Thursday, July 09, 2009

How is this not a hate crime? I'm not in support of hate crime legislation etc. but if we have such laws, shouldn't they apply equally?

Labels:

45 Comments:

Blogger TMink said...

Seems clear to me, this is a racist act and obviously a hate crime. I agree with you that the legal philosophy behind a so called hate crime is foolish, but since our current hacks in DC are so enamored of the foolishness, it should be applied fairly.

Unless the hate crime legislation is just racial and gender pandering. In that case, the laws are working just as intended.

I suspect the latter.

Trey

9:59 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Video said...

When "Hate Crime" (the opposite being "Love Crime?") laws are applied in cases of black-on-white crime, I will give you a dollar. Meanwhile I will keep my powder dry and feed the dog sparingly.

10:08 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Ern said...

It's not a hate crime because the victim is a white, heterosexual, non-Hispanic, (probably) American-born male.

Of course the laws should apply equally, but they don't. I don't think that they ever have, and I don't think that they ever will.

10:24 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

All crimes are hate crimes.

10:28 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Professor Hale said...

It is much more than a hate crime. It is rebellion against the larger community by a smaller community. It is only possible because the smaller community is confident the larger community will not take up the gauntlet.

10:28 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Professor, I am not sure I agree with you entirely. This certainly was members of a smaller community acting out against members of a larger community, but I am not sure the problem is community wide. Were you suggesting that this is a larger problem, that minorities feel free or empowered to act out in racially motivated crimes against white folk?

Trey

10:58 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger MikeT said...

Trey,

When was the last time you met a minority who was afraid of being labeled a racist for their views and actions toward whites? Even the most successful, most middle class ones I've ever known aren't afraid in the least of how their behavior is perceived by whites in that respect; their main consideration would be if they were breaking a law for which they'd be punished.

11:17 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger MikeT said...

The very fact that this isn't being labeled a hate crime by the police, and will probably not result in any serious punishment is why I have come to loathe law enforcement, the courts and prosecutors. The rule of law is today an illusion, and we are the mercy of whatever the police and legal system are willing to do. If they won't arrest anyone and bring charges, then we must meekly accept that or face their wrath.

The whole apparatus of "criminal justice" is today little more than a farce that exists for social control.

11:21 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Falze said...

How is this not a hate crime?

How is this not national news? Anyone care to make the argument that if a gang of 50 whites teens shouting "This is a white world!" had attacked a black family, putting one in the hospital, it wouldn't be national news for a couple of weeks followed by the usual suspects showing up for demonstrations and demands for more hate crime legislation? I can't even envision such a thing not eliciting that sort of reaction from the press and the race-baiters.

11:49 AM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Mike asked: "When was the last time you met a minority who was afraid of being labeled a racist for their views and actions toward whites?"

Never.

Point made.

Many people believe that racism is a sin peculair to white people. That in itself is racist, as it depends upon a beliefe that people of different races are inherently different as human beings.

I understand and accept and agree with your point. I think the freedom that minority folks feel in being racist is a consequence of the race blaming that is used to prey on those communities.

Trey

12:07 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger br549 said...

I think it rips the skin off the lie that only whites are racists.

But since global warming has now become climate change, how are they going to re-label racism?

12:35 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

"how are they going to re-label racism?"

Whiteism?

Not that I want to give anyone ideas.

Trey

12:56 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Larry Sheldon said...

A white male and his family were "attacked".

How can that be a hate crime.

It can only be a hate crime if they are queer or black.

2:02 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Roman Wolf said...

Well, I think all the major points have been touched.

1. Hate crime laws are stupid in general. Made by pandering politicians.

2. Liberals/authorities(both the same thing in may cases) only believe that whites can be racists. Once again, a very incorrect assessment.

3. Hence, hate crimes, in the Liberal/authority's mind, could not happen to whites(unless they're homosexual). A clear miscarriage of justice considering that number two isn't correct.

2:19 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger A Reformed Family Man said...

I'm a 40 your old man that has been the victim many times from racist blacks. From being called a cracker when I didn't move out of a cars way quick enough, to where a black man said I called him "boy", which wasn't true, but it caused hysteria among his friends. The rules are not applied fairly, but in my situation I didn't complain, because I accepted it as ignorant people who do not represent the entire black population. I only wish our black brothers and sisters would see it the same way.

2:31 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

Let's go back and look at the article:

"Akron police say they aren't ready to call it a hate crime or a gang initiation."

then later on in the article:

"Akron police are investigating. Right now, the case is not being classified as a racial hate crime. There were no other reports of victims assaulted by the group that night."

We have no idea what parameters allow a crime in Ohio to be labeled a hate crime. Before rushing to judgment about what the police classifies as a hate crime and what they don't we need to know more about the Ohio laws.

3:33 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger MikeT said...

because I accepted it as ignorant people who do not represent the entire black population. I only wish our black brothers and sisters would see it the same way.


They won't see it any other way until people like you stand up for yourself. Now, if the guy who accused you of calling him "boy" was a thug, I can understand you backing down, but if he were a normal, basically middle class black man you should have harshly ripped him a new one.

Then, you walk away. If they come at you from behind as a group, you have "retreated" from the confrontation and can now claim a right of self-defense in any state.

3:35 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger br549 said...

Cham ole' girl, if 50 white punks beat up on one black family and a couple of Their friends, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be on the front lawn with their own personal CNN satellite van before the sun went down.

4:00 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

It doesn't matter what Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have to say, the police have to follow the law. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Rush Limbaugh and Helen Smith may feel free to opine all they want, the law is the law.

If someone from Ohio is willing to look the stature regarding hate crimes up I would be interested to know more.

4:05 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger MikeT said...

Google is your friend:

Ethnic intimidation (aka the Hate Crime statute) in Ohio: http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2927.12

At the very least, those black thugs were guilty of aggravated menacing which is explicitly covered in in 2927.12:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2903.21

So Cham, the police are completely in the wrong here. There is ample evidence to believe that a straight up violation of 2927.12 was committed. "Who," not "if" is the legitimate question for the cops to be asking, but they aren't because they don't want to nail a band of black thugs for an obvious hate crime.

4:15 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Major-General said...

Funny Cham. I can think of one crime someplace I lived where pretty much everyone wondered why it wasn't a hate crime. Of course, when two black men leave racial epithets at the scene of the murders of their only ehite victims, that's a good question.

Also Cham, you have the internet, but here's a link to it.
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2927.12
And references:
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2903.21
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2903.22
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2909.06
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2909.07
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2917.21

In light of the above, it sounds like a hate crime to me.

4:18 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

Okay, so now we know that the perpetrators may be accused of aggravated menacing (thanks for the links). I don't know how things work in Ohio but we had a case recently in my state where there was the same problem, a case where black children pummeled a white woman because they said she said some racial insults to them. The young tykes wanted to charge the woman with a hate crime after they crushed her skull.

In my state you have to have evidence. I'm not a lawyer but I suppose a few impartial witnesses, or a videotape with clear audio would be helpful, or maybe a signed statement from the perpetrator admitting to whatever they said or did and why.

It becomes troublesome for the police to press charges on a specific crime if they don't have any clear and decisive evidence and the police probably need much more than a statement from the victim(s). In the case near where I live, the young tykes were SOL as several witnesses who happened to be black avowed that no racial slurs were mentioned. As far as I know the kids are still in juvy somewhere and will be for a long time.

What seems clear cut in a news article may be less so in a court of law.

4:53 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger br549 said...

I wonder if a single minority type would attempt to defend you in the upright manner you are trying to give 50 punks against one family and a couple friends, Cham.

Oh, and also there would be about 500 people out in front of the house too, you know, trying to get that air time. Manufactured indignity, rage, screams of rascism, a few burning vehicles, broken windows, pummeling of innocents in the wrong place at the wrong time - the usual.

4:56 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Francis W. Porretto said...

Of course it's a hate crime. But we're not allowed to say such things; it might upset a few privileged applecarts. And woe betide him who dares!

4:58 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

I am answering the question, "How is this not a hate crime?". I don't really care what minority types or anyone else does with their time and Internet usage.

5:01 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Trust said...

"hate crime" is usually a buzz word to get people elected/reelected by flaming fear and/or anger.

There aren't many votes to be had by siding with white victims over black perpetrators, for example, but there is a great deal of votes to get by paiting minorities only as victims.

Take a wild guess as to which political party benefits the most by such fear and anger.

6:46 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Michael Maier said...

These savages better hope white patience and Christian restraint hold out. I have a feeling if some of them somehow got whacked in the street with no witnesses, the cops ain't gonna try too hard to figure it out.

7:45 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger randian said...

In the case near where I live, the young tykes were SOL as several witnesses who happened to be black avowed that no racial slurs were mentioned.

How old were these "tykes"? I can't help but notice that the witnesses couldn't be bothered to help the woman.

8:28 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Memphis Steve said...

The USDOJ has never classified any black on white crimes such as this as a hate crime. And they never will. Hate crimes legislation is purely payback to the privileged and protected 'special' groups for their votes. It isn't intended to bring justice or balance to our country. It is intended to increase the power of the Democratic Party.

11:44 PM, July 09, 2009  
Blogger Memphis Steve said...

I'm reposting this story on my blog. Clearly this won't be covered by CNN or the New York Times so the only way anyone is going to hear about it is through blogs, emails, and word-of-mouth. Thanks for bringing this story to our attention. It is important.

12:35 AM, July 10, 2009  
Blogger Forgetfulmuse said...

Silly you, didn't you know that only whites can be racist? Just take a sociology course at an average university, they'll be happy to indoctrinate you on the latest twisted redefinition of the English language to suit their leftist agenda.

But I agree, if we must have "hate crime" laws, why not include this? Of course, this is what assault laws are for - no need to prove emotional motivations for a crime.

8:10 AM, July 10, 2009  
Blogger Paul said...

Indeed. The fundamental perversity of the selective hate crimes concept is parodied in this fake news item entitled "Perpetrators of Vicious Hateful Beating of Iraq War Veteran Have Sentences Reduced After Shocking Courtroom Revelation": http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/05/perpetrators-of-viscious-hateful.html

10:58 AM, July 10, 2009  
Blogger dr.alistair said...

as a canadian resident, living in a sociologist`s wet dream, i live surrounded by liberals who spout "equality" as long as it`s stripping power from european white males...of which i am one.

as an individual i`m not concerned because i stay well clear of the issues and am not personally offended by politically correct silliness of any sort, but as a mamber of a group it worries me profoundly that there is a clear bias against white males and, by default, those they care about.

we have gay parades and ethnic parades and "cultural" events af all descriptions, but if there was to be a white people day or a white men`s march....we would be called nazis or racists or whatever.....with permission from a new emerging status quo.

i will post the article on my blog, but unfortunately it will get no traction here.

11:05 AM, July 10, 2009  
Blogger William said...

It isn't a hate crime because the victims were white. The aggressors were young black men. And the Summit County prosecutor is afraid of the backlash. Funny, though, Akron is a mostly white, Appalachian city. They teach 'readin', 'ritin', and the road to Akron in W Virginia. Surprising.

1:39 PM, July 10, 2009  
Blogger The Skald said...

Guess I'll publish it on my blog, and my loyal 25 might spread it around... who knows?

1:47 AM, July 11, 2009  
Blogger Jimmy Stewart said...

There is far, far more black on white crime than vice versa and always has been forever. Blacks only consist of 13% of the population but are responsible for 75% of all violent crime. Why? I'll let you figure that one out with your own two eys and ears when you see and hear black people.

This means it's a good idea to avoid black people at all costs if you are white. I do- I live in an all white neighborhood and there are no blacks who work at my firm, nor do we come into contact with any. It is sheer HEAVEN.

What makes the situation with blacks even more dangerous is the fact they can practically get away with violence against you because of these twisted, sick perceptions in society.

It's pretty much the same with white women today- it's a good idea to avoid as many of them as well if you are male- they can blow your head off with a shotgun in your sleep and get 10 days in jail.

There is no right or wrong or any real laws or accountablity unless you are white and male.

8:14 PM, July 11, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Jimmy, I think the data supports that the problems in the black community are from the lack of fathers in the home.

But I must disagree with your sweeping comments about all blacks. Blacks from intact families have almost identical crime rates when compared to whites from intact families. And I have found that even single parent families raise good kids, especially when they are active in their church.

I do agree with what you are saying up to that point, but I think you use too broad a brush.

Trey

8:39 PM, July 11, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

White males can blow your head off with a gun and get 30 days behind bars and 120 hours of community service, provided they say they are sorry before sentencing.

Give me a break.

8:57 PM, July 11, 2009  
Blogger Jimmy Stewart said...

Well, TMink, given once again the stats of 13% of the population and commiting 75% of violent crime, these law abiding, congenial, hard-working blacks are obviously in the minority.

Glad you have the luxury in life to take time out to find out which ones these are. Myself I have a lot to lose, like my life, home, and career. But most of all I do not have the luxury of time to seek out these rare black individuals.

Culture and expectations- those are what seperate us, regardless of single parent home or not, and this is what blacks need to dump- is their culture- if they ever hope to fit in anywhere. Forget assimulating into white culture- blacks are universally reviled by all other races.

9:36 PM, July 11, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

We disagree. We disagree completely.

Trey

12:08 AM, July 12, 2009  
Blogger br549 said...

http://www.white-history.com/usacrime.htm

http://downwithjugears.blogspot.com/2009/01/liberals-lie-about-who-commits-crime-in.html

For what they're worth.......

There are dozens upon dozens of crime sites to go to.

I have read that the black population is indeed 13%. But I cannot find that support that 75% of the crime is committed by blacks. Mid to upper 50 percentile, yes. However, non blacks are grouped with whites, skewing the number of crimes committed by whites in the country. Again, look it up. Not trying to start anything, but if facts are facts, then, they're facts.

1:30 PM, July 12, 2009  
Blogger delagar said...

I've seen this posted everywhere on the conservative blogs since it went up on YouTube, and not one of you has turned his critical his facilities on.

Did you watch the clip?

These people claim a mob of 50 teenagers attacked them. The father says he was beaten so badly he had to spend 5 days in the ICU. It was supposed to have happened on the night of July 4, which is five nights before the video was shot.

None of the people in the clip, including the father and the daughter who were beaten up by the 50 teenagers, have a mark on them. No bruises, no swollen lips or eyes, no scuffs, scrapes, scratches. None of them are having trouble moving.

Also, where are the witnesses? 50 kids/adults attack a family, shout racist chants, and no one saw a thing? (Notice what the police actually says: he asks for witnesses. He doesn't sound too outraged to me. Sounds like he knows these whacks are whacks.)

Get a grip. Next time someone carves a B on their cheek, will you buy that too?

11:16 AM, July 13, 2009  
Blogger Jimmy Stewart said...

Oh well what a relief! Even if you were right- blacks only commit HALF of all violent crime while making up only 13% of the population. Well, now I know I can go walking safely through black neighborhoods now.

See how ridiculous dancing on pinheads is?

8:23 AM, July 14, 2009  
Blogger Trust said...

On a related, yet slightly off topic note, I read an interesting report on race, crime, and illegitimacy. It made the case that when you remove illegitimacy from the sample, the disparity between black and white incarceration rates evaporates.

So, the symptom of the problem may be that blacks commit disproportionately more crime, but the root of the problem is the breakdown of the family, and the black family has, tragically, broke down far faster.

11:05 AM, July 14, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Trust, I have seen that as well. But then the government subsidizes fatherless families. I almost put families in quotes, but I did not want to offend folks who are in that situation through tragedy. They do not deserve derision.

Save the family, save America.

Trey

7:43 PM, July 14, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home