nor have I heard anything from Instapundit. What does this silence tell us?
{sarcasm on} ah but dont you know the white oppressors deserve all they get for centuries of abuse and the slavery {sarcasm off}
a race crime is a race crime, whether they are black, white or green with yellow polka dots.. any group of people who bully, murder or attack anyone other group on a stupid reason like colour of your skin, or religion, should be locked up.
This situation demonstrates the basic flaw in the application of hate crimes legislation - that its remediative intent gradually gives way to retributive motives. Being that you can't actually know the mindset of a perpetrator, proxies such as race and demeanor become the focus of the determination. But these characteristics will resemble those of most assaults against someone of another race. So nearly any such assault can be interpreted as a hate crime. The public recognizes this, sees that activists use the charge tendentiously, and so come to view the availability of a hate crimes charge as a means of payback for an assault on one of their own. The end result is a heightening of racial animosity rather than its prevention.
Dr. Helen:
Really, I hate to say this but have you not been paying attention (maybe that's why you seem opposed to the diagnosis of ADHD). The grandfather has merely caught the syncopated beat of our welfare policy and is saying it for you. 'Give them everything. Make marriage for white people. Affirmative action for jobs. And surely you ought to know that applying for SSI disability will be much more succesful if done from a black zip code.'
I noted interesting variations in language in the NY Post article quoted in Malkin's blog. In the reference to the earlier case, the black men were chased and beaten by "white bigots." In the present case, the chasers were "a gang of black teenagers," a "teenage gang," and a "gang of youths." Apparently, bigots come only in white.
Actually, I am of two minds re: the hate-crimes laws. On one hand, when hate is a motivating factor in the crime, it ought to be called by its name. On the other hand, someone who is killed out of hatred for his race, ethnicity, religion, sexual identity, or anything else, is no more dead, because of the hate involved, than if robbery, mistaken identity, or revenge were the motive.
Vicki, are you in favor of dismantling the difference between homicide and manslaughter?
I just wanted you to give props to the ACLU for once.
For what? The entire concept of hate crime laws is fascist. "Hate Crime" is a dressed up term for thought crime.
On the other hand, someone who is killed out of hatred for his race, ethnicity, religion, sexual identity, or anything else, is no more dead, because of the hate involved, than if robbery, mistaken identity, or revenge were the motive.
Bingo. If you punish someone more because of his motives were politically incorrect, then that's thought crime. Welcome to Orwell's world.
dweeb:
I don't necessarily disagree with you. I wasn't arguing in favor of Hate Crime Laws. But Helen apparently is. And I just wanted her to admit that they were on the same side for once. I didn't figure she would, but I wanted to point it out. I figure it chaps her ass.
Anonymous 2:46,
It seems lots of people want to jump on the hate crime bandwagon with their own particular group. I'd say anyone pushing for recognition of a crime as a hate crime is a supporter of hate crime legislation. Maybe they can tell us why.
Anonymous 2:46:
I am 100% against Hate Crime Laws. My beef with this case is that if you have the law (which I abhor) then it should be distributed equally--regardless of race, sex etc. Incidentally, are you that bored with life that you would spend your time posting comments just to "chap my ass"--whatever that means?
Helen,
Do you think increased application of bad law is beneficial? To whom? If you are 100% against a law, why try to increase its application?
anonymous 4:21:
Because sometimes in order to get rid of a law--it has to cost the other side something very serious. If it serves the purpose for which it was intended (in this case, to punish whites, "homophobics" etc.) the law may stay on the books as is. If the law starts to cost the other side too much by hurting the very people they were trying to protect they may have to reconsider it or at least be willing to talk about it. Do you have a better suggestion for getting rid of this law?
Helen,
Sure. There are two obvious stratgies. First, advocate against it in the legislature. Second, advocate against it where the local DA is elected. The DA makes the determination of whether to pursue a hate crime. Can you cite any PC social legislation that has ever been repealed because it was applied too often?
Frequent application of these laws is PC Nirvana. More frequent application will entrench them in society.
I'm not sure the purpose of these laws is revenge, but I do see your purpose as revenge. How else would you describe it? You recommend using a stupid law to hurt people in order to cost the "other side" something very serious.
Who is the other side?
Yep, always best to bribe the kids so they don't take to the streets.
Works for France
(bad example to follow?)
Helen:
Why, no, I'm not bored with life. And I can see by your response that I did indeed "chap your ass". Christ but you're easy.
Post a Comment
<< Home