…do you think I have access to that information?
You’re here bitching about it again so I assume you at least have some information to offer on the subject.
I was perfectly happy just mocking the idea that hate crimes were going up in “self defense,” but someone had to come strolling into this thread mocking the death toll in Puerto Rico like someone just made up the over 3,000 number. I didn’t know that someone would assume I was the head of FEMA or something.
……and that…has made all the difference.
People are just letting their true feelings out. It shouldn’t be surprising.
Standard leftist crap…
No definitions of what a “hate crime” is, no statistics showing any specific increase in any specific crime, just ambiguous accusations thrown out to smear…
I wonder if any study has been done that shows a correlation in the rise of hate crimes caused by Maxine Waters hate filled rhetoric? Or a study comparing the violence and destruction done at every gathering of leftists (Black lives matter, occupy wall street, college protests against conservative speakers) compared to the same done by gatherings of rightists? Of course not because violence and crime done by leftists isn’t really crime because it’s done for a righteous cause…
Repeat Ad Nauseum…
Rorschach was the only Watchman who wouldn’t participate in the deception.
Hmm. Consistency may demand it.
Read the “study” they compared “similar counties” whatever that means for “reported hate crimes” after the Trump rallies.
No listing of the supposed crimes committed.
No report of actual convictions.
No comparison of “hate crimes” reporting prior to the rallies for the counties.
The whole thing is a steaming pile.
It’s all but impossible to get a hate crimes charge for a crime committed against a white person unless they are gay, Muslim etc.
Another flaw with the entire concept.
Not a problem with the concept, only application.
The entire concept if flawed from the start and conflicts with The Constitution in numerous ways starting with “Equal Justice” and “Equal Application”.
It criminalizes thought as well.
Nope. If legislation is passed that only increases the severity of attacking a black person because of their race but NOT the same for attacking a white person because of their race, THEN it is conflict with the principle of equality before the law. If the legislation increases the penalty for attacking ANY person because of their race, then it does not violate the principle because the word “any” implies that the particular race of the person attacked does not matter.
No. It makes the punishment for crimes that are committed against someone on account of their race more severe. So what it is punishing is action.
Furthermore, if you really believe this, then you should also oppose:
- The distinction made between first-degree and second-degree murder.
- The existence of any of those charges that have “…with intent to…” in their name.
- Treating terrorists attacks as more severe than non-terrorist attacks.
No matter what your reason for attacking a person, the attack is the same as is the outcome.
Intent, is the difference between Murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide. No conflict whatsoever.
If I commit an armed robbery or assault against a gay man because he’s gay the nature and effect of the crime is no different if I picked him because he was gay, the color of his shirt, or the style shoes he was wearing.
This one is a doozy. You contradict yourself in the span of two sentences.
There is no contradiction.
The very nature of the crime changes relative to intent.
If I accidentally hit and kill someone with my car the death was accidental.
In the case of manslaughter there was no intent to kill to begin with or there is a flawed claim of self defense.
Murder begins with the intent to kill.
You mean fascist?
He’s obviously the bad guy. Alan Moore wasn’t exactly subtle about that sort of thing. Dude has issues.
Your examples support ME, not you. I am right and you are wrong.
…and thats the point of hate crime laws.
Because, as you said: