Bias attack says NYPD on NYC subway in Brooklyn

[Asclepias]

Then arrest him and charge him with a hate crime. Boom, done.

"The NYPD has classified the attack as a bias incident." Gee, ya think???
So, when it is against a black, it is a HATE CRIME..
When it is against a white, it's a BIAS INCIDENT????

So much for equality. Not in NY!

There cannot be equality when we do not have equality in our courts and law.

As it stands today the 'reasonable person' standard is not used in our courts if any kind of minority is involved. It then becomes a 'reasonable minority' standard or perspective. For example, normally if Bob and Ted get into a fight because Ted called Bob a bad name, whether Ted used 'fighting words' or not is determined by the 'reasonable person' standard, i.e. what a reasonable person would react to. But if a white man calls a black man a name or vice versa, then it becomes a 'reasonable black man' standard, i.e. what would a reasonable black man do in this situation, and that determines the guilt or innosense of the white person involved. This began with a change in favor of women and against men in a sexual harassment case where the 'reasonable person' standard was tossed for the 'reasonable woman' standard but it has since become applied to all minority cases of any kind.

White male Christian heterosexuals do NOT have equality before the law.

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

That is the whole point. Whites are being discriminated against by the legal system and libs like you are so apathetic to it that you cant even bother to read the fucking articles, lol.

 

[Asclepias]

Its true. Seeing a group of 2 or more whites violently attack a lone black person is very rare. But the races flipped? Shit. I could find thousands on youtube.

black men are very brave when there's 5 or more of them up against an 80 yr old white guy...

You were saying dumb asshole...

Those werent white men, they were Canadians, lol, just like hispanic men arent white. /sarc

Huh?

So you are going to say that liberals dont regularly refer to hispanics as if they are not white?

Seriously?

Do I have to drag out all of Guanos posts about how whites are a minority in several states due to the influx of Hispanics?

Some Hispanics are white. Not all of them.

 

[Asclepias]

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

That is the whole point. Whites are being discriminated against by the legal system and libs like you are so apathetic to it that you cant even bother to read the fucking articles, lol.

Told you! Its a whine fest now that white boys dont have the law in their favor. To them the law is unfair because it treats everyone equal. They would rather it be like the old days.

 

[jillian]

Its true. Seeing a group of 2 or more whites violently attack a lone black person is very rare. But the races flipped? Shit. I could find thousands on youtube.

black men are very brave when there's 5 or more of them up against an 80 yr old white guy...

You were saying dumb asshole...

Those werent white men, they were Canadians, lol, just like hispanic men arent white. /sarc

Huh?

So you are going to say that liberals dont regularly refer to hispanics as if they are not white?

Seriously?

Do I have to drag out all of Guanos posts about how whites are a minority in several states due to the influx of Hispanics?

I think everyone refers to Hispanics at times as if they are not white. It depends on the issue. But the reality is that some Hispanics are white whic has zero to do with any discrimination or otherwise they may suffer as Hispanics.

why do you feel threatened that there are efforts to protect people from being victimized simply because of their race or ethnicity?

 

[Asclepias]

black men are very brave when there's 5 or more of them up against an 80 yr old white guy...

You were saying dumb asshole...

Those werent white men, they were Canadians, lol, just like hispanic men arent white. /sarc

Huh?

So you are going to say that liberals dont regularly refer to hispanics as if they are not white?

Seriously?

Do I have to drag out all of Guanos posts about how whites are a minority in several states due to the influx of Hispanics?

I think everyone refers to Hispanics at times as if they are not white. It depends on the issue. But the reality is that some Hispanics are white whic has zero to do with any discrimination or otherwise they may suffer as Hispanics.

why do you feel threatened that there are efforts to protect people from being victimized simply because of their race or ethnicity?

Because it doesnt give white boys a leg up.

 

[jillian]

"The NYPD has classified the attack as a bias incident." Gee, ya think???
So, when it is against a black, it is a HATE CRIME..
When it is against a white, it's a BIAS INCIDENT????

So much for equality. Not in NY!

There cannot be equality when we do not have equality in our courts and law.

As it stands today the 'reasonable person' standard is not used in our courts if any kind of minority is involved. It then becomes a 'reasonable minority' standard or perspective. For example, normally if Bob and Ted get into a fight because Ted called Bob a bad name, whether Ted used 'fighting words' or not is determined by the 'reasonable person' standard, i.e. what a reasonable person would react to. But if a white man calls a black man a name or vice versa, then it becomes a 'reasonable black man' standard, i.e. what would a reasonable black man do in this situation, and that determines the guilt or innosense of the white person involved. This began with a change in favor of women and against men in a sexual harassment case where the 'reasonable person' standard was tossed for the 'reasonable woman' standard but it has since become applied to all minority cases of any kind.

White male Christian heterosexuals do NOT have equality before the law.

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

I don't think it's that either. I think we're dealing with people who are frightened and see the advantages they get from being born white Christian and make diminishing b

 

[JimBowie1958]

I think everyone refers to Hispanics at times as if they are not white. It depends on the issue. But the reality is that some Hispanics are white whic has zero to do with any discrimination or otherwise they may suffer as Hispanics.

Oh, so they are white when it suits your talking points and not when it doesnt? Thanks for the clarification, lol.

why do you feel threatened that there are efforts to protect people from being victimized simply because of their race or ethnicity?

I feel threatened by any legal system that does not give EQUAL PROTECTION under the law.

If fixing things for minorities requires the majority to get unequal treatment by the law then the solution is STILL UNEQUAL AND UNJUST, dear.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I don't think it's that either. I think we're dealing with people who are frightened and see the advantages they get from being born white Christian and make diminishing b

Now we have the lib spin on fucking over the majority population as if white minimum wage workers shouldnt be concerned because they are only losing some of their white privilege.

 

[Asclepias]

There cannot be equality when we do not have equality in our courts and law.

As it stands today the 'reasonable person' standard is not used in our courts if any kind of minority is involved. It then becomes a 'reasonable minority' standard or perspective. For example, normally if Bob and Ted get into a fight because Ted called Bob a bad name, whether Ted used 'fighting words' or not is determined by the 'reasonable person' standard, i.e. what a reasonable person would react to. But if a white man calls a black man a name or vice versa, then it becomes a 'reasonable black man' standard, i.e. what would a reasonable black man do in this situation, and that determines the guilt or innosense of the white person involved. This began with a change in favor of women and against men in a sexual harassment case where the 'reasonable person' standard was tossed for the 'reasonable woman' standard but it has since become applied to all minority cases of any kind.

White male Christian heterosexuals do NOT have equality before the law.

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

I don't think it's that either. I think we're dealing with people who are frightened and see the advantages they get from being born white Christian and make diminishing b

If you knew that the events like Black Wall Street and Rosewood were not just isolated events you may begin to agree with me. Check out the book Buried In the Bitter Waters. That part of american history has been all but hidden. I think that has a large part to do with the phenomenon as well.

 

[Asclepias]

I don't think it's that either. I think we're dealing with people who are frightened and see the advantages they get from being born white Christian and make diminishing b

Now we have the lib spin on fucking over the majority population as if white minimum wage workers shouldnt be concerned because they are only losing some of their white privilege.

Looks like he thought his white privilege would come to visit him in his bed. He needs to get with the times. He does have to at least show up for his white privilege in these days and times.

 

[Jackson]

"The NYPD has classified the attack as a bias incident." Gee, ya think???
So, when it is against a black, it is a HATE CRIME..
When it is against a white, it's a BIAS INCIDENT????

So much for equality. Not in NY!

There cannot be equality when we do not have equality in our courts and law.

As it stands today the 'reasonable person' standard is not used in our courts if any kind of minority is involved. It then becomes a 'reasonable minority' standard or perspective. For example, normally if Bob and Ted get into a fight because Ted called Bob a bad name, whether Ted used 'fighting words' or not is determined by the 'reasonable person' standard, i.e. what a reasonable person would react to. But if a white man calls a black man a name or vice versa, then it becomes a 'reasonable black man' standard, i.e. what would a reasonable black man do in this situation, and that determines the guilt or innosense of the white person involved. This began with a change in favor of women and against men in a sexual harassment case where the 'reasonable person' standard was tossed for the 'reasonable woman' standard but it has since become applied to all minority cases of any kind.

White male Christian heterosexuals do NOT have equality before the law.

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

You shouldn't have said that last sentence. Just who, pray tell, burns towns down, loots and destroy local businesses.

For years blacks were ostracized, physically harmed, ridiculed and treated like dirt. Those times are changing and the culprits are found and prosecuted. Finally!

But we cannot go backwards...this will bring only animosity and the circle of abuse continues.
Let's be fair. We are in the present, now.
If a black is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech we damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That is the right thing to do.

Conversely, If a white is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech, we had damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That, too, is the right thing to do.

 

[JimBowie1958]

 

[Jackson]

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

I don't think it's that either. I think we're dealing with people who are frightened and see the advantages they get from being born white Christian and make diminishing b

If you knew that the events like Black Wall Street and Rosewood were not just isolated events you may begin to agree with me. Check out the book Buried In the Bitter Waters. That part of american history has been all but hidden. I think that has a large part to do with the phenomenon as well.

And to repeat, that is history. We are talking about now. We are equals and should be treated as such. Equal laws for equal people. No one should get away with a HATE CRIME, black white, or purple.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And to repeat, that is history. We are talking about now. We are equals and should be treated as such. Equal laws for equal people. No one should get away with a HATE CRIME, black white, or purple.

Lol, sounds good to the Oligarchs to leave the current discrimination against whites still the law of the land, I am sure. It is the white working class that they are most afraid of.

No, we have to make the system EXACTLY EQUAL when we stand before our courts.

Nothing less is acceptable.

 

[Asclepias]

There cannot be equality when we do not have equality in our courts and law.

As it stands today the 'reasonable person' standard is not used in our courts if any kind of minority is involved. It then becomes a 'reasonable minority' standard or perspective. For example, normally if Bob and Ted get into a fight because Ted called Bob a bad name, whether Ted used 'fighting words' or not is determined by the 'reasonable person' standard, i.e. what a reasonable person would react to. But if a white man calls a black man a name or vice versa, then it becomes a 'reasonable black man' standard, i.e. what would a reasonable black man do in this situation, and that determines the guilt or innosense of the white person involved. This began with a change in favor of women and against men in a sexual harassment case where the 'reasonable person' standard was tossed for the 'reasonable woman' standard but it has since become applied to all minority cases of any kind.

White male Christian heterosexuals do NOT have equality before the law.

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

You shouldn't have said that last sentence. Just who, pray tell, burns towns down, loots and destroy local businesses.

For years blacks were ostracized, physically harmed, ridiculed and treated like dirt. Those times are changing and the culprits are found and prosecuted. Finally!

But we cannot go backwards...this will bring only animosity and the circle of abuse continues.
Let's be fair. We are in the present, now.
If a black is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech we damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That is the right thing to do.

Conversely, If a white is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech, we had damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That, too, is the right thing to do.

Why shouldnt I have said that last sentence? Whites are the ones that burn towns, loot, and destroy businesses. Their methods have changed since it became illegal to do so but they still make laws that unfairly target Blacks and Mexicans, allow the police to brutalize Blacks and Mexicans, send more people of color to prison for the same crimes whites do and for longer.

 

[Asclepias]

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

I don't think it's that either. I think we're dealing with people who are frightened and see the advantages they get from being born white Christian and make diminishing b

If you knew that the events like Black Wall Street and Rosewood were not just isolated events you may begin to agree with me. Check out the book Buried In the Bitter Waters. That part of american history has been all but hidden. I think that has a large part to do with the phenomenon as well.

And to repeat, that is history. We are talking about now. We are equals and should be treated as such. Equal laws for equal people. No one should get away with a HATE CRIME, black white, or purple.

That history has to be publicized and dealt with. Whites like to hide it which creates more animosity and have not paid for what they have done. Of course no one should get away with a hate crime but thats just what generations of whites did. They got away with hate crimes.

 

[Jackson]

Then arrest him and charge him with a hate crime. Boom, done.

"The NYPD has classified the attack as a bias incident." Gee, ya think???
So, when it is against a black, it is a HATE CRIME..
When it is against a white, it's a BIAS INCIDENT????

So much for equality. Not in NY!

There cannot be equality when we do not have equality in our courts and law.

As it stands today the 'reasonable person' standard is not used in our courts if any kind of minority is involved. It then becomes a 'reasonable minority' standard or perspective. For example, normally if Bob and Ted get into a fight because Ted called Bob a bad name, whether Ted used 'fighting words' or not is determined by the 'reasonable person' standard, i.e. what a reasonable person would react to. But if a white man calls a black man a name or vice versa, then it becomes a 'reasonable black man' standard, i.e. what would a reasonable black man do in this situation, and that determines the guilt or innosense of the white person involved. This began with a change in favor of women and against men in a sexual harassment case where the 'reasonable person' standard was tossed for the 'reasonable woman' standard but it has since become applied to all minority cases of any kind.

White male Christian heterosexuals do NOT have equality before the law.

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

"So, it's what does it matter?" When you are wrong...and insulting. You said Hate crimes and Bias incidents were different before. A Hate crime was merely a conversational description, inferring it was not used a legal description of a crime. Now tell me why that black man was not charged with a Hate crime!
Or God, forbid, Was Jillian wrong???

 

[Jackson]

Equality! White Christians Herero or not have superiority before the law. The whole white victim thing wears thin after a while.

Now stop it please.

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

You shouldn't have said that last sentence. Just who, pray tell, burns towns down, loots and destroy local businesses.

For years blacks were ostracized, physically harmed, ridiculed and treated like dirt. Those times are changing and the culprits are found and prosecuted. Finally!

But we cannot go backwards...this will bring only animosity and the circle of abuse continues.
Let's be fair. We are in the present, now.
If a black is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech we damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That is the right thing to do.

Conversely, If a white is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech, we had damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That, too, is the right thing to do.

Why shouldnt I have said that last sentence? Whites are the ones that burn towns, loot, and destroy businesses. Their methods have changed since it became illegal to do so but they still make laws that unfairly target Blacks and Mexicans, allow the police to brutalize Blacks and Mexicans, send more people of color to prison for the same crimes whites do and for longer.

Provide a link for the bolded statement you just provided.

 

[Asclepias]

But, but, you said:

"Jillian: "hate crime is a conversational description. the police align their language more with the statute.

stop whining,

white people aren't the subject of very many bias crimes. so i'd suggest you put on your big boy pants."

But you said Hate Crime is just a conversational description. I didn't see any reference to it being a Conversational term. Believe me I am not whining. Just need to be caught up with the conversation description. Could you please give me a link?

Why does it even matter? Bias crime. Hate crime. Same difference. But don't worry if anyone kicks the bejesus out of you while calling you a white devil, they'll be charged under whatever bias/hate stature exists.

Seriously, other than white male Christians whining, I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is

You hit the nail on the head. For centuries it was ok for whites to kill, hang, maim etc any Black people they could find without threat of of repercussion. When it became legal for Blacks to fight back you saw a drastic drop in white on Black violence as these white males are basically cowards that need the full strength of the law to back them. Now when a Black person attacks a white person it causes them stress because they cant go out and burn a Black town to the ground in retaliation.

You shouldn't have said that last sentence. Just who, pray tell, burns towns down, loots and destroy local businesses.

For years blacks were ostracized, physically harmed, ridiculed and treated like dirt. Those times are changing and the culprits are found and prosecuted. Finally!

But we cannot go backwards...this will bring only animosity and the circle of abuse continues.
Let's be fair. We are in the present, now.
If a black is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech we damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That is the right thing to do.

Conversely, If a white is physically assaulted, verbally assaulted with racist speech, we had damn well expect the perpetrator to be arrested with a Hate Crime and prosecuted. That, too, is the right thing to do.

Why shouldnt I have said that last sentence? Whites are the ones that burn towns, loot, and destroy businesses. Their methods have changed since it became illegal to do so but they still make laws that unfairly target Blacks and Mexicans, allow the police to brutalize Blacks and Mexicans, send more people of color to prison for the same crimes whites do and for longer.

Provide a link for the bolded statement you just provided.

6 Interesting Things You Didn't Know About ‘Black Wall Street’ - Atlanta Black Star

If you need more than one please read the book I suggested earlier called Buried in the Bitter Waters.