• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chicago Man Facing Hate Crime/Murder Charge

:lamo:lamo :lamo

What's organized about some lone guy getting into a fist fight?

Part of proving motive is generally proving that the accused was a member of a known hate group or possessed propaganda from a known hate group that targets the victim.

This illustrates organized terrorism.

Also, ambushing someone because of their race/gender is not "getting in a fist fight".
 
I guess it's alright to attack someone then as long as you don't hate them.

Come now, Texmex. I didn't say that, but even if I did a person can be attacked and not hate his/her victim. You seem to be drawing such a conclusion based on reports concerning the Knock Out game when there does seem to be elements of racial biasness involved. This was the case concerning the assault in the OP, mind you, where the victim's attacker DID use racial language as he assaulted his victim.

Let me put it to you this way:

Let's assume you're White and you get into a fight with a Black man. If all you've done is curse at the guy during the verbal altercation and the ensuing fight as most people would do when they're angry, you don't have a hate crime pursuant to the law. All you have is an assault (or assault and battery, depending on the circumstances). But let's suppose one of you makes a racist comment both before, during and after the fight. Let's say it was the Black guy who called you a "Cracker" and a "Klan-wanna-be" (since there really isn't a White-equivalent to the n-word that carries as much of a stigma). In so doing, the Black guy's words injected racism into the altercation which makes it a hate crime. Why?

Because he no longer saw you as a person who coincidentally got into an altercation with a perfect stranger (or even a neighbor or coworker for that matter). Because he made such racially bias remarks, it illustrates his distain for you just because you appear different from him in some way.

Muggers can attack you and not hate you. They're just hoping they can score some cash or get access to your credit cards or maybe snatch a few valuables from you, i.e., a watch, a ring or necklace. What Mr. Firek and many of those who participate in the playing the Knockout Game did was attack based in some measure on their racial bias/hatred. There is a difference.
 
Last edited:
Being a victim of a hate crime and not having the prosecutor charge the perp with a hate crime for his hate-crime attack on you is a pretty hollow honor.

I'm always eager to learn new things. You made a definitive statement that middle-aged, hetero, white males have been victims of hate crimes. This surely indicates that you have actually know this to be true. Would you please link up some evidence in support of your position.

Brooklyn group of black youths blocks white couple's car, bloody victims in racial attack: cops - NY Daily News

Ronald Russo, 30, and his wife, Alanna, apparently had the green light and the husband honked at the group to get out of the way. The rowdy kids started kicking the car, according to the criminal complaint. Ronald Russo got out to check on potential damage to his vehicle.

And that’s when all hell broke loose.

Ronald Russo was dragged to the ground. Then he was punched and kicked in the head. He felt more blows all over his body, investigators said. He suffered a fractured nose, a broken septum, a blood clot and abrasions to his shoulder. He was treated and released from Beth Israel Medical Center.

Kirton, 18, of East Flatbush, who has no prior arrests, faces gang assault, harassment and menacing charges, all as hate crimes. He was released on $50,000 bond.
 

Sorry, your example fails....10 days after the article you post here, a follow up...

Hate crime charges have been dropped against the two black teens who allegedly pummeled a white Brooklyn couple while yelling racial slurs at them, the Daily News has learned.

Law enforcement sources said a grand jury declined to indict Kashawn Kirton, 18, and Daehrell Finch, 17, both of Brooklyn, on hate crime charges in the Oct. 14 attack on Ronald Russo and his wife, Alanna, both 30, on Avenue U near E. 58th St. in Mill Basin.

Hate crime charges dropped against black teens accused of beating white Brooklyn couple - NY Daily News
 
Sorry, your example fails....10 days after the article you post here, a follow up...

SO what?

He didn't ask for an example of someone who was convicted of a hate crime.

He spoke about prosecutors charging a perp for a hate crime against a middle aged, white, hetero, male victim.

This perp was charged by the prosecutor for committing a hate crime
 
SO what?

He didn't ask for an example of someone who was convicted of a hate crime.

He spoke about prosecutors charging a perp for a hate crime against a middle aged, white, hetero, male victim.

This perp was charged by the prosecutor for committing a hate crime

True enough I guess. I suppose my question then would be one where a black perp, was convicted of a hate crime against a white victim....Because in my opinion, it really is meaningless being charged if the charges are dropped a week later.
 
True enough I guess. I suppose my question then would be one where a black perp, was convicted of a hate crime against a white victim....Because in my opinion, it really is meaningless being charged if the charges are dropped a week later.

No, it's not meaningless

Many people claim that hate crimes do not apply to crimes committed against white people. The fact that people are charged (including blacks) with hate crimes against whites proves that this claim is untrue. If someone is not convicted, that doesn't mean that white people can't be victims of a hate crime.
 
No, it's not meaningless

Many people claim that hate crimes do not apply to crimes committed against white people. The fact that people are charged (including blacks) with hate crimes against whites proves that this claim is untrue. If someone is not convicted, that doesn't mean that white people can't be victims of a hate crime.

It would bolster your opinion if you could provide one that was actually indicted.....
 
So if a person assaults or murders someone of a different ethnicity WITHOUT saying a word it is just assault or murder, but if the attacker says something like, "You black bitch!" while assaulting or murdering someone (like a black person), then it becomes a hate crime? Is that how it works?
 
No, it's not meaningless

Many people claim that hate crimes do not apply to crimes committed against white people. The fact that people are charged (including blacks) with hate crimes against whites proves that this claim is untrue. If someone is not convicted, that doesn't mean that white people can't be victims of a hate crime.

That does seem like the prevailing notion, though. For example: the knockout game. White people were continuously being sucker punched and the crime was assault or some variation of that nomenclature. But when a black person got sucker punched, it was labeled a hate crime.
 
It would bolster your opinion if you could provide one that was actually indicted.....

It wasn't an opinion; It was fact

If the people on the grand jury didn't want to indict, that doesn't mean that the law doesn't apply to people who attack white men.

It means the GJ disagreed with the prosecutor
 
So if a person assaults or murders someone of a different ethnicity WITHOUT saying a word it is just assault or murder, but if the attacker says something like, "You black bitch!" while assaulting or murdering someone (like a black person), then it becomes a hate crime? Is that how it works?

Nope.
 

Yeah right, crazy **** like this happens all the time - they just rarely (if ever) charge minorities with hate crimes.

You think if some black dude walked up to a white dude and said "hey cracka snowflake bitch" then beat him to death the black dude would be charged with a hate crime? hell no - not when progressives run Chicago.

Furthermore, being from Chicago, this case just seems like another crazy dude freaking out - and it happens a lot, as a matter of fact it's semi-normal on trains, buses and other forms of cramped public transportation.

I'm not trying to defend this psycho who killed this man but calling it a hate crime just because the guy was white and threw a few racial slurs is going overboard...
 
It wasn't an opinion; It was fact

If the people on the grand jury didn't want to indict, that doesn't mean that the law doesn't apply to people who attack white men.

It means the GJ disagreed with the prosecutor

If you can't indict the "crime", then you have no crime....It is simple as that.
 
Just out of curiosity, are there examples of minorities convicted of hate crimes against whites?
 
Just out of curiosity, are there examples of minorities convicted of hate crimes against whites?
There have been a few, but relatively few.


Increasingly it seems "hate crime" laws are just a way to get round "free speech" for political correctness.

People angry at each other have been calling people the most insulting names possible. You even see it on this forum. Because ethnic slurs and "hate" slurs are the most insulting, when raging people will tend to use them. I don't believe the slur created the hate or the fight. Rather, fights usually come with hate words, because nearly ALL fights have something to do with hate, although there are exceptions.
If enforcement were equal, I would disagree.

Enforcement, however, is not equal, so I have to agree. The "hate crime" laws are written to be even-handed to cover the politician's butts and to pass court review, but enforcement is still very selective... almost predictably so.
 
It sure is in our conversation.

"Our" conversation?

As far as I can tell, my part of "our" conversation has been to repeatedly tell you that I wasn't talking about what you've been talking about
 
"Our" conversation?

As far as I can tell, my part of "our" conversation has been to repeatedly tell you that I wasn't talking about what you've been talking about

Your now refusal to address follow up and try to dismiss it is irrelevant. But ok, you don't want to talk about that facet then I understand.
 
True enough I guess. I suppose my question then would be one where a black perp, was convicted of a hate crime against a white victim....Because in my opinion, it really is meaningless being charged if the charges are dropped a week later.

8 Black girls and 1 boy were convicted of beating 3 young white women.

From the following article:

In Long Beach, Calif., a juvenile court judge has convicted eight black girls and one boy of beating three young white women last year. One girl was acquitted of all charges. The defendants range between 12 and 18 years old. The racially charged case included allegations of witness intimidation.

The attack happened last Halloween in an upscale mostly white neighborhood filled with trick-or-treaters.
Prosecutors called it a hate crime because they said the attackers hurled racial slurs at their victims.

read more:

Nine Convicted in Long Beach Hate-Crime Trial : NPR
 
I apologize. I was wrong.
I stand corrected.
Too late to edit I guess that was the case that was overturned.
 
Back
Top Bottom