"Emos" now protected by "hate crime" laws

[El Kabong]

Everyone is supposed to enjoy equal protection under the law. These kind of laws protect different classes of people more so than others.

I'm pretty sure everyone still has the same protection under the law. It is the punishment for the criminals that is different, as opposed to the protection people receive.

Is an emo's life worth a harsher punishment than a non-emo? The differences in punishment mean inequality... do you not see that? Why emos why not chavs? Everyone hates chavs, should their group not be protected?

[TitoFan]

Everyone is supposed to enjoy equal protection under the law. These kind of laws protect different classes of people more so than others.

I'm pretty sure everyone still has the same protection under the law. It is the punishment for the criminals that is different, as opposed to the protection people receive.

Is an emo's life worth a harsher punishment than a non-emo? The differences in punishment mean inequality... do you not see that? Why emos why not chavs? Everyone hates chavs, should their group not be protected?

Let's go back to an earlier post of yours, where you make the point that being an emo is a choice. Unlike being black, Vietnamese, or a Jew. If you're a member of a hate group, and go out and lynch a person because he's any of the aforementioned, IMO you deserve a worse punishment than if you murder someone under other circumstances or for other motives.

Let's go back to something similar to an earlier GB post as well. Different scenarios:

• You kill someone you found in bed with your wife.
• You kill someone who cut in front of you on the freeway.
• You kill someone because you had a fight in a bar.
• You kill someone because he's black and you're a KKK or skinhead.

IMO, murderer # 4 deserves a worse punishment than 1-3. All victims are protected by law. But motive decides the severity of the punishment.

[TitoFan]

Everyone is supposed to enjoy equal protection under the law. These kind of laws protect different classes of people more so than others.

I'm pretty sure everyone still has the same protection under the law. It is the punishment for the criminals that is different, as opposed to the protection people receive.

Is an emo's life worth a harsher punishment than a non-emo? The differences in punishment mean inequality... do you not see that? Why emos why not chavs? Everyone hates chavs, should their group not be protected?

Let's go back to an earlier post of yours, where you make the point that being an emo is a choice. Unlike being black, Vietnamese, or a Jew. If you're a member of a hate group, and go out and lynch a person because he's any of the aforementioned, IMO you deserve a worse punishment than if you murder someone under other circumstances or for other motives.

Let's go back to something similar to an earlier GB post as well. Different scenarios:

• You kill someone you found in bed with your wife.
• You kill someone who cut in front of you on the freeway.
• You kill someone because you had a fight in a bar.
• You kill someone because he's black and you're a KKK or skinhead.

IMO, murderer # 4 deserves a worse punishment than 1-3. All victims are protected by law. But motive decides the severity of the punishment.

BTW, before you complain....... if a black kills someone because he's white, and he happened to walk into a black militant neighborhood...... then he's lumped into # 4 as well.

[El Kabong]

Let's go back to an earlier post of yours, where you make the point that being an emo is a choice. Unlike being black, Vietnamese, or a Jew. If you're a member of a hate group, and go out and lynch a person because he's any of the aforementioned, IMO you deserve a worse punishment than if you murder someone under other circumstances or for other motives.

Let's go back to something similar to an earlier GB post as well. Different scenarios:

• You kill someone you found in bed with your wife.
• You kill someone who cut in front of you on the freeway.
• You kill someone because you had a fight in a bar.
• You kill someone because he's black and you're a KKK or skinhead.

IMO, murderer # 4 deserves a worse punishment than 1-3. All victims are protected by law. But motive decides the severity of the punishment.

My punishments for your list

#1-#4 If premeditated death penalty or life with no parole. If heat of the moment then 18-life if it was unintentional then perhaps a lesser sentence.

Motive isn't the crime!

[TitoFan]

Let's go back to an earlier post of yours, where you make the point that being an emo is a choice. Unlike being black, Vietnamese, or a Jew. If you're a member of a hate group, and go out and lynch a person because he's any of the aforementioned, IMO you deserve a worse punishment than if you murder someone under other circumstances or for other motives.

Let's go back to something similar to an earlier GB post as well. Different scenarios:

• You kill someone you found in bed with your wife.
• You kill someone who cut in front of you on the freeway.
• You kill someone because you had a fight in a bar.
• You kill someone because he's black and you're a KKK or skinhead.

IMO, murderer # 4 deserves a worse punishment than 1-3. All victims are protected by law. But motive decides the severity of the punishment.

My punishments for your list

#1-#4 If premeditated death penalty or life with no parole. If heat of the moment then 18-life if it was unintentional then perhaps a lesser sentence.

Motive isn't the crime!

1 thru 3 are "heat of the moment". # 4 is coldly premeditated.
Thanks for answering.

[VictorCharlie]

What if I'm in the KKK and kill a black guy that cut me off in traffic?

[VictorCharlie]

Let's go back to an earlier post of yours, where you make the point that being an emo is a choice. Unlike being black, Vietnamese, or a Jew. If you're a member of a hate group, and go out and lynch a person because he's any of the aforementioned, IMO you deserve a worse punishment than if you murder someone under other circumstances or for other motives.

Let's go back to something similar to an earlier GB post as well. Different scenarios:

• You kill someone you found in bed with your wife.
• You kill someone who cut in front of you on the freeway.
• You kill someone because you had a fight in a bar.
• You kill someone because he's black and you're a KKK or skinhead.

IMO, murderer # 4 deserves a worse punishment than 1-3. All victims are protected by law. But motive decides the severity of the punishment.

My punishments for your list

#1-#4 If premeditated death penalty or life with no parole. If heat of the moment then 18-life if it was unintentional then perhaps a lesser sentence.

Motive isn't the crime!

1 thru 3 are "heat of the moment". # 4 is coldly premeditated.
Thanks for answering.

Also 1-3 don't necessarily have to be heat of the moment. I could kill a guy I found with my wife at a later date same with the traffic incident or the fight.

[greynotsoold]

The thing is, it is supposed to be "equal protection under the law." It is not that way. In my youth, I was involved in a mini race war, just neighborhood stuff. When white guys were assaulted and beaten and called 'punk ass white boys', it was chalked up to 'boys will be boys.' When we retaliated, and the dreaded 'n-word' was used, guys got phone number sentences.
Take a look at the 'Zebra Killings.' Black ex-cons went on a rampage, violently stabbing (and stabbings are REALLY violent) white victims. Nobody got 'hate' crime enhancements. Can you imagine if white convicts did the same thing?
I have been involved in racially motivated assaults, both as target and perpetrator. In the situations I was party to, it was just young men being violent, as young men will, but it wasn't adjudicated that way.
I think that, in some situations, there should really be no rules. You have young men, out portraying themselves in a particular way, let them handle their business. Let 'em fight,even if it is along racial lines. And it will be. How else should you pick teams? Go at it. I don't see the point in initiating violence towards people that are non-violent, merely different. That is cowardice.

[Andre]

Refreshing honesty there.

[El Kabong]

The thing is, it is supposed to be "equal protection under the law." It is not that way. In my youth, I was involved in a mini race war, just neighborhood stuff. When white guys were assaulted and beaten and called 'punk ass white boys', it was chalked up to 'boys will be boys.' When we retaliated, and the dreaded 'n-word' was used, guys got phone number sentences.
Take a look at the 'Zebra Killings.' Black ex-cons went on a rampage, violently stabbing (and stabbings are REALLY violent) white victims. Nobody got 'hate' crime enhancements. Can you imagine if white convicts did the same thing?
I have been involved in racially motivated assaults, both as target and perpetrator. In the situations I was party to, it was just young men being violent, as young men will, but it wasn't adjudicated that way.
I think that, in some situations, there should really be no rules. You have young men, out portraying themselves in a particular way, let them handle their business. Let 'em fight,even if it is along racial lines. And it will be. How else should you pick teams? Go at it. I don't see the point in initiating violence towards people that are non-violent, merely different. That is cowardice.

THANK YOU!

See Titofan, hate crime legislation is full of prejudice and inequality and if the bleeding hearts truly cared about "fairness" then the laws on the books would be justly and equally enforced.

[El Kabong]

Titofan you're a fan of this list, let's tweak it a bit

• You kill someone you found in bed with your wife. Let's say the man you found in bed with your wife is of a different race, does that make it a hate crime?
• You kill someone who cut in front of you on the freeway. Let's say it was a person of a different race, does that make it a hate crime?
• You kill someone because you had a fight in a bar. Again, let's say it was a person of a different race does that make it a hate crime?
• You kill someone because he's an emo and you're not. Does that make it a hate crime?

Real life example of the prejudices "hate crimes" legislation can lead to would be the case of Matthew Shepard as opposed to the case of Jesse Dirkhising and also James Byrd's case as opposed to the case of Channon Christian & Christopher Newsome. All the cases listed were absolutely terrible, but only the minorities who were murdered had extra hate crime legislation either added to the books or added on the sentences of their murderers and THAT my friend does little more than create resentment.

[VictorCharlie]

Brace yourself Lyle, you are about to get a bulletized retort in size 15 font and sky blue

[El Kabong]

Brace yourself Lyle, you are about to get a bulletized retort in size 15 font and sky blue

Oh no, not SKY BLUE!!!!

[0james0]

Everyone is supposed to enjoy equal protection under the law. These kind of laws protect different classes of people more so than others.

I'm pretty sure everyone still has the same protection under the law. It is the punishment for the criminals that is different, as opposed to the protection people receive.

Is an emo's life worth a harsher punishment than a non-emo? The differences in punishment mean inequality... do you not see that? Why emos why not chavs? Everyone hates chavs, should their group not be protected?

Do you have Chav's in the US? I had assumed it was a UK thing, track suit wearing, toothless wasters.

Basically you cannot say anything mean about anyone. You can think what you like, but if you say it outloud then you offend someone. That then makes you racist, gayist, gingerist, chavist, heightist and so on. Some people are just wankers, always will be. If that wasn't a taboo and likely to be offensive, they would just say something else offensive. There should be a law against cunts, a panel decides and if you are generally a cunt to people, you'll get dealt with.

Killing someone on purpose is murder, full stop. Doesn't really matter if you did it because what they look like or if it was because you had a dodgy Big Mac for lunch. Either way, it's a cuntish thing to do, no better or worse than each other.