when we did ask about it, we were told there was no "knockout game". Its easier to deny than defend.
Now that they cannot deny it, I eagerly await their absent responses.
Hey guys why aren't blacks ever charged with hate crimes? Thats what I want to know, why isn't anyone asking about that?
Hey guys why aren't blacks ever charged with hate crimes? Thats what I want to know, why isn't anyone asking about that?
For once this actually does look like a hate crime:
A premeditated, race-based, hate-based assault.
In limited circumstances sure they are. But not nearly to the same extent, nor with the same level of aggressiveness. To say whites are unfairly targeted via hate crime laws is not an understatement.
Considering the percentage of population
White people - around %75 of the population while %58.6 of reported hates crime.
Black people %14 of the population with %18.4 reported hate crime.
If I look at those number as percentage of the population blacks get more hate crimes by a considerable margin.
Now show your data.
Yet blacks are 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa.
I had no clue it was that bad until I just looked it up, I didn't go through the provided sources myself but if anyone elses wants to I would love to hear the results.
Since they provided sources, for the sake of this discussion, I am going to assume that its somewhat accurate. So knowing the above I find it rather hard to believe that whites account for almost 60% of hate crimes while blacks account for less than 20%.
Since they provided sources, for the sake of this discussion, I am going to assume that its somewhat accurate. So knowing the above I find it rather hard to believe that whites account for almost 60% of hate crimes while blacks account for less than 20%.
Considering the percentage of population
White people - around %75 of the population while %58.6 of reported hates crime.
Black people %14 of the population with %18.4 reported hate crime.
If I look at those number as percentage of the population blacks get more hate crimes by a considerable margin.
Now show your data.
If you are going to beat up someone to rob them are you going to beat up a white guy or a black guy?
http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html
Blacks are 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit a robbery.
If you assume the population is roughly 10% black (A bit low but makes for easy "back of napkin" math) you would expect black-on-white crime to happen 10 times as often. The 39 times doesnt support population distributions now does it? So why is it there is such a high degree of black on white crime and yet such a low count of hate crime charges against blacks?
The numbers dont really seem to add up to the idea blacks are disproportionately targeted with hate crime charges. But, they do help illustrate why blacks might appear to be charged at a higher rate as per your post. If blacks commit crimes against whites in the numbers I've shown then by all accounts your numbers should be vastly higher than they are, demonstrating blacks aren't charged as often as whites.
What that tells you is most black violent crime doesn't have a provable racial hate element. its not an issue of believing or not believing , its a matter of looking at available data and coming to a conclusion based on it.
Whites having %58 of the statistics while being %75 of the population isn't surprising. Just like blacks comign in at %14 of the population and %18 of the hate crime statistic.
Your evaluation doesn't include black on white crime for the sake of the crime itself absent racial elements, unless you don't think its possible for blacks to commit crimes vs white people unless its racial.
I think its more likely blacks commit more crimes against whites because there are just way more white people, bigger pool of victims.
I suspect that a lot of the black crime has no provable hate element to it, maybe because the crime against the white person isn't racially motivated rather opportunity motivated because there are far more white people?
Lets say i'm black and I go out with the intent to rob someone, lets also say I pay particular attention to white people because in the past I have gotten more valuables from them. When I rob that white person how do you prove it was racially motivated?
If you are going to beat up someone to rob them are you going to beat up a white guy or a black guy?
First of all, "hate crimes" are entirely subjective which is one of the biggest reasons I think they are complete bullshit. I have personally witnessed black on white assaults that included words like "fuck that white bitch up yo, cracker ass bitch, etc...". Do I think they should have been charged with a hate crime? No I don't because again, its entirely subjective and the entire idea behind hate crimes is retarded. Your actions and reasoning behind said actions are already a huge consideration in your sentencing which is plenty enough to handle the situation. Being a racist asshole is not illegal and frankly shouldn't be, its akin to "thought crimes". Beating the fuck out of someone is illegal and should be, the reasons behind it should be considered at your trial but charging someone with a new or worse crime because of their words or thoughts is wrong imho.
This is especially true considering the very charged nature of violent crime when often you are trying to get under someones skin. People often say shit they don't really mean or believe in the heat of the moment just like what I personally think at least one of the altercations I witnessed above was. I had seen one of the guys before and he hangs out with and is friends with a bunch of white folk so I doubt that he is racist. Giving him another 5 years (or whatever) because of what he said versus what he did, without being able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (because without a really good history its damn near impossible to prove what is in a persons head) that he even "thinks" that way.
And then you have the entire "words aren't illegal" thing.
Because you just said that you targeted white people specifically?
Well if you feel that the laws are unjust that fine and there are valid arguments for that. But given how the law is today people who break it should be subject to it. The 27 year old who did this had to have soem idea that laws are on the books, so he chose to break them.
Right but lets say I didn't actually say it, just thought it, how do you prove it?
He chose to break it how exactly? How exactly do you prove that just because he used a racial slur that this is a hate crime?
I would wager that 80% of the population has used a racial slur or two at least a few times in their lives but obviously most of them aren't racists and don't "hate" anyone due only to their race. Yet some want to argue that if during those one or two times they also happen to be committing another crime that said crime is somehow twice as bad??? Really?
It makes no sense and frankly it is unjust. We should all strive to rid our nation of unjust laws, in fact it is our duty as citizens to do exactly that.
I suspect that a lot of the black crime has no provable hate element to it, maybe because the crime against the white person isn't racially motivated rather opportunity motivated because there are far more white people?
Lets say i'm black and I go out with the intent to rob someone, lets also say I pay particular attention to white people because in the past I have gotten more valuables from them. When I rob that white person how do you prove it was racially motivated?
So you provide an example of specifically targeting by race, and then you state it isnt a hate crime.
You are doing a bang up job here buddy. Want to try again?
I do understand it has to be provable, but I think this shows why the entire idea behind a "hate crime" is pretty silly to begin with. Why is it if I punch a guy in the face its somehow less serious than if I punch a guy in the face while screaming racial slurs at him?