And the bigotry continues

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
I once mentioned to a codriver [a white female] that when the street is named for ML King, you know it's not an 'upscale' neighborhood, and she said "I never would have taken you for a racist!" Huh? I thought it was a simple observation, easily confirmed: there are no streets named for MLK in areas of high dollar real estate. Ditto for pawn shops, rent to own, check cashing storefronts, "buy here, pay here" car lots, or laundromats, either. Is that racist, really?
Noticing that most streets named after MLK Jr are in bad neighborhoods or aren't primary roads is hardly racist. The racist part came in the politics of selecting which streets get renamed. This site chronicles just how contentious, and racists, the process can be.
http://mlkstreet.com/
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
I once mentioned to a codriver [a white female] that when the street is named for ML King, you know it's not an 'upscale' neighborhood, and she said "I never would have taken you for a racist!" Huh? I thought it was a simple observation, easily confirmed: there are no streets named for MLK in areas of high dollar real estate. Ditto for pawn shops, rent to own, check cashing storefronts, "buy here, pay here" car lots, or laundromats, either. Is that racist, really?

Can't stand drama mamas. It's gotten to the point where you can't say a straight up fact, or make an observation, without being labeled a racist. Some people just can't see truth thru their rose-colored glasses.
 

Windsor

Veteran Expediter
Can't stand drama mamas. It's gotten to the point where you can't say a straight up fact, or make an observation, without being labeled a racist. Some people just can't see truth thru their rose-colored glasses.
Oh do you have some kind of problem with the color rose or something?
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Two guys walking down two different streets in the city of (fill in any name you choose). One guy is a middle aged white guy. The other guy is (gay/black/Jewish/fat/short/whatever). The first attacker is in trouble. The second attacker is in TROUBLE because, for the purpose of this thread, he attacked a gay so it's automatically a hate crime because gay people are "more special" than ordinary people and therefore the exact same attack and offense is a greater crime. I'm sorry, being of a particular race or sexual proclivity shouldn't make one more important.

Commit the same crime against a paraplegic, a child, a person with mental capacity in the retarded range and perhaps a few other categories and a few extra whacks with a baseball bat would be warranted.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Contrary to popular belief, it's not automatic. The prosecution has to actually prove the attack happened all or in part because of the race, color, creed, national origin, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Consider the source.
A lot of people think if a crime is committed against a minority, or a homosexual, or some other protected class, that the crime is automatically elevated to that of a hate crime. And, many of those same people believe that if a white person is the one attacked that it can't be a hate crime. They're wrong on both counts. In fact, last year in Washington DC the majority of hate crimes had whites as the victim. That's almost certainly a backlash for the Ferguson shooting. Nationwide, hate crimes against blacks still far outnumber hate crimes against whites, Hispanics, Asians and other races. Attacks on Jews are down, balanced out by the increase of attacks on Muslims, so it's a wash there.

Ironically (not really), attacks on gays are up. That's what in-your-face gets you.

hate-crime-america-numbers
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Keep in mind, Jews are white. A lot of American Jews just blend in and keep quiet. Those numbers could be flawed.
I'm not sure what you mean. If they're white and blend in and keep quiet, the chances of them being attacked because they are Jewish, and therefore listed as a victim of a hate crime, would be less, no?

In any case, the current flawed numbers are down from the previous flawed numbers of the past.
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I'm not sure what you mean. If they're white and blend in and keep quiet, the chances of them being attacked because they are Jewish, and therefore listed as a victim of a hate crime, would be less, no?

In any case, the current flawed numbers are down from the previous flawed numbers of the past.
They keep quiet about being Jewish. The attack is then just considered a random attack.

If they spoke up, the numbers of attacks on Jews would be higher.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Erroneous hate crime numbers:
DOJ concedes that it does not get reports from all police departments, and that what it gets covers only 79.3 percent of the American population. However, even the places that do count hate crimes do it in wildly inconsistent ways. No fewer than 13,022 departments sent in information, so there was plenty of room for inconsistency, and of those departments, no fewer than 11,290 reported no bias crimes at all.

One might conclude that the hate-free departments are in out-of-the way, homogeneous places where everyone gets along, but no. Atlanta, for example, reported no hate. In fact, all 2.4 million people who lived Cobb, DeKalb, and Fulton Counties were free of hate. The 2.5 million Floridians who live in Miami-Date County and the 1.8 million in Broward County were equally hate free. The 1.3 million people of Hillsborough County, which contains Tampa, were just as fortunate, as were the 900,000 North Carolinians who live in the county that contains Raleigh and the 780,000 people of San Mateo County, California.


Atlanta: too busy to hate

New Orleans had only two hate crimes, and Philadelphia’s population of 1.5 million produced only 11.

Seattle, Washington (population 627,000; 85 hate crimes) and Lexington, Kentucky (population 302,000; 41 hate crimes) are, according to this report, some of the nastiest places in America, with per capita hate-crime rates that are 19 times that of Philadelphia, 26 times that of Chicago, and 85 times that of Baltimore. It is easy to imagine majority-white police departments earnestly tracking down hate; the police in Baltimore and Philadelphia have their hands full fighting crime.


Lexington, Kentucky: a nasty place to live.

Even within the same state, there are strange disparities. The populations of Memphis and Nashville are about the same, but Memphis had 61 hate crimes to Nashville’s 10. Dallas, Boston, and Louisville are a few of the cities that didn’t bother to send in reports at all.

Obviously, this report is meaningless. Every year DOJ puts it out because Congress requires it by law. Every so often Congress adds new categories of victims for the police to track: handicapped people, homosexuals, Muslims. Police officers can’t stand this kind of paperwork, and plenty of them probably just don’t do it. The DOJ bureaucrats who actually have to compile the crazy stuff they get from the field are bound to know that the report they are writing is a farce, but they get paid anyway.

Hate Crime Statistics, 2012 is a perfect example of the confusion and futility that ensue when a multi-racial country refuses to accept the most obvious facts about race.
.

http://www.amren.com/features/2013/11/a-meaningless-hate-crime-report/
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Why is any crime a hate crime. It is what it is regardless of the victim. It shouldn't matter who the victim is. Unless of course liberals are involved with their redefining and relabeling programs that make identical things be different depending on subject/recipient.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
DOJ now separates Hispanics and whites in perpetrator category.
Previously they were included together, but separated in victim category.
New DOJ Statistics on Race and Violent Crime
Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has just published a table of statisticson race and violent crime that she received from the Department of Justice. For the first time in figures of this kind, DOJ has treated Hispanics as a separate category rather than lumping them in with whites. These data cover all violent crimes except murder, but the number of murders is tiny compared to other violent crimes.
.

http://www.amren.com/news/2015/07/new-doj-statistics-on-race-and-violent-crime/
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
They keep quiet about being Jewish. The attack is then just considered a random attack.

If they spoke up, the numbers of attacks on Jews would be higher.
The stats on attacks really don't even attempt to speculate like that. Instead, they record actual attacks, and for whatever reason, be it that people are starting to hate Muslims more than Jews, or they are starting to hate Jews less, or because Jews have learned to shut up and blend in, the attacks on Jews, because they are Jewish, are down.
 

quadflyer1

Active Expediter
Not at all. I'm saying that men worry about going certain places that are known to be unsafe, but women have to think of almost everywhere as potentially unsafe - even their own homes. Between rape and domestic violence, most women can't ever feel truly safe & secure, anywhere. Hell, many of us can't even take a walk in the afternoon without some morons catcalling, asking "Do you want a ride?", making rude comments, etc. No matter how much we'd like to be left alone, there's almost always some reminder of how vulnerable we are, all the time, and it just sucks.

It's called CWL,confined weapon licence. And be well practiced at using it. Take a tactical self defense weapons training class. Continue to practice. Be one with your gun.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Why is any crime a hate crime. It is what it is regardless of the victim. It shouldn't matter who the victim is.
It goes to motive. All violent crimes can be more or less serious depending on motive. That was true before the first hate crime laws were enacted.

If Ragman, for example, were to knock you out and take your money because he wanted your money, that's just pedestrian robbery-assault. If, however, he chose you as a target because you're from Texas, that's a hate crime. The prosecution will show that Ragman finds the Texas flag offensive, and will argue is because of the people who live there, and will show your knockout as proof of that hate. And if he were to be tried in Texas, he would of course receive the death penalty before you could even request it, and oh, what a sad clown he would be.

Don't mess with Texas.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and cheri1122

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
It goes to motive. All violent crimes can be more or less serious fermenting in motive. That was true before the first hate crime laws were enacted.

If Ragman, for example, were to knock you out and take your money because he wanted your money, that's just pedestrian robbery-assault. If, however, he chose you as a target because you're from Texas, that's a hate crime. The prosecution will show that Ragman finds the Texas flag offensive, and will argue is because of the people who live there, and will show your knockout as proof of that hate. And if he were to be tried in Texas, he would of course receive the death penalty before you could even request it, and oh, what a sad clown he would be.

Don't mess with Texas.
Hey now!!!!!
 
Top