Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 01 Sep '10 22:53
    But it wasn't a hate crime.

    Maybe her father will shake the guy's hand.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38949288/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
  2. 01 Sep '10 23:06
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    But it wasn't a hate crime.

    Maybe her father will shake the guy's hand.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38949288/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
    Do you think it should have been classified a hate crime? Do you actually have any evidence that it fits the criteria?
  3. 01 Sep '10 23:11
    Originally posted by PsychoPawn
    Do you think it should have been classified a hate crime? Do you actually have any evidence that it fits the criteria?
    If colors were reversed it would be why not now?
  4. 01 Sep '10 23:16
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    If colors were reversed it would be why not now?
    If the colors were reversed then maybe some would and surely some wouldn't. Obviously one person thinks it is in this case.

    So you don't have any evidence that it was a hate crime I take it?
  5. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    01 Sep '10 23:22
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    If colors were reversed it would be why not now?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pcRpyRnSnc
  6. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    02 Sep '10 00:52
    Originally posted by PsychoPawn
    If the colors were reversed then maybe some would and surely some wouldn't. Obviously one person thinks it is in this case.

    So you don't have any evidence that it was a hate crime I take it?
    Sam believes (or pretends to believe) that every time a white person commits a crime against a black person it is treated as a "hate crime". Of course, that's utter and complete nonsense, but trying to explain such things to a blatant, not particularly smart racist (not that there are many smart racists) like Sam is a bit difficult.
  7. 02 Sep '10 00:57
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Sam believes (or pretends to believe) that every time a white person commits a crime against a black person it is treated as a "hate crime". Of course, that's utter and complete nonsense, but trying to explain such things to a blatant, not particularly smart racist (not that there are many smart racists) like Sam is a bit difficult.
    San lives in Az as I do. His demeanor and comments are fairly representative down here.
  8. 02 Sep '10 01:08
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Sam believes (or pretends to believe) that every time a white person commits a crime against a black person it is treated as a "hate crime". .
    That is the automatic assumption until proven otherwise and you know it. You are too cowardly to admit it.

    But black on white crime? Never considered a hate crime unless the evidence is overwhelming.

    To deny that is asinine.
  9. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    02 Sep '10 01:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    That is the automatic assumption until proven otherwise and you know it. You are too cowardly to admit it.

    But black on white crime? Never considered a hate crime unless the evidence is overwhelming.

    To deny that is asinine.
    There is no such "automatic assumption". In reality, very few interracial crimes of any type are treated as "hate crimes":

    Charging a hate crime -- targeting someone because of race, sexual orientation or other ethnic factors -- in the U.S. is rare; maybe only 1 percent of the cases get prosecuted, according to experts and available court records. Even when police believe a hate crime occurred, it rarely leads to a prosecution and conviction.

    "Just because a crime is a black on white crime or a white on black crime or a Jewish victim or a gay or lesbian doesn't necessarily make it a hate crime," said Steven Freeman, associate director of civil rights for the Anti-Defamation League in New York.

    Only a handful of murders have been prosecuted as hate crimes in the U.S., said Jack McDevitt, associate dean of Northeastern University's College of Criminal Justice. "Trying to detect motivation in somebody's behavior is very, very difficult."

    http://wcco.com/topstories/hate.crime.prosecution.2.367128.html
  10. 02 Sep '10 10:53
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    That is the automatic assumption until proven otherwise and you know it. You are too cowardly to admit it.

    But black on white crime? Never considered a hate crime unless the evidence is overwhelming.

    To deny that is asinine.
    do you base your claim on facts or on hearsay? do you really believe that anytime a white person harms a black it is considered a hate crime?

    stop playing the victim. nobody is convinced.
  11. 02 Sep '10 10:59
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    But it wasn't a hate crime.

    Maybe her father will shake the guy's hand.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38949288/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
    nowhere in the link does it say this was a hate crime. in fact the attacker's race isn't even mentioned until the very end.

    all the victim is saying is that the attack was unprovoked and they hope the attacker is brought to justice and made to explain their actions.

    my opinion is that a mad woman wanted to cause some pain and the victim was unfortunate to be at the wrong time.

    your opinion is that this was a hate crime, that the black woman attacked the white because of race and that society protects the blacks.

    my opinion about your opinion is that you are instigating hate against blacks and you are inches away from donning a kkk sheet robe and ask for some lynchings.