White guy participates in "Knockout Game" and gets charged with hate crimes
96 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;43331752]Escalation much?
Loosing a leg in exchange for a punch, seems fair lol.[/QUOTE]
fortunately in many states, an unprovoked attack out of the blue would be all the reason to defend yourself with a firearm sooooooooo
[QUOTE=sgman91;43335072]What he thinks about black people =/= the reason for the attack. Was he attacking because of his racist ideas or to see if it would be televised?[/QUOTE]
haha oh man, we can always depend on sgman91 for comedy
-snip, I'm wrong-
[editline]28th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=DemonElite;43332158]Are you an idiot? A shot to the leg could very well be lethal. Shooting at someone, regardless of the targeted body part, is using lethal force.[/QUOTE]
You're right, it is lethal force, I had my facts wrong. But keep in mind:
[QUOTE=Manibogi;43331798] the risk loss of life is there regardless, so the self-defence defence would be aplicable in that situation[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43331571][url]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/26/federal-authorities-charge-white-knockout-suspect-/[/url]
American media is still keeping Americans afraid.[/QUOTE]
FTFY
What exactly started this "knockout game" moral panic and how are any of these any different from random racially-motivated assaults that would have been happening anyway
It's just a fancy name to make people more afraid of something they otherwise wouldn't be, isn't it
[QUOTE=Zeke129;43340501]What exactly started this "knockout game" moral panic and how are any of these any different from random racially-motivated assaults that would have been happening anyway
It's just a fancy name to make people more afraid of something they otherwise wouldn't be, isn't it[/QUOTE]
one black guy punched a white guy and he died (pretty sure there was no racial motivation either, it was just a random violent attack), and the news jumped on the opportunity to stroke people like katbug's white persecution complex because that shit sells like hotcakes.
[QUOTE=Extronic;43331661]Hate crimes shouldn't exist because most crimes are done on purpose because the criminal [I]hates[/I] the victim of the crime. We shouldn't prosecute differently just because of the reason that the criminal dislikes the victim is racist
[editline]28th December 2013[/editline]
In a way, all crimes are hate crimes[/QUOTE]
nice one dude, i saw that south park episode too. what a stupid thing to say, no most crimes aren't committed because they hate them, and most crimes AREN'T committed because they're specifically targetting a different race or minority or whatever. that's why the distinction is made
[editline]29th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Extronic;43331623]Well that kind of is how hate crimes are being legislated
White on white is fine
black on black is fine
White on black is bad[/QUOTE]
even more bullshit. look at the statistics, black on white violence is punished far more severely than white on black even if it isn't called a hate crime
[editline]29th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43331673]Thats kind of true in a sense. Many believe that you can't discriminate against people with privilege.[/QUOTE]
no it's not true at all, anyone can be the victim of a hate crime
[editline]29th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=avincent;43331732]If someone hit me like this as a game and I didn't go down I would pull out my .45 and play the knee-cap game.[/QUOTE]
genius, guy comes up, tries to knock you out then runs cause that's the (non-existent) game and you're gonna shoot him
[QUOTE=Oizen;43331632]White on Black is definitely given more attention then Black on white these days.[/QUOTE]
so is anyone gonna defend this or
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43341605]most crimes AREN'T committed because they're specifically targetting a different race or minority or whatever. that's why the distinction is made[/QUOTE]
The judicial system shouldn't be taking people's racial or cultural backgrounds into consideration. It should be blind to all of that.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43341807]The judicial system shouldn't be taking people's racial or cultural backgrounds into consideration. It should be blind to all of that.[/QUOTE]
it should be a lot of things but hate crimes exist because there's a hole in how crime is treated.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43341807]The judicial system shouldn't be taking people's racial or cultural backgrounds into consideration. It should be blind to all of that.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean they shouldn't be taking those into account?
Racial or cultural backgrounds can have huge impact on motivations for a crime.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43341807]The judicial system shouldn't be taking people's racial or cultural backgrounds into consideration. It should be blind to all of that.[/QUOTE]
what do you mean? if someone is attacked for a specific reason should that not be taken into account?
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43341865]what do you mean? if someone is attacked for a specific reason should that not be taken into account?[/QUOTE]
Stuff like mental illness and substance abuse should matter but intentions is really blurry territory.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43341871]Stuff like mental illness and substance abuse should matter but intentions is really blurry territory.[/QUOTE]
not really? intent is a huge part of prosecution, it's the difference between manslaughter and murder, it's a big factor in degrees of murder too. how the heck is it blurry territory?
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43341871]Stuff like mental illness and substance abuse should matter but intentions is really blurry territory.[/QUOTE]
Except intentions are an integral part of the judicial process.
There is the 3 aspects of the crime that generally need to be proven in a criminal case, means, motive, and opportunity.
Well, I guess it's good that they take action against whatever retards are actually playing this "knockout game", I hope they're going to take that farther even in case where white-on-black violence is not involved.
It's not even a matter of age or skin color, there's a few people out there who think they can go around punching people for shits and giggles, and that's something that's illegal and should probably be halted.
[QUOTE=Valnar;43341899]Except intentions are an integral part of the judicial process.
[/QUOTE]
The difference between manslaughter and murder, etc but with hate crimes you're really judging peoples thoughts.
Its thought crimes.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43349759]The difference between manslaughter and murder, etc but with hate crimes you're really judging peoples thoughts.
Its thought crimes.[/QUOTE]
no it's not, you're not being charged for thinking all blacks are inferior or something, you're being charged for specifically attacking blacks for that reason, which is a different and some would say worse crime than attacking for say, a dude talking shit to you or something stupid like that
[editline]30th December 2013[/editline]
and yeah motive is always taken into account with crime too, for instance, the jury would probably want to know if someone hypothetically knocked someone else out because if he didn't his kidnapped daughter would be murdered or some shit, as that is a highly different motive to say, knocking someone out because you hate black people
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43349759]The difference between manslaughter and murder, etc but with hate crimes you're really judging peoples thoughts.
Its thought crimes.[/QUOTE]
Attacking a person of another race because they are that race is quite different than attacking a person of another race because it was convenient, in the eyes of the law.
White guy commits crime, gets charged with said crime
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43349759]The difference between manslaughter and murder, etc but with hate crimes you're really judging peoples thoughts.
Its thought crimes.[/QUOTE]
A thought crime is prosecuting someone for their thoughts. Physically attacking someone is not a thought, it's an action.
And since you already acknowledge that manslaughter and murder are different, you already understand how culpability is factored into it.
So what's the issue?
[QUOTE=Extronic;43331623]Well that kind of is how hate crimes are being legislated
White on white is fine
black on black is fine
White on black is bad[/QUOTE]
...and black on white is fine.
[QUOTE=Recco;43350027]...and black on white is fine.[/QUOTE]
Hahaha
[editline]29th December 2013[/editline]
I'd think the same thing if I read tabloids and shoddy blog websites
[QUOTE=Starpluck;43331668]This source is absolute shit. Most of the alleged stories were actually fake/years old stories being re-reported constantly yet it ignored that fact just to publish a clearly editorialized article.
For those unaware or who didn't even notice the difference: Washington Times = shit, Washington Post = credible. Their name/logo is just plain deceitful and placed on same spot with a near-exact size/font as the Post.
Good:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/9EdeuMV.png[/img]
Shit
[img]http://i.imgur.com/znD8hRo.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Who'd have thought news sites could have evil twins.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;43350651]Who'd have thought news sites could have evil twins.[/QUOTE]
You should see The New York Post.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;43349975]
So what's the issue?[/QUOTE]
He assaulted/killed somebody intentionally. Why do we need to slap on the races and extend the charges?
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43359554]He assaulted/killed somebody intentionally. Why do we need to slap on the races and extend the charges?[/QUOTE]
Because he killed someone because of their race.
[QUOTE=Extronic;43331623]Well that kind of is how hate crimes are being legislated
White on white is fine
black on black is fine
White on black is bad[/QUOTE]
black on white is fine too unless the white guy is rich
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43359554]He assaulted/killed somebody intentionally. Why do we need to slap on the races and extend the charges?[/QUOTE]
because motive plays a part in sentencing
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;43334526]Are you shitting me, there were like 3 separate threads for three separate incidents of this happening to white guys after the trayvon martin/zimmerman ordeal[/QUOTE]
ok since zimmerman wasn't even white this still makes me physically cringe hearing about that.
Can we add a new claus to the constitution where extreme stupidity can get you put away longer?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.