Hate crime=thought crime?

How did such an vague and subjective catagory as (taa-daa) "HATE" end up as a modifier or category when it can't be proven substantially in a court of law? How? Nobody asked for it, and it makes ZERO sense legally, it's subjective as hell but seems to be a tool to target political opponents or rivals. We have to end this entire "hate crime" broad brush idiocy. End it.

I have a long story. You might not want to read it.

Well I worked at a place and a customer threatened to put a bullet in my head. Supposedly he said the same thing to my female boss. He was convicted of conveying threats to her but not for conveying threats to me. What was the difference? I told the DA that I didn't actually believe he would do it. My female boss said she believed be would do it.

Tell me how that makes sense. He committed two crimes but got convicted of one and not the other. The law in North Carolina is dependent upon the feelings of the victim which cannot be verified. Should assault be determined the same way? What if the person didn't punch hard and it didn't hurt? Is it still assault? This is somewhat related to the hate crime discussion. The crime should be the crime. A person's thoughts or feelings shouldn't be the basis for law since they are unverifiable but here we are.
 


As Joe Biden’s would-be successor, doing his part to nurture and support the hate industry, California Governor Gavin Newsom on May 4 announced “the Launch of CA vs Hate, a New Statewide Hotline to Report Hate Acts in California.” Proclaiming that “hate will not be tolerated,” the governor said that Californians will have “another tool to ensure that not only justice is served, but that individuals have access to additional resources to help deal with the lingering wounds that remain after such a horrendous crime occurs.”

This is agenda-driven hype. The agenda, perfectly expressed by author Michael Shellenberger in a Substack post last week, is to “manufacture a fake ‘hate’ crisis as [a] pretext for mass spying, blacklists, and censorship.” The hype, also exposed by Shellenberger in his recent article, is underscored by the fact that over the past 10 years, hate crime convictions, as opposed to “criminal complaints of hate crimes,” have not increased at all. In a state with 40 million people, hate crime convictions were a minuscule 109 in 2021, and a negligible increase from 107 in 2012.
`````````````````

Recognize any of that today? It’s bigger than ever, with the hate machine still focused on white racist hate crimes. And if a perpetrator isn’t white, such as the Latino man who just murdered five people in Texas, the hate machine makes sure to play down that fact, but is sure to mention he is a “suspected Nazi sympathizer.” What about another Latino, also in Texas, who recently ran his SUV into a crowd outside an immigrant center, killing eight? The media takeaway—he yelled “anti-immigrant insults” when he was detained. White supremacy, courtesy of Latinos.

If the story doesn’t fit the narrative, and you can’t find a story that does, then warp the story. Make it fit. Hugely disproportionate rates of black-on-black crime? What’s that? Blacks beating a white girl half to death? Crickets. A white person, with the assistance of black person, subdues a deranged black career criminal before he hurts somebody and, in the struggle, he unintentionally chokes him to death? The dead black criminal is a saint, the brave white hero is a “vigilante,” and the brave black hero is ignored because he doesn’t fit the narrative.
 
Last edited:
As would I. Well, most of them, anyway.

Doesn't take away from the fact that a murder committed because they didn't like their race is a lot worse than a murder that happened because of a stupid bar fight.
Murder is murder and one isn;t worse than another.

Motive doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned
 
Murder is murder and one isn;t worse than another.

Motive doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned

It does as far as the law is concerned, which is why it draws a distinction between first degree murder, second degree murder, and manslaughter.

It also draws distinctions between a crime of passion and premeditated murder.

This is just another mitigating factor.
 
It does as far as the law is concerned, which is why it draws a distinction between first degree murder, second degree murder, and manslaughter.

It also draws distinctions between a crime of passion and premeditated murder.

This is just another mitigating factor.

And I said it doesn't' matter to me.

I don't care why a person commits murder and the why would play no role in guilt or innocence as far as I'm concerned
 
Nobody gives a shit what you think.

Except our laws say differently.
And IDGAF what the laws say.

Motive is not important. A so called "hate crime" murder leaves the victim no less dead than any other murder.
 
It does as far as the law is concerned, which is why it draws a distinction between first degree murder, second degree murder, and manslaughter.

It also draws distinctions between a crime of passion and premeditated murder.

This is just another mitigating factor.

Murder is bad.

Those convicted of murder should get life in prison.

Those who commit hate crimes should get 22 years in prison.

I'd say hate crimes are not worse but actually better.
 
Murder is bad.

Those convicted of murder should get life in prison.

Those who commit hate crimes should get 22 years in prison.

I'd say hate crimes are not worse but actually better.

Reality. we make distinctions on kinds of murder.

The guy who drags a black man behind a truck because he was in the wrong neighborhood is on a much higher magnitude of murder as the guy who kills the neighbor he catches in bed with his wife.

Both are bad.

But I can have contempt for the former while I can have sympathy for the latter.
 
Reality. we make distinctions on kinds of murder.

The guy who drags a black man behind a truck because he was in the wrong neighborhood is on a much higher magnitude of murder as the guy who kills the neighbor he catches in bed with his wife.

Both are bad.

But I can have contempt for the former while I can have sympathy for the latter.
And yet the victim is no less dead.

Murder is murder and dead is dead how and why a murder victim is killed is irrelevant.
 
Naw, you just want them all to have easy access to guns, though.. because the founding slave owners said so.

Guns have nothing to do with it.

And My mother was Black so I probably have people who were slaves as my ancestors unlike you.

Really what is the point of whining about slavery when we have abolished it?
 
Guns have nothing to do with it.

And My mother was Black so I probably have people who were slaves as my ancestors unlike you.

Really what is the point of whining about slavery when we have abolished it?
Because we are still paying for the consequences.

When the FSR established the Second Amendment, it was with the expectation that proper gentlemen would have guns to put down potential slave revolts.

Today, we live with the insanity of gun culture- A murder rate ten times that of other industrial democracies, militarized police, some areas being unlivable because of the crime.
 
Because we are still paying for the consequences.

When the FSR established the Second Amendment, it was with the expectation that proper gentlemen would have guns to put down potential slave revolts.

Today, we live with the insanity of gun culture- A murder rate ten times that of other industrial democracies, militarized police, some areas being unlivable because of the crime.

Who is "we"? It's not you white boy. I have more reason to complain about slavery than you do and I don't waste my time crying over it like you do.

Our murder rate is about what it was in 1950 but we all know facts don't really matter to you.
 
Who is "we"? It's not you white boy. I have more reason to complain about slavery than you do and I don't waste my time crying over it like you do.

Our murder rate is about what it was in 1950 but we all know facts don't really matter to you.

Our murder rate is still much too high, because too many people have guns.

But because you gun fetishists are too loud, we are stuck with it, until regular people get fed up.
 
Our murder rate is still much too high, because too many people have guns.

But because you gun fetishists are too loud, we are stuck with it, until regular people get fed up.

I have no fetishes and I'm not so intellectually stunted to realize it's not guns that are the cause of our crime and murder rate but you need to work with an ultra-simplified thought process so you can pretend to actually understand the world.
 

Forum List

Back
Top