nerdgirl 0 #76 October 5, 2007 QuoteIt is amazing how much energy is devoted to the topic of hate crimes, considering they account for one in six thousand crimes.Quote Is this really the argument you want to make? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NCclimber 0 #77 October 5, 2007 Quote Quote Quote hatewatch FBI websiteds (read the UCR's/Uniform Crime Reports) google "HateCrime" Fo find your own, as anything I would point to will simply be poo-poo'd. Bullshit. The FBI's UCR claim's 11,000 hate crimes/year? Bullshit! According to the FBI's UCR, the vast majority of hate crimes are against people of color? Bullshit! Quote Sex crimes against children are barely rate compared to sex crimes against adults. What a complete load of uninformed BULLSHIT!!! Get it right. Well...the FBI usually gets it right. Hatewatch has less conservative numbers, so I went with the most conservative report I'm aware of. for 2005. 2006 shows 10, 240 crimes. For 2007, I rounded it down to 11,000 based on the increase between 2002 and 2006. According to the FBI, there were 9730 incidents of hate crime in 2001. It was down to 7649 on 2004. And even lower, to 7163 in 2005. How did you get that 11,000 number? Quote We'll just fly with the numbers from 2005. Bias crimes against white persons: 828 crimes/975 victims. Bias crimes against non-whites (people of color) 3091 crimes/3756 victims Big difference by any math. In most comparisons, anything beyond 50% is considered the "majority," right? so how is 3756 vs 975, 1405, or 1213 not a "vast majority?" You said "According to the FBI's UCR, the vast majority of hate crimes are against people of color? That's 3091 out of 7163. Not a majority. Clearly not a vast majority. Quote [edited to add: The Department of Justice also has a report that doesn't include the FBI numbers. Their numbers are almost identical to Hatewatch, approximating 210,000 per year. You got to wonder why this report has figures 20 times greater than the FBI's figures. Assuming this report is correct, did you see where it said 85% of hate crime victims were white? Quote But we're improving. At least you didn't call me a liar this time. When was that? I don't recall. But I do recall someone posting "Fuck you, Aryan coward." Was that you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #78 October 5, 2007 QuoteAccording to the FBI, there were 9730 incidents of hate crime in 2001. It was down to 7649 on 2004. And even lower, to 7163 in 2005. Perhaps you're misreading the charts? QuoteHow did you get that 11,000 number? asked and answeredin a previous post. QuoteYou got to wonder why this report has figures 20 times greater than the FBI's figures. Read the report from the Department of Justice; it encompasses *all* reported bias crimes. The FBI report only includes the crimes they investigated. Further, if you read both reports, each agency assumes approximately 40% of crimes go unreported. Minimizing or debating the very clear numbers doesn't make them false. It happens. Every hour of every day somewhere in this country. To a real live. breathing, feeling, contributive member of society. I'm sorry that it doesn't bother you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NCclimber 0 #79 October 5, 2007 Quote Quote According to the FBI, there were 9730 incidents of hate crime in 2001. It was down to 7649 on 2004. And even lower, to 7163 in 2005. Perhaps you're misreading the charts? What charts? You posted a link to a table for 2005, which is where I got my number of 7163. Quote Quote How did you get that 11,000 number? asked and answered. Not really. Quote Quote You got to wonder why this report has figures 20 times greater than the FBI's figures. Read the report from the Department of Justice; it encompasses *all* reported bias crimes. The FBI report only includes the crimes they investigated. WRONG! Quote Minimizing or debating the very clear numbers doesn't make them false. Consistently getting your numbers wrong and using them to paint a dishonest picture doesn't really help your case, either. Quote It happens. Every hour of every day somewhere in this country. To a real live. breathing, feeling, contributive member of society. I'm sorry that it doesn't bother you. Wow - that's quite a leap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #80 October 5, 2007 Interesting. The DOJ has one set of numbers, significantly higher than those that are federally investigated. How you discount those numbers, I have no idea.The UCR numbers from 2000 to 2006 have increased, not decreased, every year. At this point, t'would appear you're trolling, the numbers are there for anyone to view. AFAIK, the FBI and the DOJ are both reputable and conservative organizations, so I'll accept their numbers. Having been on the receiving end of hate crime, I resent the constant implication that it isn't an issue, and/or that it doesn't matter. What I find most amazing is that a large percentage of the bias crimes are committed by white "Christians" and the majority of those opposed ot the concept of bias crime are white "Christians." It they're not the group committing the crimes, why be opposed to punitive laws regarding the crime? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #81 October 5, 2007 Quote I resent the constant implication that it isn't an issue, and/or that it doesn't matter. This is an interesting tactic, saying that it "doesn't matter". The point is, assaults matter. Anyone attacking another person without cause is terrible. But you are arguing that that assault on you is matters MORE, than an equivalent assault for other reasons. Below is how it looks to many of us. Why can't you give respect the logic instead making blatantly racist assumptions and comments about people not aligned with your view? Let alone stereotypically bucketing all those (incorrectly) into the "white Christian" bucket. case 1: someone gets assaulted for "looking at me funny" - I take very serious and think the attacker should be prosecuted. You don't care, the victim is a whiner case 2: someone gets assaulted because they are Asian and "Asians took my father's job a decade ago" - I take very serious and think the attacker should be prosecuted. You take very serious and think the attacker should be prosecuted. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #82 October 5, 2007 QuoteI am totally opposed to hate crime legislation. It makes no sense to me and it is redundant. If beating someone up is against the law, prosecute them for beating someone up. Why should it be "more" against the law because of why they did it or what they were thinking about when they did it. We already have too many useless laws! What he said. Motivation is irrelevent, it's the actions that are criminal. Assault and murder are crimes and should be prosecuted the same way regardless of whether they were committed for financial benefit or the color of the victim's shoelaces. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #83 October 5, 2007 QuoteCurrent law does not adequately recognize the harm to public order and individual safety that hate crimes cause. ... Therefore, our laws must be strengthened to provide clear recognition of the gravity of hate crimes and the compelling importance of preventing their recurrence." New York State Legislature, 2000 What they said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Casurf1978 0 #84 October 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteI am totally opposed to hate crime legislation. It makes no sense to me and it is redundant. If beating someone up is against the law, prosecute them for beating someone up. Why should it be "more" against the law because of why they did it or what they were thinking about when they did it. We already have too many useless laws! What he said. Motivation is irrelevent, it's the actions that are criminal. Assault and murder are crimes and should be prosecuted the same way regardless of whether they were committed for financial benefit or the color of the victim's shoelaces. Blues, Dave How can motive be irrelevant. If your motive is to perpetuate fear and terrorize a certain group shouldnt that be taken into account. You have to agree that burning a cross on someones lawn carries a harsher message than simple vandalism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #85 October 5, 2007 Quote How can motive be irrelevant. If your motive is to perpetuate fear and terrorize a certain group shouldnt that be taken into account. You have to speak the language of the typical white suburbanite. Ask them how they'd feel if someone came to their house one night and mowed their lawn crooked!!!. They'd want the perpetrator to be punished more than just some guys getting his fence spray painted, or someone getting their skull broke in a burglary. I mean, that's REAL terrorism. White suburbanites are all the same - this argument will make them all supporters of different punishments for the same crime. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #86 October 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteI am totally opposed to hate crime legislation. It makes no sense to me and it is redundant. If beating someone up is against the law, prosecute them for beating someone up. Why should it be "more" against the law because of why they did it or what they were thinking about when they did it. We already have too many useless laws! What he said. Motivation is irrelevent, it's the actions that are criminal. Assault and murder are crimes and should be prosecuted the same way regardless of whether they were committed for financial benefit or the color of the victim's shoelaces. Blues, Dave How can motive be irrelevant. If your motive is to perpetuate fear and terrorize a certain group shouldnt that be taken into account. You have to agree that burning a cross on someones lawn carries a harsher message than simple vandalism. Burning a cross on someone's yard could be akin to vandalism, but I'd consider it more of a threat, which there are laws against. Should burning a cross on someone's lawn carry a heavier penalty than pointing a gun in someone's face and threatening to kill them? If you were raped because someone got their rocks off on violent sex and the black girl next door was raped because people were trying to keep the neighborhood white, would you be offended by her rapist getting twice the sentence as your's? I think rape is rape, and its victims deserve the same justice. Overall, I just think the reason for committing a crime is irrelevent and entirely too subjective. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SpeedRacer 1 #87 October 5, 2007 http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/10/red_sox_fan_ass.html red sox fan assaulted. people who start fights over sports events are fucktards. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
NCclimber 0 #77 October 5, 2007 Quote Quote Quote hatewatch FBI websiteds (read the UCR's/Uniform Crime Reports) google "HateCrime" Fo find your own, as anything I would point to will simply be poo-poo'd. Bullshit. The FBI's UCR claim's 11,000 hate crimes/year? Bullshit! According to the FBI's UCR, the vast majority of hate crimes are against people of color? Bullshit! Quote Sex crimes against children are barely rate compared to sex crimes against adults. What a complete load of uninformed BULLSHIT!!! Get it right. Well...the FBI usually gets it right. Hatewatch has less conservative numbers, so I went with the most conservative report I'm aware of. for 2005. 2006 shows 10, 240 crimes. For 2007, I rounded it down to 11,000 based on the increase between 2002 and 2006. According to the FBI, there were 9730 incidents of hate crime in 2001. It was down to 7649 on 2004. And even lower, to 7163 in 2005. How did you get that 11,000 number? Quote We'll just fly with the numbers from 2005. Bias crimes against white persons: 828 crimes/975 victims. Bias crimes against non-whites (people of color) 3091 crimes/3756 victims Big difference by any math. In most comparisons, anything beyond 50% is considered the "majority," right? so how is 3756 vs 975, 1405, or 1213 not a "vast majority?" You said "According to the FBI's UCR, the vast majority of hate crimes are against people of color? That's 3091 out of 7163. Not a majority. Clearly not a vast majority. Quote [edited to add: The Department of Justice also has a report that doesn't include the FBI numbers. Their numbers are almost identical to Hatewatch, approximating 210,000 per year. You got to wonder why this report has figures 20 times greater than the FBI's figures. Assuming this report is correct, did you see where it said 85% of hate crime victims were white? Quote But we're improving. At least you didn't call me a liar this time. When was that? I don't recall. But I do recall someone posting "Fuck you, Aryan coward." Was that you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #78 October 5, 2007 QuoteAccording to the FBI, there were 9730 incidents of hate crime in 2001. It was down to 7649 on 2004. And even lower, to 7163 in 2005. Perhaps you're misreading the charts? QuoteHow did you get that 11,000 number? asked and answeredin a previous post. QuoteYou got to wonder why this report has figures 20 times greater than the FBI's figures. Read the report from the Department of Justice; it encompasses *all* reported bias crimes. The FBI report only includes the crimes they investigated. Further, if you read both reports, each agency assumes approximately 40% of crimes go unreported. Minimizing or debating the very clear numbers doesn't make them false. It happens. Every hour of every day somewhere in this country. To a real live. breathing, feeling, contributive member of society. I'm sorry that it doesn't bother you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #79 October 5, 2007 Quote Quote According to the FBI, there were 9730 incidents of hate crime in 2001. It was down to 7649 on 2004. And even lower, to 7163 in 2005. Perhaps you're misreading the charts? What charts? You posted a link to a table for 2005, which is where I got my number of 7163. Quote Quote How did you get that 11,000 number? asked and answered. Not really. Quote Quote You got to wonder why this report has figures 20 times greater than the FBI's figures. Read the report from the Department of Justice; it encompasses *all* reported bias crimes. The FBI report only includes the crimes they investigated. WRONG! Quote Minimizing or debating the very clear numbers doesn't make them false. Consistently getting your numbers wrong and using them to paint a dishonest picture doesn't really help your case, either. Quote It happens. Every hour of every day somewhere in this country. To a real live. breathing, feeling, contributive member of society. I'm sorry that it doesn't bother you. Wow - that's quite a leap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #80 October 5, 2007 Interesting. The DOJ has one set of numbers, significantly higher than those that are federally investigated. How you discount those numbers, I have no idea.The UCR numbers from 2000 to 2006 have increased, not decreased, every year. At this point, t'would appear you're trolling, the numbers are there for anyone to view. AFAIK, the FBI and the DOJ are both reputable and conservative organizations, so I'll accept their numbers. Having been on the receiving end of hate crime, I resent the constant implication that it isn't an issue, and/or that it doesn't matter. What I find most amazing is that a large percentage of the bias crimes are committed by white "Christians" and the majority of those opposed ot the concept of bias crime are white "Christians." It they're not the group committing the crimes, why be opposed to punitive laws regarding the crime? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #81 October 5, 2007 Quote I resent the constant implication that it isn't an issue, and/or that it doesn't matter. This is an interesting tactic, saying that it "doesn't matter". The point is, assaults matter. Anyone attacking another person without cause is terrible. But you are arguing that that assault on you is matters MORE, than an equivalent assault for other reasons. Below is how it looks to many of us. Why can't you give respect the logic instead making blatantly racist assumptions and comments about people not aligned with your view? Let alone stereotypically bucketing all those (incorrectly) into the "white Christian" bucket. case 1: someone gets assaulted for "looking at me funny" - I take very serious and think the attacker should be prosecuted. You don't care, the victim is a whiner case 2: someone gets assaulted because they are Asian and "Asians took my father's job a decade ago" - I take very serious and think the attacker should be prosecuted. You take very serious and think the attacker should be prosecuted. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #82 October 5, 2007 QuoteI am totally opposed to hate crime legislation. It makes no sense to me and it is redundant. If beating someone up is against the law, prosecute them for beating someone up. Why should it be "more" against the law because of why they did it or what they were thinking about when they did it. We already have too many useless laws! What he said. Motivation is irrelevent, it's the actions that are criminal. Assault and murder are crimes and should be prosecuted the same way regardless of whether they were committed for financial benefit or the color of the victim's shoelaces. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #83 October 5, 2007 QuoteCurrent law does not adequately recognize the harm to public order and individual safety that hate crimes cause. ... Therefore, our laws must be strengthened to provide clear recognition of the gravity of hate crimes and the compelling importance of preventing their recurrence." New York State Legislature, 2000 What they said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #84 October 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteI am totally opposed to hate crime legislation. It makes no sense to me and it is redundant. If beating someone up is against the law, prosecute them for beating someone up. Why should it be "more" against the law because of why they did it or what they were thinking about when they did it. We already have too many useless laws! What he said. Motivation is irrelevent, it's the actions that are criminal. Assault and murder are crimes and should be prosecuted the same way regardless of whether they were committed for financial benefit or the color of the victim's shoelaces. Blues, Dave How can motive be irrelevant. If your motive is to perpetuate fear and terrorize a certain group shouldnt that be taken into account. You have to agree that burning a cross on someones lawn carries a harsher message than simple vandalism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #85 October 5, 2007 Quote How can motive be irrelevant. If your motive is to perpetuate fear and terrorize a certain group shouldnt that be taken into account. You have to speak the language of the typical white suburbanite. Ask them how they'd feel if someone came to their house one night and mowed their lawn crooked!!!. They'd want the perpetrator to be punished more than just some guys getting his fence spray painted, or someone getting their skull broke in a burglary. I mean, that's REAL terrorism. White suburbanites are all the same - this argument will make them all supporters of different punishments for the same crime. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #86 October 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteI am totally opposed to hate crime legislation. It makes no sense to me and it is redundant. If beating someone up is against the law, prosecute them for beating someone up. Why should it be "more" against the law because of why they did it or what they were thinking about when they did it. We already have too many useless laws! What he said. Motivation is irrelevent, it's the actions that are criminal. Assault and murder are crimes and should be prosecuted the same way regardless of whether they were committed for financial benefit or the color of the victim's shoelaces. Blues, Dave How can motive be irrelevant. If your motive is to perpetuate fear and terrorize a certain group shouldnt that be taken into account. You have to agree that burning a cross on someones lawn carries a harsher message than simple vandalism. Burning a cross on someone's yard could be akin to vandalism, but I'd consider it more of a threat, which there are laws against. Should burning a cross on someone's lawn carry a heavier penalty than pointing a gun in someone's face and threatening to kill them? If you were raped because someone got their rocks off on violent sex and the black girl next door was raped because people were trying to keep the neighborhood white, would you be offended by her rapist getting twice the sentence as your's? I think rape is rape, and its victims deserve the same justice. Overall, I just think the reason for committing a crime is irrelevent and entirely too subjective. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #87 October 5, 2007 http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/10/red_sox_fan_ass.html red sox fan assaulted. people who start fights over sports events are fucktards. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
