SubinMaine
Posts: 1888
Joined: 1/7/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: slaveluci
quote:
ORIGINAL: SubinMaine
you are incorrect, luci...the other gentleman threw the first "racial slur" by telling my friend he was going to "shoot his white ass."
You see, BOTH parties used racial slurs (as i stated in my post), BOTH should have been held accountable if that's the way the law was written, however that's NOT how it was handled.
See why it irritates me? It's reverse discrimination...no one was justified in tossing the names around, but both were guilty of it...why was my friend singled out?
And i don't believe i stated whether one was African American or not....
*edited to add*
I'm not incorrect because I said exactly what you're saying. I know both used racial slurs. My point is that if your friend had not, I doubt the "hate crime" label would have been attached. We'll never know as both said things but that's just my speculation. And, no, you didn't say "African American." I assumed that much because I've seen this time and time again. Really doesn't matter. The point I was making is that the Caucasian participant is usually the one responsible for all the "hate." Calling him racial names just doesn't rate as hatred, I suppose. It is reverse discrimination obviously..........luci
Well then you deserve my apologies, luci. i took your post as to mean that my friend got what he deserved because the other gentleman was the recipient of the racial slur...i wouldn't care to speculate how the events would have turned had he not voiced the slur though because, growing up (for the most part) in MA has shown me that the government there is HEAVILY bias on the side of any non-caucasian group. And we do agree that it's reverse discrimination...so, my apologies for misinterpreting your post.
quote:
ORIGINAL: uwinceismile
i dont see why any crime should be tainted by race?
i thought that justice was blind? ;)
if a white supremacy group member, or the nation of islam member break a law,,,then procecute for the law they have broken. its not against the law to hate .
i agree 100%...just to clarify, my reference to other "hate groups" was supposed to imply that they committed a Hate Crime because of the group they belong to....for instance, should a KKK member be allowed to hate the African American population? Yes, because it's his (twisted) opinion...however, should the same KKK member rape an African American woman, i think his involvement in the group that condones the hate and encourages the violence should absolutely play a role in his sentence.
It's an emotional level issue and has the potential to be very volatile so i don't want to project the image that i'm a racist, because i'm not...but then i'm not racist against my own culture either...and that's how the law should be, unbiased due to skin color, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or any other genre you can think of *smile*
_____________________________
That which yields is not always weak...
|
RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? - 
. You don't have to be "targeted" to have opinions on the issue and valid ones at that. I would note, however, that white males are often the "target" of all other groups' frustrations. According to some, they are responsible for all the woes of other sexes, races, etc. Why isn't THAT considered "hate?" "Hate" all depends on who the "victim" or "target" is, I suppose............luci 
Profile
....good for you. Don't ever buy into that crap
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread