UK police begin recording attacks on punks, emos and goths as hate crimes
69 replies, posted
[QUOTE=FoneJack;40158554]STOP BEING DIFFERENT UGH[/QUOTE]
What
[QUOTE=RobbL;40158578]What[/QUOTE]
that's pretty much the point of a hate crime
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;40158720]that's pretty much the point of a hate crime[/QUOTE]
what is
[QUOTE=RobbL;40158753]what is[/QUOTE]
"STOP BEING DIFFERENT UGH"
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;40158772]"STOP BEING DIFFERENT UGH"[/QUOTE]
Elaborate
I'm sorry, but what the fuck? Goths, emos et. al. all come from pretty privileged backgrounds, and cannot even begin to compare to those who are actually oppressed with violence and hate.
This whole thing will destroy the very meaning of a "hate crime" and dilute it into, well, nothing more than a crime.
[QUOTE=RobbL;40158753]what is[/QUOTE]
You're kidding, right? Nobody can be this...awful at understanding something.
Hate crimes are crimes commuted due to a prejudice against a certain race, culture or lifestyle, rather than crimes committed against someone for individual merits. For example as most of the shitbags who this targets would do;
"COME ON YOU BLACK/ PAKI/ KIKE CUNT, I'LL BASH YOUR FACE IN BRUV".
Attacking someone because of culture, race or belief, rather than because of who they are themselves.
You might think that this is silly based on the premise that you can change your subculture as opposed to your race or sex but if you think about it, if people really had the choice to not dress like a douchebag then why would they do it in the first place?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;40158826]You're kidding, right? Nobody can be this...awful at understanding something.
Hate crimes are crimes commuted due to a prejudice against a certain race, culture or lifestyle, rather than crimes committed against someone for individual merits. For example as most of the shitbags who this targets would do;
"COME ON YOU BLACK/ PAKI/ KIKE CUNT, I'LL BASH YOUR FACE IN BRUV".
Attacking someone because of culture, race or belief, rather than because of who they are themselves.[/QUOTE]
Imo a 'crime' that can't be committed or exist by itself shouldn't be classified as a crime in the first place
There is no hate crime that wouldn't also be covered by any other actual crimes like harrasment, assault, ect.
I mean what's the difference between assaulting someone because they slept with your wife or doing the same because they're a muslim? The intent, action and effect is still the same. The reasoning behind a crime has never been part of the criteria for what any other offense is defined as...
And it's not like the existence of hate crime discourages people from acting on prejudice
[QUOTE=RobbL;40158897]Imo a 'crime' that can't be committed or exist by itself shouldn't be classified as a crime in the first place
There is no hate crime that wouldn't also be covered by any other actual crimes like harrasment, assault, ect.
I mean what's the difference between assaulting someone because they slept with your wife or doing the same because they're a muslim? The intent, action and effect is still the same. The reasoning behind a crime has never been part of the criteria for what any other offense is defined as...
And it's not like the existence of hate crime discourages people from acting on prejudice[/QUOTE]
''Oh no we should punish the people who attacked someone because they were being discriminatory extra because they didnt do anything to deserve it or have it coming and chances are the people who were beat up otherwise didn't :downs:''
Motivation shouldn't be taken into account during sentencing at all. The courts shouldn't care if you beat up someone because they were black or because they slept with your wife. You affected the victim all the same (broke his wrist / leg etc.) so why should you being able to justify beating someone up for your own personal reasons get you any less punishment then for beating up someone because they belonged to a certain group etc.
Does classifying a crime something as a hate crime really actually do anything? Why should motivation behind an attack other than self defense be taken into account?
Nobody deserves to be punished for liking some subculture, no matter what it is.
We'll that is a bias motivated crime so yeah it can be considered a hate crime. Gotta be careful though, Westboro might see this as another way to sue money out of people, since they are a group that everyone generally hates.
[QUOTE=SilverDragon619;40159091]Nobody deserves to be punished for liking some subculture, no matter what it is.[/QUOTE]
Except for goreans. Fuck goreans.
[QUOTE=Unmercy;40159135]We'll that is a bias motivated crime so yeah it can be considered a hate crime. Gotta be careful though, Westboro might see this as another way to sue money out of people, since they are a group that everyone generally hates.[/QUOTE]
What does WBC have to do with the operation of an English police department?
Ok all joking aside the reason why crimes committed at people for the group that they belong to is classified differently from crimes committed at people for personal reasons is simply because the former creates a resounding psychological impact amongst that targeted group, whereas the latter's effects usually don't go beyond the victim's inner circle and immediate area.
yeh an inter-personal murder would add a lot of gloom to a neighborhood but there isn't that particularly pernicious sense of psychological terror instilled into the minds of people that - for all other intents and purposes - had absolutely nothing to do with the victim aside from sharing his skin color.
What would you fear more, a man who killed another man in your neighborhood because of a personal grudge he held, or a virulent racist who espouses wholesale violence and murders someone he doesn't even know merely because of his skin color (which you happen to share)?
[QUOTE=Unmercy;40159135]We'll that is a bias motivated crime so yeah it can be considered a hate crime. Gotta be careful though, Westboro might see this as another way to sue money out of people, since they are a group that everyone generally hates.[/QUOTE]
Westboro are seen as a hate group themselves and are banned from entering the UK
I kinda wanna see how far they'll take the term "subculture", honestly.
Wow what about otherkin
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;40159443]I kinda wanna see how far they'll take the term "subculture", honestly.[/QUOTE]
In sociological terms, a subculture is any behaviour that deviates from the norm even slightly, so every interest could be called a subculture.
I am often discriminated because of my love of lepidoptery and i wish to see such behaviour criminalised.
Breaking News: National Emo Beatdown Day cancelled for this year
[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;40159223]What does WBC have to do with the operation of an English police department?[/QUOTE]
Excuse my wishful thinking, I think law enforcement should consider all things that fall under hate crimes as hate crimes. I actually think the actions they are taking should be the norm. Still, with that train of thought, I wonder who would try to exploit the law.
[QUOTE=matt.ant;40159272]Westboro are seen as a hate group themselves and are banned from entering the UK[/QUOTE]
Lucky
[editline]4th April 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;40159059]''Oh no we should punish the people who attacked someone because they were being discriminatory extra because they didnt do anything to deserve it or have it coming and chances are the people who were beat up otherwise didn't :downs:''
Motivation shouldn't be taken into account during sentencing at all. The courts shouldn't care if you beat up someone because they were black or because they slept with your wife. You affected the victim all the same (broke his wrist / leg etc.) so why should you being able to justify beating someone up for your own personal reasons get you any less punishment then for beating up someone because they belonged to a certain group etc.
Does classifying a crime something as a hate crime really actually do anything? Why should motivation behind an attack other than self defense be taken into account?[/QUOTE]
Motivation is considered because at some level, knowing it or not, the victim usually provokes the actions taken against him and we have sympathy towards the suspect in that respect. Although, we don't condone the action, we go easier because of this sympathy. When considering a hate crime however, the motivation is not something we could sympathize with.
Examples of moments where sympathy played a huge part in crimes would be like when Gary Plauche killed his sons kidnapper/molester. He got 5 years and 300 hours of community service, a slap on the wrist.
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;40159059]''Oh no we should punish the people who attacked someone because they were being discriminatory extra because they didnt do anything to deserve it or have it coming and chances are the people who were beat up otherwise didn't :downs:''
Motivation shouldn't be taken into account during sentencing at all. The courts shouldn't care if you beat up someone because they were black or because they slept with your wife. You affected the victim all the same (broke his wrist / leg etc.) so why should you being able to justify beating someone up for your own personal reasons get you any less punishment then for beating up someone because they belonged to a certain group etc.
Does classifying a crime something as a hate crime really actually do anything? Why should motivation behind an attack other than self defense be taken into account?[/QUOTE]
Woah what?
Self-defense is a motivation and I don't agree that people that kill someone in self-defense should get the same sentencing as a murderer.
This is why motivation must be taken into account, less we punish people who didn't have a choice in what they did.
[editline]4th April 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;40159614]In sociological terms, a subculture is any behaviour that deviates from the norm even slightly, so every interest could be called a subculture.
I am often discriminated because of my love of lepidoptery and i wish to see such behaviour criminalised.[/QUOTE]
I have never heard of anyone being discriminated for liking butterflies.
Hate crime charges are stupid
Someone should be punished for what they did, not their reasoning behind it
As a punk, I am ok with this.
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;40158097]It's still not the same thing as beating someone up because of their race.[/QUOTE]
Beating somebody up because of their culture is the basically the same thing.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;40160487]Hate crime charges are stupid
Someone should be punished for what they did, not their reasoning behind it[/QUOTE]
Except its not just punishment, its reabilitation.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;40160487]Hate crime charges are stupid
Someone should be punished for what they did, not their reasoning behind it[/QUOTE]
Their motivation for a crime is a big part of the crime. If someone killed someone who was threatening them (hypothetically), and thus saved the lives of more people, should they receive the full murder charge? I mean, they just murdered a guy after all, self defence or not. If someone stole from a black person, and had intent to steal more from black people only, why should they just receive a normal theft charge? They clearly had intent to steal from one specific racial group, they weren't stealing at random, or because it was someone they thought deserved it for who they were.
Reasoning is a massive part of crimes, it shouldn't let people get away with crimes, but it should be considered when sentencing (though I don't necessarily agree with increasing their prison sentence, maybe enrolling them into a relevant workshop or course to try and "fix" the reason they committed the crime on top of their sentence).
Sentence length shouldn't be affected by "oh he hated this particular subculture" in my personal opinion.
Whether you kill someone because of a group you perceive they belong to or not likelihood is you still hate them because you killed them. What if you really hated an individual and wanted to kill them? If the hate is such a bad thing that aggravates crime against a group why can't it be applied to hatred of a single person not involving any hot topics such as racism and subcultures? The distinction just implies that those investigating can somehow know exactly what the murderer was thinking at the time they committed it. Hating alone isn't a crime unless you do something that physically harms someone because of it but that is already a crime in itself, I don't see the need for the hate distinction.
"Oh your family member was killed but sorry it wasn't a hate crime so the guy won't be getting a longer sentence."
Seems to me just like some kind of legislation for press or show so they can big up any crimes that they label with the umbrella term.
[QUOTE=JustExtreme;40160808]Sentence length shouldn't be affected by "oh he hated this particular subculture" in my personal opinion.
Whether you kill someone because of a group you perceive they belong to or not likelihood is you still hate them because you killed them. What if you really hated an individual and wanted to kill them? If the hate is such a bad thing that aggravates crime against a group why can't it be applied to hatred of a single person not involving any hot topics such as racism and subcultures? The distinction just implies that those investigating can somehow know exactly what the murderer was thinking at the time they committed it. Hating alone isn't a crime unless you do something that physically harms someone because of it but that is already a crime in itself, I don't see the need for the hate distinction.[/QUOTE]
A whole lot more rehabilitation is needed if they attacked someone purely for being different.
And a longer prison term definitely helps with rehabilitation right?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.