Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Soldier's Car Vandalized At Dallas University

Fletch_Lives59

By Fletch_Lives59
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

ljs

ljs

Posted
Posted
close minded individual. ya know, the next time you jump on one of us and try to call us defensive you need to realize that you are just as close minded. there are plenty of gay people that beat up straight people. maybe you dont live close enough to a gay community to know it.

are you speaking from personal experience?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ljs

ljs

Posted
Posted
Well. I dont like the gay ****ers anyway so I hope their getting their ass kicked.

even with people like you in the world, I don't hate straight people. Hell, my mom and dad are straight so I thank them for being here.

If I hated all straight people because of the few who have beat me up or called me names, it's just as wrong as a black man hating the white man for what white men did years ago, or if white men hated black men for what a very few have done to them.

Treat people with respect, give each person a chance and don't clump them all in one group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Teller

Teller

Posted
Posted
Yeah, I went back after my post to see who was post 3. That one was actually on topic - bad guess on my part.

Meh, you made it clear that you weren't attacking anyone.

I really would like to see the question answered as to why soldiers aren't covered under H.C. law though.

Otherwise, I think this thread would be non-stop agreement. Even those folks that oppose the war don't want to see our soldiers treated like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ljs

ljs

Posted
Posted
I was assuming it would be based on % of the respective populations. I just know how much negativity there is towards homosexuality in this country, how prevalent it is everyday and everywhere. I've never gotten the feeling around gay people that they didn't like me because I was straight. I get that feeling from straight people whenever the mere thought of homosexuality is mentioned and the way terminologies are used. It's not even close and honestly, as much crap as they get, I wouldn't blame a gay person for fighting back every now and then. Knowing several people since childhood who eventually came out and knowing what they went through with that, man, you don't want to deal with that crap. I would hate straight people if I had to go through some of the things people I know did.

this really needs it own thread, but work is done and I'm passionate bout this topic. I couldn't even count how many times I have been treated differently, beat up or assaulted in some way, called names and such because I happen to date women. But again, even with all of that, I don't even hate the person who does it, I pray for them. I don't hate straight people because a few are worthless *******s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rincewind

rincewind

Posted
Posted
what do you think I am inferring Rince?

I simply wish that we could discuss this face to face in a fine establishment.

Honestly? It seemed like a veiled threat of the 'you wouldn't say that to me face' variety. I was really hoping that just this one time you could have seen that what I posted was an obvious joke and actually had a laugh with me (even though it admitedly poked a small amount of fun at you). But I guess not. Your opinion of me is rock solid and I guess there is no changing that. Good day. :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted

H_H, I'm glad you responded to my post.

My initial post is what got all the negativity started and for that I apologize. I will say that I agree that a good case could be made for military members to be included in the H.C. laws.

Your other opinions I probably agree with more than I disagree - I just think they are meant for a more "perfect" society. I think the simple fact that these hate crime laws may help to deter straight male A from beating the **** out of gay male B for hateful reasons or white male A from assaulting black male B for hateful reasons warrant their existence. I'm sure some reform could help things and maybe keep them from being abused but I'm not sure.

I get what you are saying now though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigMike619

BigMike619

Posted
Posted
Honestly? It seemed like a veiled threat of the 'you wouldn't say that to me face' variety. I was really hoping that just this one time you could have seen that what I posted was an obvious joke and actually had a laugh with me (even though it admitedly poked a small amount of fun at you). But I guess not. Your opinion of me is rock solid and I guess there is no changing that. Good day. :cheers:

honestly you just proved my point in why I wish we could have this face to face. I didnt want to fight you but I also didnt know if you were kidding or not. Face to face I bet you would have been smiling and I wouldnt have wondered a damn thing.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rincewind

rincewind

Posted
Posted
honestly you just proved my point in why I wish we could have this face to face. I didnt want to fight you but I also didnt know if you were kidding or not. Face to face I bet you would have been smiling and I wouldnt have wondered a damn thing.

:)

Simple misunderstanding. I probably should have added a smiley but I thought everyone would get the reference. :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WVUforREDSKINS

WVUforREDSKINS

Posted
Posted

1. The people should be prosecuted to the full extent and im sure they will. And they will refer to themselves as "political prisoners" :rolleyes:

2. I googled a bunch of things and I couldn't find a single story of gays beating up breeders because they weren't gay. It just doesn't happen.

However, there are a bunch of lesbian gangs that jump people all the time. It is a big problem in DC, I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Sisko

The Sisko

Posted
Posted
Not off-hand, I can't, quite honestly.

But one of the things that frustrates me about hate-crime statistics is this. About 60% of people charged with hate crimes by race are white, but according to Wiki (I know, not the best source) 74% of the population is white.

Conversely, 20% of hate crimes in 2006 were committed by African-Americans. Yet they make up just 13% of the population.

So really, if you look at it by the numbers, African-Americans are MORE likely to committ hate crimes. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Race_and_ethnicity

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/offenders.html

You're correct that wikipedia isn't always the greatest source. I'm not saying your numbers are off but you'd have been better off checking here instead.

Refer to the table I linked to above and tell me if you see anything slightly odd about it? Somebody's missing!! From what I understand, Latinos are lumped in with Whites in this data. As a result, that skews things dramatically as I suspect that a lot of the Black perpetrated hate crimes are gang violence against Latino gang members. Now beyond the obvious problem of not knowing exactly how much of this in included in the "against Whites" category, the other major problem is that classifying gang violence as hate crimes is incredibly misleading. After all, gang wars are about turf, not necessarily race. Certainly, race is involved, but only peripherally. Without a doubt, shooting a rival gang member involves a completely different motivation than say dragging someone behind a truck, or lynching someone.

The whole point of hate crimes is to not only perpetrate a crime against a specific individual, but also to terrorize that whole group. Clearly, gang violence doesn't meet that metric. I do admit though, that it meets the strict interpretation as outlined in the law (as I understand it anyway). Even so, I'd say this is clearly a case of adhering to the letter of the law and ignoring the spirit.

In any event, your reasoning and analysis of the data is extremely flawed in another respect. You pointed out the disproportionate levels of people committing the hate crimes without considering the flip side. That is, Blacks may or may not (given what I pointed out above) disproportionately commit more hate crimes against Whites. However, as a smaller percentage of the population, they are also disproportionately more victimized by them as well. Given what I mentioned above about the purpose of hate crimes, to terrorize an entire group of people, does it not make sense that if a larger percentage of your population is victimized by a hate crime that it is then more effective at terrorizing you? After all, that means that you as an individual have a much higher chance of being singled out than a member of a larger group.

Finally, your argument against harsher punishment for hate crimes ignores the fact that the person who commits one has also committed the separate crime of terrorizing (or attempting to) a whole group. As such, it warrants a stiffer or additional punishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
You're correct that wikipedia isn't always the greatest source. I'm not saying your numbers are off but you'd have been better off checking here instead.

Refer to the table I linked to above and tell me if you see anything slightly odd about it? Somebody's missing!! From what I understand, Latinos are lumped in with Whites in this data. As a result, that skews things dramatically as I suspect that a lot of the Black perpetrated hate crimes are gang violence against Latino gang members. Now beyond the obvious problem of not knowing exactly how much of this in included in the "against Whites" category, the other major problem is that classifying gang violence as hate crimes is incredibly misleading. After all, gang wars are about turf, not necessarily race. Certainly, race is involved, but only peripherally. Without a doubt, shooting a rival gang member involves a completely different motivation than say dragging someone behind a truck, or lynching someone.

The whole point of hate crimes is to not only perpetrate a crime against a specific individual, but also to terrorize that whole group. Clearly, gang violence doesn't meet that metric. I do admit though, that it meets the strict interpretation as outlined in the law (as I understand it anyway). Even so, I'd say this is clearly a case of adhering to the letter of the law and ignoring the spirit.

In any event, your reasoning and analysis of the data is extremely flawed in another respect. You pointed out the disproportionate levels of people committing the hate crimes without considering the flip side. That is, Blacks may or may not (given what I pointed out above) disproportionately commit more hate crimes against Whites. However, as a smaller percentage of the population, they are also disproportionately more victimized by them as well. Given what I mentioned above about the purpose of hate crimes, to terrorize an entire group of people, does it not make sense that if a larger percentage of your population is victimized by a hate crime that it is then more effective at terrorizing you? After all, that means that you as an individual have a much higher chance of being singled out than a member of a larger group.

Finally, your argument against harsher punishment for hate crimes ignores the fact that the person who commits one has also committed the separate crime of terrorizing (or attempting to) a whole group. As such, it warrants a stiffer or additional punishment.

I think this was a well thought out response and I agree with pretty much all of it. :applause:

I wouldn't expect less from the guy who predicted EXACTLY what would happen in response to 9/11 on 9/11/01. :notworthy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Teller

Teller

Posted
Posted

I appreciate such a thorough response, Yusuf.

I'd just pont out two things.

One, if black vs. latino gang violence is cited as a hate crime, then that unfairly skews the data. Absolutely. It shouldn't be included, and I hope it's not.

And two, if, in your view, all hate crimes are intended to terrorize ALL members of that group, then do you believe minorities can't commit hate crimes?

I mean, if we're too be honest, there aren't enough gays in the U.S. to really "scare" all of straight America. You could also say the same of most minority groups. They simply don't have the numbers to "terrorize" all whites.

(Save maybe for hispanics, if you listen to some people.) ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...