Rii
Rear Admiral
The charge is perfectly reasonable.
Being offensive....
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
The charge is perfectly reasonable.
I have to agree with them. Doing that is pretty damn offensive to the Muslim woman.
But charging it as a hate crime? It certainly wasn't appropriate, but charging someone with a hate crime for pulling on a freaking headscarf is rediculous. In all honesty, I want to say more and explain my position further, but the idea is just so stupid to me that I'm having a hard time finding ways to express my position. It's silly at best.
Rii
Rear Admiral
Under US Federal Hate Crimes Law a hate crime occurs when one "willingly injures, intimidates or interferes with another person, or attempts to do so, by force because of the other person's race, color, religion or national origin".
That is precisely what occurred here. The offender allegedly made disparaging remarks about Islam in the presence of the victim immediately prior to grabbing her headscarf, leaving no doubt as to her motive.
If convicted she faces up to 1yr in prison.
I really hate the idea of hurting anyone's feelings, so I do go out of my way to be diplomatic, if not inoffensive. If anybody is offended by anything I say or do, they are offended by the wrong things.
As for me, I'm only offended by deliberate negativism; malice, aggressive stupidity, low standards, that sort of thing.
And as for the plague of oversensitivity, that's been going on for a while:
As for me, I'm only offended by deliberate negativism; malice, aggressive stupidity, low standards, that sort of thing.
And as for the plague of oversensitivity, that's been going on for a while:
Rii
Rear Admiral
It's almost as if I thought that didn't sound reasonable, and also that in light of the tone of the rest of the post it seemed a disingenuous characterisation that I was neither inclined to give tacit assent to by quoting without comment or to research in any detail myself.
I'm sure you're right, though. Anti-Islamic hatred immediately in the wake of the events at Ft. Hood is nothing to be concerned about.
"Hate crime" is the stupidest law politicians have ever enacted. Rather than enforcing laws on the books, IT'S CALLED ASSAULT, we invent an all-encompassing "law".
You beat up a homosexual for being homosexual -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
You pull a head scarf off of a Muslim or a Yarmulke off of a Jew -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
Rii
Rear Admiral
"Hate crime" is the stupidest law politicians have ever enacted. Rather than enforcing laws on the books, IT'S CALLED ASSAULT, we invent an all-encompassing "law".
You beat up a homosexual for being homosexual -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
You pull a head scarf off of a Muslim or a Yarmulke off of a Jew -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
This is a perfect application of hate crime law. The facts of the case wouldn't even merit a second glance, worse goes on every recess in primary school, it's the social context that elevates the significance of the crime. Counter-intuitively it's in cases involving more serious crimes (such as murder) that the merits of hate crime law are less clear.
The hate crime occurred two days following the events at Ft. Hood and the offender said "the guy that did the Texas shooting, he wasn't American and he was from the Middle East" immediately prior to the attack. I'm sure the two are entirely unrelated, though.
No, it isn't. These so-called hate-crime laws are feel good legislation enacted by politicians tailored to a minority population rather than the public at large. How does one decide what "hate" is? There are laws on the books that address rape, assault, and murder. There is no need to fill the books with laws that deal with kicking puppies, yelling at toddlers, and offending people of different races."Hate crime" is the stupidest law politicians have ever enacted. Rather than enforcing laws on the books, IT'S CALLED ASSAULT, we invent an all-encompassing "law".
You beat up a homosexual for being homosexual -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
You pull a head scarf off of a Muslim or a Yarmulke off of a Jew -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
This is a perfect application of hate crime law. The facts of the case wouldn't even merit a second glance, worse goes on every recess in primary school, it's the social context that elevates the significance of the crime. Counter-intuitively it's in cases involving more serious crimes (such as murder) that the merits of hate crime law are less clear.
Rii
Rear Admiral
I try to avoid impugning folks' character wherever possible, but when you continue to press the subject it's difficult to avoid.
Aragorn himself is the only apparent source of this alleged "investigation" on record. What the vaguely reputable media outlets I've perused do suggest is that the Council on American-Islamic Relations has contacted the FBI with an eye to pushing charges at the federal rather than state level. Whilst this could also be construed as an overreaction the lack of details precludes one from drawing any real conclusions, and it certainly paints a different picture than does the notion of the council calling for the FBI to investigate the cabal of bigoted old ladies at the local supermarket.
I also couldn't help but notice that Aragorn failed to mention the victim's reluctance to press charges - hence the delay - probably on account of the fact that it wouldn't play into his sensationalist and selective tale of overly sensitive Muslims makin' a ruckus in our nice lil' town.
For pulling on a head scarf? What the FUCK is wrong with these people?
Pulling on a scarf is harmless. It's extremely vaguely mildly invasive, but in the grand scheme of things, it's irrelevant. It's not like anyone got beat up or anything like that. What's next, flipping the bird is now a federal offense? If somebody taps me on the shoulder trying to get my attention, is that a fucking hate crime as well?
Hate crimes are thought crimes.
Rii
Rear Admiral
No, it isn't. These so-called hate-crime laws are feel good legislation enacted by politicians tailored to a minority population rather than the public at large."Hate crime" is the stupidest law politicians have ever enacted. Rather than enforcing laws on the books, IT'S CALLED ASSAULT, we invent an all-encompassing "law".
You beat up a homosexual for being homosexual -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
You pull a head scarf off of a Muslim or a Yarmulke off of a Jew -- it's called "assault", not a hate crime
This is a perfect application of hate crime law. The facts of the case wouldn't even merit a second glance, worse goes on every recess in primary school, it's the social context that elevates the significance of the crime. Counter-intuitively it's in cases involving more serious crimes (such as murder) that the merits of hate crime law are less clear.
I wasn't aware that christians and caucasians were a minority in the United States - in any case the question would be "relative to what?" - but there you go.
So what happened here was of no more significance than an irritable old lady poking a man in the back with her cane so she can get past? We're not going to see eye-to-eye on that, JP.
Exactly.
It's a POKE. Big deal. Nobody died or anything like that.
People get poked every day, and nobody goes around whining about hate crimes...Hate crimes make the hate a crime, and you can't do that. As nasty as this may sound, people have the right to hate. It's their own thoughts, and everyone has the absolute right to think whatever they want. You can't criminalize thought - but that's exactly what hate crimes do.
Rii
Rear Admiral
Until today I was under the impression that the United States only had hate crime at the federal level.
Actually in context it's quite clear that the message was "we don't tolerate your kind here". I suspect that in the right context this woman would be willing to go a good deal further in expressing her hatred.
Absolutely. What they don't have a right to do is commit a crime, and when they do - gasp - motive comes into play. Funny how that works.
Did she say that? No? Then leave it be.
So she's being charged with a hate crime because of what she MIGHT do? That doesn't sound paranoid to you?
Look at the thread about rap in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. I'd guess there's a fair amount of people in that thread who don't like rap. Are you going to charge them all with a hate crime for being racist?
If you put more serious charges on the table just because the defendant expressed hatred, than if they had not done so, then by definition you have criminalized the hatred.
For pulling on a head scarf? What the FUCK is wrong with these people?
Pulling on a scarf is harmless. It's extremely vaguely mildly invasive, but in the grand scheme of things, it's irrelevant. It's not like anyone got beat up or anything like that.
No, it's assault.
What's next, flipping the bird is now a federal offense? If somebody taps me on the shoulder trying to get my attention, is that a fucking hate crime as well?
Hate crimes are thought crimes.
This last part is very true.
Really? So if I'm at my store, and a kid comes along and tugs at a pant leg, am I gonna charge that kid with assault? No, I'll just smile and wave and let them go about their business. Assault would be if a customer whacked me across the head because we ran out of Jennie-O turkeys. A simple tug on an article of clothing is annoying, yes, but hardly assault.
