Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 71

Thread: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

  1. #51
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,771

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    1.)What is it you have a problem with?

    2.) Please explain to me why this is a federal case.

    3.) The feds can't just come in and take a case over when they have no jurisdiction.

    4.) Was the victim a federal employee or did this happen on federal property?

    5.) This was a local assault case period.

    6.) I haven't checked it out, but an earlier poster said the feds can come in of the local case fails.

    7.) Please show me where the local case was even filed, let alone failed.
    1.) nothing, you post is just factual inaccurate and you havent supported anything you have said yet
    2.) law makes it that way
    3.) yes they can because they do have jurisdiction as you were already told by multiple people and ignored
    4.) dont have to be see #3
    5.) the assult was local the crime is federal PERIOD lol
    6.) they can come in when ever they want when its a federal crime
    7.) doesnt have to be nor does it have to fail

    In the United States, a federal crime or federal offense is an act that is made illegal by U.S. federal legislation. In the United States, criminal law and prosecution happen at both the federal and the state levels; thus a “federal crime” is one that is prosecuted under federal criminal law, and not under a state's criminal law, under which most of the crimes committed in the United States are prosecuted.


    Hate crime laws in the United States protect against hate crimes (also known as bias crimes) motivated by enmity or animus against a protected class. Although state laws vary, current statutes permit federal prosecution of hate crimes committed on the basis of a person's protected characteristics of race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)/FBI, as well as campus security authorities, are required to collect and publish hate crime statistics.
    like i said your post about what the feds can do is factually wrong


    now i will ask the question s you keep dodging and running away from AGAIN and i bet you dodge them again.
    Your question is what is holders "motivation" and i told you i dont know it seems the FEDS are doing thie jobs by law unless you have other info

    so i ask


    A.)What have his(holders) comments been? what as he said?
    B.) is there something off topic you read that you want to discuss?
    C.) was holder even mentioned in the OP?

    D.)Maybe it was in the video i didnt watch the video all i read in the OP was this

    "Hate crimes tear at the fabric of entire communities," U.S. Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels said Thursday in a Justice Department statement announcing the charge against Barrett. "As always, the Civil Rights Division will work with our federal and state law enforcement partners to ensure that hate crimes are identified and prosecuted, and that justice is done."

    Maybe that answers your question? does it?

    lets see if you answer and now understand the feds can do this
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #52
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,437

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    I think the Feds prosecuting this case is counter-productive.

    If the guy gets convicted he goes to Club Fed instead of a state **** hole where he belongs.

  3. #53
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,771

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I don't believe in hate crime legislation, my opinion is it is feel good legislation based upon assigning differing standards to the same thing. That said this was a cowardly and disgusting act against a defenseless person and rather than creating a hate crime standard the idiot who did this should get hit with everything on the books; Abuse of the elderly, aggravated battery, attempted manslaughter/murder, willful injury. The victim did not deserve what happened to him, on that we can all agree, I just think that crimes should be punished according to everything but motivation, an armed robber for instance gets punished according to the laws he broke, whether that was to feed his family or score quick cash it's irrelevant to the actionable crime.
    this i sort of agree with

    in general i dont like the term and its inconsistency IMO but i am fine with it as long as theres clear evidence.

    I dont like the term but i do see the logic of the legislation, its basically similar to the degrees of murder, theft/robbery, grand theft etc and i think thats how the terminology should follow IMO.

    Like premeditated murder is different from a rage killing and that im ok with

    IMO thats how the laws should be written for this, if an assault murder or crime is committed based just on gender, race, religion etc then they should move to first degree murder/assaults etc.

    BUT also be clear by that system all these PLANNED assaults would be the same when they were PLANNED and filmed etc.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #54
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    this i sort of agree with

    in general i dont like the term and its inconsistency IMO but i am fine with it as long as theres clear evidence.

    I dont like the term but i do see the logic of the legislation, its basically similar to the degrees of murder, theft/robbery, grand theft etc and i think thats how the terminology should follow IMO.

    Like premeditated murder is different from a rage killing and that im ok with

    IMO thats how the laws should be written for this, if an assault murder or crime is committed based just on gender, race, religion etc then they should move to first degree murder/assaults etc.

    BUT also be clear by that system all these PLANNED assaults would be the same when they were PLANNED and filmed etc.
    I don't have a problem for criminalizing targeting as part of law, I think my distaste comes from the way hate crimes legislation was sold. As it stands the laws currently criminalize motivations seen as not politically correct, I look at it like this, if a person beats up another person for characteristics it's a dick move, and that person should be required to attend classes as a condition of release like anger management and sensitivity training. I'm wary of punishing hate though simply because it gets into thought prohibition. I am more of a fan of nailing a perpetrator to the wall with everything we have on the books, concurrent sentencing to make sure they stay in a cell for a very long time, and roughly accomplishing the same thing.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  5. #55
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,771

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I don't have a problem for criminalizing targeting as part of law, I think my distaste comes from the way hate crimes legislation was sold. As it stands the laws currently criminalize motivations seen as not politically correct, I look at it like this, if a person beats up another person for characteristics it's a dick move, and that person should be required to attend classes as a condition of release like anger management and sensitivity training. I'm wary of punishing hate though simply because it gets into thought prohibition. I am more of a fan of nailing a perpetrator to the wall with everything we have on the books, concurrent sentencing to make sure they stay in a cell for a very long time, and roughly accomplishing the same thing.
    I agree but dont you think thats very similar to what it does it just has very piss poor packaging/presentation


    just like i said about 1st degree murder and a rage killing


    planning a murder out as been deemed to be worse because it takes more incivility and more criminality then coming home and finding your wife having a three way with the UPS man and your brother and maybe you punch one of them or strangle somebody.

    again this is just what is in place

    I think hate crimes do the same thing but thier verbiage suck, like you said how they are sold is piss poor


    but a person saying im just going to punch a person a run way or a person saying i cant wait, the first woman i see im punching her is getting a little extra punishment

    again not saying i agree just saying the foundation of what the law is trying to do is based on logic already in the legal system, but like you said the selling of it is poor.

    I get what your saying about thought prohibition but i think thoughts are very important in crimes.

    Its just MY opinion but ill treat you different if you kill the guy that raped your daughter and murder your wife then you killing the neighbor because he was a jew.

    Thoughts do matter IMO is certain cases dont you agree?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #56
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,771

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    1.)I think the Feds prosecuting this case is counter-productive.

    2.) If the guy gets convicted he goes to Club Fed instead of a state **** hole where he belongs.
    1.) so you acknowledge the fact they can now? you just dont like them following the law
    2.) this is an opinion you are free to have

    guess you have no answer to the questions
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  7. #57
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    I agree but dont you think thats very similar to what it does it just has very piss poor packaging/presentation


    just like i said about 1st degree murder and a rage killing


    planning a murder out as been deemed to be worse because it takes more incivility and more criminality then coming home and finding your wife having a three way with the UPS man and your brother and maybe you punch one of them or strangle somebody.

    again this is just what is in place

    I think hate crimes do the same thing but thier verbiage suck, like you said how they are sold is piss poor
    Exactly, I would like for us as a country to revisit the argument and use proper legal reasoning for the additional punishment. I honestly believe if there was ever a perfect candidate for these types of laws it would be a person who victimizes an elderly man for the color of his skin, but I try to keep in mind that punishing thought for anything other than keeping dangerous people off the streets is dangerous in itself.


    but a person saying im just going to punch a person a run way or a person saying i cant wait, the first woman i see im punching her is getting a little extra punishment
    I think that sucker punching a person to cause harm should be an additional charge in itself, but we can throw on all kinds of charges from attempted manslaughter/murder, reckless endangerment, negligent injury, aggravated battery, etc.

    again not saying i agree just saying the foundation of what the law is trying to do is based on logic already in the legal system, but like you said the selling of it is poor.
    Right, I don't like a "just because" law, or a law to engineer a desired result, but rather something that has a logical connection from the crime to the punishment.

    I get what your saying about thought prohibition but i think thoughts are very important in crimes.
    They absolutely are, and it's a great tool to catch a serial predator of any level crime, but punishing simple hate can be abused in the long term. If one wanted to call them "profiling" crimes even though it seems like semantics, it would make sense to punish targeting of people for violence rather than "hating" them. Rhetorical traps are a big pet peeve of mine though, so maybe it's me.

    Its just MY opinion but ill treat you different if you kill the guy that raped your daughter and murder your wife then you killing the neighbor because he was a jew.
    Absolutely, and most juries and judges will as well. I'm not saying the motive is unimportant for the purposes of judgement, I just think to have a criminal law based upon motive can lead to undesired results given enough time and can waste resources if we are more worried about the mindset of the attacker rather than the motive.

    Thoughts do matter IMO is certain cases dont you agree?
    To a certain degree they do, I think for punishment purposes the argument needs to be revisited. In this case, the person should be charged with a hate crime since it's already on the books, and every other law he broke in the meantime. I truly feel sorry for the victim and hope he is okay, but the little POS that did that to him should receive the harshest sentence possible.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #58
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,771

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    1.)Exactly, I would like for us as a country to revisit the argument and use proper legal reasoning for the additional punishment. I honestly believe if there was ever a perfect candidate for these types of laws it would be a person who victimizes an elderly man for the color of his skin, but I try to keep in mind that punishing thought for anything other than keeping dangerous people off the streets is dangerous in itself.

    2.) I think that sucker punching a person to cause harm should be an additional charge in itself, but we can throw on all kinds of charges from attempted manslaughter/murder, reckless endangerment, negligent injury, aggravated battery, etc.

    3.) Right, I don't like a "just because" law, or a law to engineer a desired result, but rather something that has a logical connection from the crime to the punishment.

    4.) They absolutely are, and it's a great tool to catch a serial predator of any level crime, but punishing simple hate can be abused in the long term. If one wanted to call them "profiling" crimes even though it seems like semantics, it would make sense to punish targeting of people for violence rather than "hating" them. Rhetorical traps are a big pet peeve of mine though, so maybe it's me.

    5.) Absolutely, and most juries and judges will as well. I'm not saying the motive is unimportant for the purposes of judgement, I just think to have a criminal law based upon motive can lead to undesired results given enough time and can waste resources if we are more worried about the mindset of the attacker rather than the motive.

    6.) To a certain degree they do, I think for punishment purposes the argument needs to be revisited. In this case, the person should be charged with a hate crime since it's already on the books, and every other law he broke in the meantime. I truly feel sorry for the victim and hope he is okay, but the little POS that did that to him should receive the harshest sentence possible.
    1.) agreed
    2.) agree with this also, random acts of violence that could literally kill can EASILY be argued more dangerous than a confrontation.
    3.) agree and i have seen this law be inconsistent. If the evidence is there use it, if not then dont.
    4.) lol i dont think its you, i think theres a legit concern about abuse/inconstancy along with poor packaging that makes it worse. IMO your concerns are totally legit and can be backed up by the factual randomness of the charges at times.
    5.) yes i agree with that 100% too, the level of the crime should be SECONDARY just like murder. Yes we are definitely sure you murder someone, so you are in trouble now we just have to decided 15, 25, double life or are we going to execute etc. Same should happen here.

    these assaults are very dangerous and should be treated as such, the extras should come secondary.

    Media plays a role in this too, sadly along with Americas attention span.

    THe hate crime hides the elderly factor and the fact this could have resulted in a death.

    6.) also agreed

    also a pleasure talking to you even when we dont agree
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  9. #59
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) agreed
    2.) agree with this also, random acts of violence that could literally kill can EASILY be argued more dangerous than a confrontation.
    3.) agree and i have seen this law be inconsistent. If the evidence is there use it, if not then dont.
    4.) lol i dont think its you, i think theres a legit concern about abuse/inconstancy along with poor packaging that makes it worse. IMO your concerns are totally legit and can be backed up by the factual randomness of the charges at times.
    5.) yes i agree with that 100% too, the level of the crime should be SECONDARY just like murder. Yes we are definitely sure you murder someone, so you are in trouble now we just have to decided 15, 25, double life or are we going to execute etc. Same should happen here.

    these assaults are very dangerous and should be treated as such, the extras should come secondary.

    Media plays a role in this too, sadly along with Americas attention span.

    THe hate crime hides the elderly factor and the fact this could have resulted in a death.

    6.) also agreed

    also a pleasure talking to you even when we dont agree
    Likewise to what I bolded. Laws should always IMO reflect the effects of the victimization and injury of others, I would never defend someone who victimizes the weak and to be perfectly honest, as much as I detest violence outside of a controlled sporting manner(boxing, MMA, martial arts, sparring, etc.) I even probably would have kicked that guy's ass for what he did to that elderly gentleman. Personally, I have no problem with this guy picking up a hate crime charge since it's already on the books and it appears very clear that his intent had a racist motive while I in general don't support laws based on "hate" factors, it may be hypocritical of me to take that stance but regardless that man did not deserve the injury he received and that sick punk needs as much prison time as we can legally give him, hopefully with daily beatings in general population.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  10. #60
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    Re: Feds: 'Knockout' attack was a hate crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelJR View Post
    It's only racist if a white person does it. You didn't know?
    I wish people would stop saying minorities are immune from being found guilty of hate crimes or being "racist". It perpetuates a myth. Here are the facts:

    FBI — Annual Hate Crimes Report Released

    Of the 6,222 reported hate crimes, 6,216 were single-bias incidents—46.9 percent were racially motivated, 20.8 percent resulted from sexual orientation bias, 19.8 percent were motivated by religious bias, 11.6 stemmed from ethnicity/national origin bias, and 0.9 percent were prompted by disability bias.
    Of that 47%:

    FBI — FBI Releases 2010 Hate Crime Statistics

    Of the 6,008 known offenders, 58.6 percent were white and 18.4 percent were black. For 12.0 percent, the race was unknown, and the remaining known offenders were of other races.
    Now:

    - You can go and pretend that you meant that the law doesn't punish racist minorities - However, that's easily proven false - fully 20% of all hate crime convictions involve minorities.
    - You can pretend that the media doesn't pay much attention to it - However, that's just as false as per the new "Knockout Punch" craze.
    - You can pretend that whites get tougher jail sentences for hate crimes - However, that will go against every report showing that minorities get tougher sentences.

    In short, the next sequence of arguments you're about to make - and.. I'm sure some of them will put your adoptive family of Europeans who gave up their heritage in order to become 'Muricans - will be proven to be false.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 01-02-14 at 01:26 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •