Page 16 of 31 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 306

Thread: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

  1. #151
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    So you somehow more of a victim because the crime was motivated by race?

  2. #152
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    white males are also in the protected group
    seems you dont understand the law or what hate crimes are
    So will the government pursue the charge if the victim was white just as often if the victim was black?

  3. #153
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,790

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    So will the government pursue the charge if the victim was white just as often if the victim was black?
    which race doesn't matter facts and evidence does on whether the crime was committed
    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. #154
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    which race doesn't matter facts and evidence does on whether the crime was committed
    Ok, so according to you the chances the government will pursue the charge if the victim was white is no less or more than if the victim was black. Do you have any evidence to support that?

  5. #155
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,790

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Ok, so according to you the chances the government will pursue the charge if the victim was white is no less or more than if the victim was black. Do you have any evidence to support that?
    LMAO not what i said, i said your question didnt matter to the law and crime
    if you think the government will be bias thats you job to prove it not mine because i didnt make the claim nor care about it since it doesn't matter to facts, laws and crime.

    good luck!
    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. #156
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by Libertie76 View Post
    No I don't agree, I believe in that case the Christian community of the area falls victim to the usage of terror by the assailant.
    This is why we should have hate crime legislation, the definitions are far too floppy.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #157
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 04:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    and that is 100% factually false based on legality.
    Its an OPINION you are allowed to have but we are talkign facts and laws so your opinion is meaningless.
    LEGALLY what could the christian community do? could they press charges based on them being chrisitian? nope

    they are factually not the victiums

    anyway moing on from your mistake

    its fact its a hate crime
    its a fact the owner is a victium

    your false and proven wrong claim is there can only be a hate crime if there is a biased towards the victim's identity

    well what if the owner was mark zuckerberg? an atheist

    or better yet a corporation, say facebook owned it and the property, an atheist corporation.

    well the IDENTITY of the victim is atheist and therefore the crime would not be against the victim's identity but it would still be a hate crime by definition.
    Like i said facts, laws and the crims definition all prove you wrong and you have nothign on your side besides "nu-huh", this fact wont change

    you're welcome
    facts win again

    The whole purpose of hate crime legislation is to prevent the prejudice attacks to victimize a whole community based on certain categories such as race or religion.

    If the assailant burned down a church because he was a psychotic arsonist who enjoyed burning down churches then it wouldn't be a hate crime

    If the assailant did it to spark fear in the minds of the Christians belonging to the church he effectively victimizes the entire Christian community. This is the entire reason for hate crime legislation.

    However, your suggestion was that it wasn't based on the motivation of a bias towards the victim, even if the "legal" victim is the property owner who happens to be an atheist the argument could still suggest that considering he owned a Christian church he identifies as a entrepreneur of the Christian faith, regardless of his own beliefs. That identity is still being targeted by the actual case of this hypothetical situation.

    Case point, I am a white guy who supports n.a.a.c.p and am targeted for such, with a crime of intimidation. It's because I identify as a supporter of the n.a.a.c.p that I'm targeted on the basis of the assailants bias towards my identity politically in regards towards my support for the n.a.a.c.p hate crime legislation is in regards to the attempt to prevent e emotional stress or fear given to the community of let's say white people who support n.a.a.c.p, or what you say Christians belonging to the church

    Your hypothetical question really holds no water, the owner of the church would still be victimized based on his identity of a church holder, motivated by the bias of the assailant. You have no clue what your talking about and your reaching for something that you can't prove.

  8. #158
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 04:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    This is why we should have hate crime legislation, the definitions are far too floppy.
    We shouldn't have hate crime legislation because it opens the door to more intense thought crimes, at least my reasoning for not having the laws.

    I'm not arguing that the intention of the legislation is for good reasons, however it turns violent crime into violent crime based on thought creating a grey area, or opening to door towards more efficient thought crimes in destroying political opposition for the a users of government.

  9. #159
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,790

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by Libertie76 View Post
    The whole purpose of hate crime legislation is to prevent the prejudice attacks to victimize a whole community based on certain categories such as race or religion.

    If the assailant burned down a church because he was a psychotic arsonist who enjoyed burning down churches then it wouldn't be a hate crime

    If the assailant did it to spark fear in the minds of the Christians belonging to the church he effectively victimizes the entire Christian community. This is the entire reason for hate crime legislation.

    However, your suggestion was that it wasn't based on the motivation of a bias towards the victim, even if the "legal" victim is the property owner who happens to be an atheist the argument could still suggest that considering he owned a Christian church he identifies as a entrepreneur of the Christian faith, regardless of his own beliefs. That identity is still being targeted by the actual case of this hypothetical situation.

    Case point, I am a white guy who supports n.a.a.c.p and am targeted for such, with a crime of intimidation. It's because I identify as a supporter of the n.a.a.c.p that I'm targeted on the basis of the assailants bias towards my identity politically in regards towards my support for the n.a.a.c.p hate crime legislation is in regards to the attempt to prevent e emotional stress or fear given to the community of let's say white people who support n.a.a.c.p, or what you say Christians belonging to the church

    Your hypothetical question really holds no water, the owner of the church would still be victimized based on his identity of a church holder, motivated by the bias of the assailant. You have no clue what your talking about and your reaching for something that you can't prove.
    your statement was factually wrong and the answer is still factually yes . . .theres no amount of your opinions that will change that fact.

    thats a nice long post that changes ZERO facts, laws and how the crimes is defined lol its meaningless. Like i said law, facts and the definition of the crime all prove you wrong. Theres nothing on your side but your feelings and opinions. keep trying though its ha;larious watching you argue against facts and definitions.

    your post fails and facts win again
    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

  10. #160
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 04:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    your statement was factually wrong and the answer is still factually yes . . .theres no amount of your opinions that will change that fact.

    thats a nice long post that changes ZERO facts, laws and how the crimes is defined lol its meaningless. Like i said law, facts and the definition of the crime all prove you wrong. Theres nothing on your side but your feelings and opinions. keep trying though its ha;larious watching you argue against facts and definitions.

    your post fails and facts win again
    Tell me how in your hypothetical case of mark zuckerberg owning a church that was burned down for the purpose of hating Christians isn't victimizing him for his identity of being an entrepreneur of Christianity by owning churches based on the bias of being anti Christian.

Page 16 of 31 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... 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
  •