Unprovoked, savage attack on the elderly, where was his "white privilege"? Looks like his girl pulled him off to get the hell out of there while the other guy just looks on. This was purely motivated by hate. Bet the thug who attacked him, still roams freely to remain a threat. https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=966424943795355
But I have been assured that blacks cant be racist, wonder what kind of thought process went the the savage criminals mind before his cowardly attack on an elder?
No, only white people are racist....of course and this is just a black man making his voice heard because he's been oppressed...smh I have no idea what goes through the mind of someone capable of such cruelty, but definitely a hate crime.
When things like this happen you want me to feel "white guilt" and grovel over my "privilege"? I dont think so bud. Just serves to make me more cautious and be prepared.
I've seen boys and young men who didn't need something as deep as "hate" to beat the crap out of someone. They just saw it as fun. He may have attacked him for his skin color, or because he didn't like that he was walking too slow in front of him, or because he thought he was fat and ugly and he thought it was fun to beat up fat and ugly people. This was a crime done by an individual. His responsibility is individual. His actions "prove" nothing on a collective basis, anymore than some white people racist "prove" that "racism is an inherent trait of whiteness". I encourage you to look upon individuals as individuals - and don't bother replying to this encouragement with "...but THEY are the ones who can't imagine people as individuals". Like your parents will have asked you at some point in your life: "Are you also going to jump from a cliff if the other kids do it?".
My point would be the same no matter the races involved. A white man can beat up a black man based on motives other than racism or hate, and even if he did do it based in racial hatred, it would not be an indictment on everyone else sharing his skin tone, since the specific individual hate that specific individual person felt, and specific individual violent action, isn't shared in some sort of racial mass-telepathic mental link shared by everyone sharing the same skin tone.
Ah yes. Race baiting. And people say racism won’t mobilize conservatives. In terms of what happened? Whatever happens happens. Let’s hope it’s justice. In terms of the race baiting? Come on, are people that easily dupped?
I do get tired of teaching this lesson. Whats your evidence that is was based on racial, religious, ethnic or sexual animus? Or in other words what's your evidence that the savage attack would not have happened but for the melanin level of the victim? How do you know exactly why he was targeted and that race was pivotal? Your evidence of racial animus must reach the same burden of proof as evidence of the crime itself, in other words beyond a reasonable doubt in most jurisdiction to get the sentencing enhancement represented by a 'hate crime' status. So start proving!
its likely that the future astronaut made a snide comment on passing the couple. nobody lashes out like that for no reason.
Did you feel the same about the thread "White couple points guns at "protesters"? Funny how justice was an afterthought.
Excuses, excuses. Esau, what do you mean by "future astronaut" ? The video shows no exchange but lets assume anything was said (though there was zero indication of such) that makes it OK?
Hows about you stop pretending that a 'hate crime' is anything you want it to be, to prove some superficial and ignorant point. its not about the race of the parties. Its about the motive and underlying intent behind the criminal conduct and the prosecutors have to prove that specific intent separate and apart from proving the accused committed the elements of the crime. Learn to read about a topic before you post.
A lot of unprovoked attacks have been happening in our country lately! A sleeping homeless man had fireworks thrown on him, innocent bystanders gunned down, etc... However, let's assume you're right, does a snide comment warrant that reaction? C'mon!
since you are such a curious soul, here's your reading material. https://www.justia.com/criminal/aggravating-mitigating-factors/ https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/...nce-enhancements-mean-harder-punishments.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States The next time you post a thread on the subject, hopefully it won't be based on nothing more than a video clip of a violent crime and some lay persons' misapplication of the term hate crime.
Learn to read the words you quote. There are criminal statutes that define the elements of the charge 'looting' and different ones that define the elements of the charge' rioting' and others involving 'theft' 'assault', 'battery' and 'vandalism'. there are separate sections of statutes governing sentencing enhancements and aggravating factors that can attach to any crime if you prove the aggravating factor. See post #122 and do your homework. You don't get to decide what constitutes the burden of proof for these sentencing enhancements based on your personal agenda. Its already sitting in the law.
Indeed! I'll rely on two arguments. I can counter with I don't care about the legal ramifications, but that's a weak argument on its own. Instead I'll rely on my reply to Bluesguy. Because my point is the right words at the right time. How many times do you think I've been told "guns are needed for self defense" by conservatives? More times than I can care to remember. And yet, here we have a time when guns are being used inappropriately because no riots have broken out. But then how do we know that they weren't doing something to protect their property (which is a legal argument)? Easy, rely on the notion it's not about legality but the behavior being done.