http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/17/AR2007071701808.html?nav=hcmodule (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/17/AR2007071701808.html?nav=hcmodule)
On a narrow, leafy street in Northwest Washington, where Prius hybrid cars and Volvos are the norm, one man bought a flashy gray Hummer that was too massive to fit in his garage.
So he parked the seven-foot-tall behemoth on the street in front of his house and smiled politely when his eco-friendly neighbors looked on in disapproval at his "dream car."
It lasted five days on the street before two masked men took a bat to every window, a knife to each 38-inch tire and scratched into the body: "FOR THE ENVIRON."
I'll bite...
What's the definition of "hate crime"?
No.
Hate crime is the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religious, sexual orientation, or disability. The purveyors of hate use explosives, arson, weapons, vandalism, physical violence, and verbal threats of violence to instill fear in their victims, leaving them vulnerable to more attacks and feeling alienated, helpless, suspicious and fearful. Others may become frustrated and angry if they believe the local government and other groups in the community will not protect them. When perpetrators of hate are not prosecuted as criminals and their acts not publicly condemned, their crimes can weaken even those communities with the healthiest race relations.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crs/pubs/htecrm.htm (http://www.usdoj.gov/crs/pubs/htecrm.htm)
i really don't know, but my point is, that a group of people, took a spiteful revenge against a person, and destroyed personal property, because of his free right to own something...it seems to me as a form of bigoty, it was 'violence of intolerance'....
am I right or wrong?...
wrong. as usual. poopiehead.
if they had beat up the owner for having the "gaul" to buy the hummer, Henry, I might agree with you. But I dont think cars are a member of any protected class.
Man, is it just me or has reading comprehension really suffered in recent years?
"Hate crime is the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religious, sexual orientation, or disability."
I don't know how much clearer the DOJ can be....
Quote from: Bo D on July 19, 2007, 12:51:04 PM
Man, is it just me or has reading comprehension really suffered in recent years?
"Hate crime is the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religious, sexual orientation, or disability."
I don't know how much clearer the DOJ can be....
chill out bo, i get it...all i am sayin is, i think "hate" crimes are a bunch of bs....had this guy been gay or muslim, then it would be a horrible thing, but since he is not....a crime is a crime....if you hurt or damage someone or thing, then you should be punished....period.
if he had been gay and they had keyed his pink Miata, it still wouldnt have been a hate crime
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 01:08:00 PM
if he had been gay and they had keyed his pink Miata, it still wouldnt have been a hate crime
driving a pink Miata, SHOULD be... :biggrin:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 19, 2007, 12:09:35 PM
i really don't know, but my point is, that a group of people, took a spiteful revenge against a person, and destroyed personal property, because of his free right to own something...it seems to me as a form of bigoty, it was 'violence of intolerance'....
am I right or wrong?...
I agree with you Henry. It may not be a "hate crime" by definition but it was certainly a crime of hate.
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 01:20:51 PM
I agree with you Henry. It may not be a "hate crime" by definition but it was certainly a crime of hate.
well, why dont you write your Congress person and ask them to add drivers of such behemoths to the list of protected people.
How would you define it then if not a crime of hate? I mean they did it because they hated the fact that he had an expensive gas hog auto rather than a little fuel efficient auto like they drive.
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 01:26:46 PM
How would you define it then if not a crime of hate? I mean they did it because they hated the fact that he had an expensive gas hog auto rather than a little fuel efficient auto like they drive.
Id define it as extremely stupid, counterproductive, and disrespectful.
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 01:35:52 PM
Id define it as extremely stupid, counterproductive, and disrespectful.
Plus mean and hateful... :yes: :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 19, 2007, 01:06:38 PM
chill out bo, i get it...all i am sayin is, i think "hate" crimes are a bunch of bs....had this guy been gay or muslim, then it would be a horrible thing, but since he is not....a crime is a crime....if you hurt or damage someone or thing, then you should be punished....period.
Well then, if you get it, why did you start this uproar by calling it a hate crime? Especially if you knew better. What makes you think that those responsible for this crime won't be caught and punished?
like i said, i don't like the whole hate crime package.....a crime is a crime....i believe it is a political tool, used by the left, to get minority votes, like gays.....anything to put them into a 'special' protected class....
i don't care if it is a gay person or a straight person....if ANYBODY is violated by another, in a violent way, they should be tried to the maximum....why does there have to be 'special' laws made for this?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 19, 2007, 04:23:41 PM
like i said, i don't like the whole hate crime package.....a crime is a crime....
I wholeheartedly agree.
But when you guys pull up stupid examples like this to try to sensationalize your cause, all you do is expose your lack of understanding of the subject.
Because Henry, like it or not, justice is NOT blind. Too often, a straight person who victimizes a gay one, or a white person who victimizes a person of color will find a sympathetic jury.
Quote from: Bo D on July 19, 2007, 04:30:52 PM
I wholeheartedly agree.
But when you guys pull up stupid examples like this to try to sensationalize your cause, all you do is expose your lack of understanding of the subject.
Why is it when you can't understand what is being said that you have to resort to calling examples stupid?
well...to compare a car being keyed to physical violence against a person is, almost by definition, stupid.
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 04:47:07 PM
Why is it when you can't understand what is being said that you have to resort to calling examples stupid?
Oh. I'm sorry. I suppose you want me to get all politically correct and say that the example you provided simply doesn't fit within the Federally mandated definition of a "hate crime"
Of course I understand everything "being said."
That's why it's easier to just call it what it is and say it's stupid.
"Police said they see small acts of vandalism in the area from time to time, but they have not seen anything so severe, or with such a clear political message, in recent years"
I'm here to tell ya, if this had been a gay person, getting his car vandalised like this, it would be considered a hate crime...
Me, that is par for the course, if you don't agee with some on here, it just "stupid" ... I'm used to it....some on here REALLY need to look in the mirror, once in a while... ;)
Henry, maybe you like your car so much that you feel its a person....but I refuse to think that you are doing anything other than reaching for straws with this "scratched hummer is hate crime" business.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 19, 2007, 04:57:26 PM
I'm here to tell ya, if this had been a gay person, getting his car vandalised like this, it would be considered a hate crime...
by some, sure.
Apparently THIS instance is considered a hate crime by some, as well. Whats yer point?
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 05:01:30 PM
Henry, maybe you like your car so much that you feel its a person....but I refuse to think that you are doing anything other than reaching for straws with this "scratched hummer is hate crime" business.
Hate to tell you this but that was a little more than a "scratch". You sound like you're making light of the whole thing. How would you feel if you paid $38k for a car and someone destroyed it because they didn't like you driving it because it didn't fit their definition of the "proper car" to drive?
have I made light of it?
I think its a horrible thing to have done. But its not a hate crime.
Maybe not a hate crime but a crime which has stemmed from whoever hating the car he chose because it used more gas than they thought it should. It was done to teach him a lesson and IMO done in a hateful manner. Might not be the judicial explanation of a hate crime but it's still a hate crime.
Can ya tell I'm in a mood today??? :icon_twisted:
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 05:26:35 PM
Can ya tell I'm in a mood today??? :icon_twisted:
Me too!
:angry:
Personally, I think the Hummer owner committed a hate crime against the environment when wrecklessly chose to purchase a vehicle that was clearly designed to destroy the ozone and suck up what lil' bit of oil we have left in reserves and I'm glad someone stopped him before he got too far. :biggrin:
Guess we need to get together and go destroy good old Al's house then huh?
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 06:38:40 PM
Guess we need to get together and go destroy good old Al's house then huh?
Lemme guess, you have more Faux generated spin that implies that he isn't environmentally conscious? :rolleyes:
BTW, I was joking, that's why I put the -----> :biggrin:
hmmm.... was it about having a gas guzzling engine? or was it maybe something else? Was it maybe something the guy had done in the past that pissed the two guys off and maybe they were retaliating by damaging the vehicle. Sounds like pure and simple (expensive) vandalism. And a juvenile act to boot. Perhaps, the guy is a hated person based on religious or political beliefs, or a race not pointed out, and the two guys felt that damaging property was going to cost them less in the long run than damaging the man. Were there facts disclosed that would give everyone a well rounded picture of any alternative reasons as to why this occurred other than they just didn't like his choice in automobiles?
Yer beginnin' to sound like Y pariann..... :o :biggrin:
That's a scary thought.......a bunch of Y clones runnin' around the forum.... :pray: :no:
(Only joking pariann. Just couldn't resist. That actually is a thought. He could have been tormenting them for some reason 'til they had just had it up to their eyeballs with him but that was still no excuse for what they did.)
No way would I excuse it, but having been in the news my own self, and knowing how pertinent facts are left out, I question every news article or newscast ever. Everything is suspect to me.
And omg, is Y starting to rub off on me? LOL, I don't think I could use those terms he uses, or even understand some of them: 'slippery slope' 'strawman' etc etc. LOL though I have an extensive vocabulary, the art of debate and terms used therein, are alien to me. :wink:
It seems a lot of times they purposely leave pertinent facts out because they can get a better story that way. I know a few people who that has happened to and it just isn't right.
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 05:26:35 PM
Maybe not a hate crime but a crime which has stemmed from whoever hating the car he chose because it used more gas than they thought it should. It was done to teach him a lesson and IMO done in a hateful manner. Might not be the judicial explanation of a hate crime but it's still a hate crime.
Can ya tell I'm in a mood today??? :icon_twisted:
well, like I said, since it was a hate crime against a car...why dont you find yourself some automotive lobbyists and see if you cant get cars added to the protected classes.
While youre at it, lets have em declared people, that way the next time someone door dings me, I can have them charged with assault and battery.
I'm going to bet somewhere they have a just a silly law that no one is aware of any longer that would cover that. It might apply to horse and carriage, but it might still be there. LOL
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 08:37:04 PM
well, like I said, since it was a hate crime against a car...why dont you find yourself some automotive lobbyists and see if you cant get cars added to the protected classes.
While youre at it, lets have em declared people, that way the next time someone door dings me, I can have them charged with assault and battery.
And next time my car window gets shot out like it did last Oct. maybe they'll actually do something when they catch the people who did it instead of just going to court and making empty deals they never follow through with. You could be on to something there.
Quote from: me on July 19, 2007, 10:11:11 PM
And next time my car window gets shot out like it did last Oct. maybe they'll actually do something when they catch the people who did it instead of just going to court and making empty deals they never follow through with. You could be on to something there.
why did they do it?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 19, 2007, 04:57:26 PM
I'm here to tell ya, if this had been a gay person, getting his car vandalised like this, it would be considered a hate crime...
If a gay man got his vehicle vandalized in the manner described in the article, it would be a property crime. If the perps scratched, "Die Faggot" into the car, then it would probably be considered a hate crime.
And does Matt Drudge drive a pink Miata?
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 10:19:51 PM
why did they do it?
From what I gathered at the court hearing they did it just because they could. No reason they just went on a window shooting spree. The court room was full of people whose windows they had either shot out or thrown a brick through. Forty of them at least.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 19, 2007, 04:57:26 PM
I'm here to tell ya, if this had been a gay person, getting his car vandalised like this, it would be considered a hate crime...
now i get it. you wanna add "republican" to the special protected list.
go for it. write your congressman and tell him them republicants need laws that'll keep their stuff safe from mean 'ol ... well ... everybody else.
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 10:19:51 PM
why did they do it?
if me is anything like she is here in person, then i'd say.... :biggrin:
:razz:
Quote from: PIYA on July 19, 2007, 06:15:00 PM
Personally, I think the Hummer owner committed a hate crime against the environment when wrecklessly chose to purchase a vehicle that was clearly designed to destroy the ozone and suck up what lil' bit of oil we have left in reserves and I'm glad someone stopped him before he got too far. :biggrin:
and that is the point...i think, sadly, THAT is why he got his car vandalized.....read the article....there are many people out there that despises people who drive suv's...these morons just took it one step too far...imo.
Quote from: Gryphon on July 19, 2007, 05:01:30 PM
Henry, maybe you like your car so much that you feel its a person....but I refuse to think that you are doing anything other than reaching for straws with this "scratched hummer is hate crime" business.
you are right, I am stretching this, I admit...............now, lets just pretend that these guys threw a brick at the owner and it put him in the hospital....stay with me now,..............would it THEN be a "Hate Crime"?... :confused:
In my eyes, yes, Henry, then it would be much closer to a hate crime. Since hate crime legislation has been for the protection of historically disenfranchised groups, I dont think the law would see it that way.
Quote from: Gryphon on July 20, 2007, 08:22:45 AM
In my eyes, yes, Henry, then it would be much closer to a hate crime. Since hate crime legislation has been for the protection of historically disenfranchised groups, I dont think the law would see it that way.
I believe your right.....again, I've said this before.....I totaly dislike, this hate crime law....I think the whole thing is politically driven, to gain support of the so-called "disenfrancised" groups....ALL Crimes that are violent by nature, to me are Hate Crimes....those guilty of this, should be without exception, punished to the fullest, no mater who they violated....it is laws like that, that drive a wedge between races, and ethnic groups.....with that said, I understand, in cases, certain groups may have been overlooked more so than other groups, and THAT is wrong also......we need to simply enforce the laws that we have...period.
Quote from: Bo D on July 19, 2007, 12:51:04 PM
Man, is it just me or has reading comprehension really suffered in recent years?
"Hate crime is the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religious, sexual orientation, or disability."
I don't know how much clearer the DOJ can be....
Do you worship at the font of Gov't, dude?
Categorizing certain crimes as "Hate" crimes is punishing people for what they were
thinking. In other words, we no longer have the right to
think certain things.
It is the camel's nose of all-out thought control by the Gov't. Do you think it will stop at race, ethnicity, national origin, religious, sexual orientation, or disability?
I don't think so.
Polital thought will eventually make it on the list.
And this is brought to us courtesy of the radical left, whose political home is the Democrat party. The same people who make a big stink about "civil rights" because we monitor the telephone calls of suspected foreign terrorists.