Hate Crime: Goths, Punks And Emos Recognised

orestes

pickarooney wrote: »

So if a member of an ethnic minority attacks a member of the ethnic majority does it make sense to classify it as a hate crime? Is it possible to construe it as a signal that 95% of the population is nto welcome or should fear for their lives?

I think it definitely should be considered as a hate crime, as I said in my last post the determining factor is in the motivation. The example I used of "your type aren't welcome here" could easily be replaced with "I do not like people like you", that's just semantics regarding the same attitude that motivates the attacks - that the individual is being targeted solely as a representative of the group that the attacker doesn't like.

It's like the rednecks in South Park telling people "we don't take kindly to your types around here"

Irish Guitarist

I think it's ridiculous to be honest. If I got the crap beaten out of me because someone decided they 'didn't like the look of me' would it not count as a hate crime because I don't fit the description of some group?

I used to have verbal abuse shouted at me or objects thrown at me from cars because I had long hair. I didn't fit into some category like 'metaller' though.

Just prosecute scumbags based on their actions, regardless of what their victims race, sexual orientation or fashion preference is. Otherwise it sends a message out that it's alright to beat someone up as long as you don't hate them for some politically incorrect reason.

Kold

Links234 wrote: »

I think many people completely misunderstand what a hate crime is, not just in this thread but in general.

It's not just an attack on a person, think of it more like an act of terrorism to send a message to a particular group. I'll give you an idea of what I mean by that, look at James Byrd jr. he was beaten, urinated on, then chained to a truck and dragged to death. that's not just murder, the intention wasn't just to kill someone, it was to send a message: white supremacists wanted to create fear by killing someone of the african american community in an incredible grizzly way.

But like.. If someone were to do this to someone just because they disliked them I think they deserve the same level of punishment. Don't you?

RDM_83 again

I don't really agree with hate crime legislation as it stands now, it prioritizes one group above others in the eyes of the law in the most basic of ways, some guy gets beaten up and called a black b*stard = hate crime, the same black guy gets beaten up and called a useless b*stard = not a hate crime.
In the eyes of the law and the state all groups should be equal, for good and bad!

It also neglects the fact that a lot of these attacks are just random in the sense that they are simply chosing a target that caught their eye, when I was younger there used to be talk of groups of guys playing 7-up when the clubs closed, that is randomly attacking the 7th person leaving the club (this is a probably an urban myth but there did used to be a lot of random hidings).

What I do think should happen is that there should be an increased police presence in arresting people that commit these attacks on groups that are often victimized e.g like the way a task force might intervene in a high crime area

What I also don;t understand is there is a bit of cognitive dissonance going on in the (stereo)typical liberal support for hate crime legislation. This legislation in general results in disproportionately higher sentences for a small number of people with no additional emphasis on rehabilitation. However the same group of people will argue with the hang-em high crowd that there is no evidence that harsher high profile punishments for a few high profile cases reduce crime, yet this is exactly what hate crime legislation does with the added disadvantage that it also prioritizes different types of violence

(like Irishguitarist I also used to have long hair as a teen and got bottles etc thrown at me, still miss my hair though :mad: )

Gatling

Slightly off topic
How many of yours have actually been jumped on by others

For me 7/8 times for mainly having long hair

Mr Whirly

I had long hair for a couple of years and got jumped once. For almost all of the rest of my life I have had very short hair or a shaved head and have never got a spot of bother.

smash

What comes first, goths or emos? Are they like Pokemon and just evolve at some point?

Nodin

...they never had to make skins a protected species.....

orestes

Gatling wrote: »

Slightly off topic
How many of yours have actually been jumped on by others

For me 7/8 times for mainly having long hair

Jumped and beaten in the street, 5 or 6 that I can remember off the top of my head. That doesn't include abuse being hurled at me on a pretty much daily basis, having stuff thrown at me in the street (usually drinks and coins, very often from moving cars, occasionally rubbish and other random stuff), groups of guys surrounding me and shoving me about and threatening to kill me, having my personal property destroyed (bags and books taken and ripped to shreds a few times), being told if I showed up at certain parties or gatherings I would be beaten, and the three times I ended up in hospital with concussions after being beaten almost unconscious in school (not sure if we're counting school, but I think three seperate hospitalisations qualifies for this little list of harmless fun).

A constant stream of violence, threats, intimidation, abuse and sh1t over about 5 or 6 years from my late teens to early twenties, because I had long hair, wore black, wore trench-coats, and used make-up. Being a goth in Tallaght is fun, quite an adventure really.

Madam_X

I get the difference but the line is a bit blurry still. That lad who was killed when set on fire (and I know his death probably wasn't deliberate, but there was intent to harm seeing as a lighter was put to him) was attacked for being "different" and an easy target. I know it's not the same as someone seeking out a gay person to assault as an attack on the wider gay community, but I can see how the attack on that poor guy would be seen as a hate crime and an attack on homosexuality also.

Gatling

Madam_X wrote: »

I get the difference but the line is a bit blurry still. That lad who was killed when set on fire (and I know his death probably wasn't deliberate, but there was intent to harm seeing as a lighter was put to him) was attacked for being "different" and an easy target. I know it's not the same as someone seeking out a gay person to assault as an attack on the wider gay community, but I can see how the attack on that poor guy would be seen as a hate crime and an attack on homosexuality also.

I differ on that attack the guy who did it ,was witnessed to have bullied the victim all night and wasn't invited to the victims party he also scribbled gay insults on his body before covering him in sun tan oil and lit the lighter in the young lads groin ,
The sick part was the judge who decided it was just horse play and the nice young man made an error of judgement,

dsmythy

Nonsense. The idea of hate crimes firstly but especially this. If you're beaten to death and were innocent of any wrongdoing, the reason you were beaten to death really doesn't matter, the person who did it should be treated accordingly. Same for if you got punched in the face.

Scruffles

as someone who has experienced lifelong severe bullying and hate crime from known people and strangers, as well as being the target of a local gang of truenting teenagers-all due to disability,wish we did not have hate crime put on a hierarchy.
humans shoud not be told our suffering is any lesser than someone elses just because the reason we suffered hate is of a different category.
hate crime shoud be treated very seriously but it shoudnt be put in order of which group has been able to campaign the loudest and longest,its all hate crime and regardless of the group targeted it presents serious issues for society.


if a vulnerable targeted group was deliberately chosen that needs a lot more specialist support put into the case because of the nature of the individuals targeted.
this is not just hate crime but is manipulative and/or predatory behavior,looking for those who will be least able to deal with the abuse,taking advantage of someones limited mental capacity,lack of working or short term memory,poor mental or emotional state,limited communication and/or expressive ability etc,typical targets for pyschopaths/ sociopaths/narcopaths.

Galwayguy35

Airitech wrote: »

It should definitely add gravity to an assault if its proven that this was the motive, so the judge can hand down a heavier sentence.

Sounds to me like this is saying that one life is worth more than another.

Is an attack on someone who is perceived as "different" worse than an unprovoked attack on a young man outside a nightclub by a bunch of yobs which happens every weekend in towns and cities all around the country. In both cases the victim could be left brain damaged.

Why should one sentence be longer than the other?

Let the attackers in both examples receive the same harsh sentence.

old hippy

Gatling wrote: »

Slightly off topic
How many of yours have actually been jumped on by others

For me 7/8 times for mainly having long hair

As a teen in Dublin and early 20s? Countless times. Long hair, loud clothes, indiscriminate sexuality? Hell knows!

pickarooney

orestes wrote: »

Jumped and beaten in the street, 5 or 6 that I can remember off the top of my head. That doesn't include abuse being hurled at me on a pretty much daily basis, having stuff thrown at me in the street (usually drinks and coins, very often from moving cars, occasionally rubbish and other random stuff), groups of guys surrounding me and shoving me about and threatening to kill me, having my personal property destroyed (bags and books taken and ripped to shreds a few times), being told if I showed up at certain parties or gatherings I would be beaten, and the three times I ended up in hospital with concussions after being beaten almost unconscious in school (not sure if we're counting school, but I think three seperate hospitalisations qualifies for this little list of harmless fun).

A constant stream of violence, threats, intimidation, abuse and sh1t over about 5 or 6 years from my late teens to early twenties, because I had long hair, wore black, wore trench-coats, and used make-up. Being a goth in Tallaght is fun, quite an adventure really.

Jesus! At what stage do you pack it in and say the Cure aren't really worth it?

hooradiation

orestes wrote: »

Jumped and beaten in the street, 5 or 6 that I can remember off the top of my head. That doesn't include abuse being hurled at me on a pretty much daily basis, having stuff thrown at me in the street (usually drinks and coins, very often from moving cars, occasionally rubbish and other random stuff), groups of guys surrounding me and shoving me about and threatening to kill me, having my personal property destroyed (bags and books taken and ripped to shreds a few times), being told if I showed up at certain parties or gatherings I would be beaten, and the three times I ended up in hospital with concussions after being beaten almost unconscious in school (not sure if we're counting school, but I think three seperate hospitalisations qualifies for this little list of harmless fun).

A constant stream of violence, threats, intimidation, abuse and sh1t over about 5 or 6 years from my late teens to early twenties, because I had long hair, wore black, wore trench-coats, and used make-up. Being a goth in Tallaght is fun, quite an adventure really.

Tallaght continues it's strong bid for "worst place in Ireland".

Ray Palmer

pickarooney wrote: »

Jesus! At what stage do you pack it in and say the Cure aren't really worth it?

You do get you are condone the peoples' action and joining in. Probably seems funny to you but he has ended up in hospital over this with life threatening situations. Would you say the same to an ethnic person dealing with the same? How about a gay guy? I can pretty much be sure that these people see him pretty much the same a somebody who is gay.

It really isn't funny and people have been maimed and even died from such attacks. There is also the increase in depression and suicide risks. You basically are approving bullying and intimidation. You are a real man!

hooradiation

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You do get you are condone the peoples' action and joining in. Probably seems funny to you but he has ended up in hospital over this with life threatening situations. Would you say the same to an ethnic person dealing with the same? How about a gay guy? I can pretty much be sure that these people see him pretty much the same a somebody who is gay.

It really isn't funny and people have been maimed and even died from such attacks. There is also the increase in depression and suicide risks. You basically are approving bullying and intimidation. You are a real man!

Blaming the victim is a pretty standard line of thought for the very dull.

stateofflux

i have had lots of hassle/digs over the years from assholes but the day i change my appearance or anything about myself because of some fear of dickheads is the day ill kill myself. ive heard of people i know cutting their hair because some skangs were hassling them. letting them win.

Aint no Feeble bastard!

pickarooney

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You do get you are condone the peoples' action and joining in. Probably seems funny to you but he has ended up in hospital over this with life threatening situations. Would you say the same to an ethnic person dealing with the same? How about a gay guy? I can pretty much be sure that these people see him pretty much the same a somebody who is gay.

It really isn't funny and people have been maimed and even died from such attacks. There is also the increase in depression and suicide risks. You basically are approving bullying and intimidation. You are a real man!

I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm asking at what stage does pragmatism kick in and you decide to change your clothes to save your own life.

Ray Palmer

pickarooney wrote: »

I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm asking at what stage does pragmatism kick in and you decide to change your clothes to save your own life.

Apply that to rape and what woman wear.

If that is what you meant to say then you should have said it rather than make a dig about liking The Cure. I don't buy that is what you meant given what you already said.

Personal identity and displays of such is rightly protected. As said you are blaming the victim.

pickarooney

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Apply that to rape and what woman wear.

If that is what you meant to say then you should have said it rather than make a dig about liking The Cure. I don't buy that is what you meant given what you already said.

Personal identity and displays of such is rightly protected. As said you are blaming the victim.

There's no 'blaming' involved. It's a simple question of when pragmatism and the instinct to survive overtakes idealism and the desire to follow a fashion trend. for me it's fairly eary, for you there might be no such point.

Duggy747

I've had long hair for years so I've heard all the usual horseshìte from people (Hippy, Jesus, Goth, Pirate :pac:, etc) but never been in a scrap over it.

It doesn't bother me and something I just accept that comes with the territory. Flip side of that coin is it attracts the wimmen and I like having long hair.

I'm sure if I had short hair I'd still get abuse from someone about something else in my appearance. Hell, I did in school just because I listened to heavy metal from the same fùckin' numpties who would go on to listen to and go see in concert Korn / Limp Bizkit / latest hit on Kerrang!

Either way, I wouldn't change my appearance because others have a stick up their arse about it...............unless maybe I looked like a tramp and stunk of piss and it was for my own good................

Dyr

Nodin wrote: »

...they never had to make skins a protected species.....

And look what happened, there's f**k all of them left now.

Ray Palmer

pickarooney wrote: »

There's no 'blaming' involved. It's a simple question of when pragmatism and the instinct to survive overtakes idealism and the desire to follow a fashion trend. for me it's fairly eary, for you there might be no such point.

There is no point and you misunderstand what is fashion and identity.

There is much more to this than a fashion choice. Think of the clothes you would hate to have to wear to be left alone and think how that would make you feel if you had to. That is what we are talking about.

You certainly made a swipe about The Cure which was a flippant comment blaming the victim. If you want to change your view you can start by apologising for that.

hooradiation

pickarooney wrote: »

There's no 'blaming' involved. It's a simple question of when pragmatism and the instinct to survive overtakes idealism and the desire to follow a fashion trend. for me it's fairly eary, for you there might be no such point.

Everything after the bit in bold contradicts the bit in bold.

Once you're as far as going "well, why don't you just change what you're doing" then you're placing the blame on the victim. Because, after all, if they were as "pragmatic" as you and made that change, they wouldn't be getting beaten up, would they?

The fact that you need to preface your victim blaming with a disclaimer suggests you're uncomfortable with the cognitive dissonance this stance carrier with it. Perhaps you'd do better to reconsider that then trying to convince people you're not saying those people were asking for it sorry, people need to be more pragmatic.

pickarooney

hooradiation wrote: »

Everything after the bit in bold contradicts the bit in bold.

Once you're as far as going "well, why don't you just change what you're doing" then you're placing the blame on the victim. Because, after all, if they were as "pragmatic" as you and made that change, they wouldn't be getting beaten up, would they?

The fact that you need to preface your victim blaming with a disclaimer suggests you're uncomfortable with the cognitive dissonance this stance carrier with it. Perhaps you'd do better to reconsider that then trying to convince people you're not saying those people were asking for it sorry, people need to be more pragmatic.

It's not a particularly complicated concept. I'm not sure why you have so much trouble grasping it.

Yes, you should be allowed wear what you like, walk where you like, leave your doors open and your car unlocked and anyone who takes advantage of your doing so is a criminal and should be punished. It's a nice ideal, and one that you should be comfortable passing on to your children as such. An ideal.

The reality is that no amount of idealism, the law being on your side, or sympathy for your plight will change the fact that you will get repeatedly beaten up and possibly killed. It's like a bear in your garden - you have every right to go out and sunbathe and I will go to your funeral and possibly hate the bear and will never say it's your fault for sunbathing in your own garden.

But you'll still be dead.

Now, I know that you understand this and I know that rather than engage you would prefer to just keep saying 'victim blaming' and it possibly makes you feel better about yourself and that's all well and good. And I have a lot of respect for orestes who stuck to his principles despite knowing he would get beaten by scumbags. But my own self-preservation instincts would prevent me from doing the same. I'm confident that, while your own convictions, be they real or theoretical, may differ, you have the capacity to understand an alternative viewpoint.

hooradiation

pickarooney wrote: »

Now, I know that you understand this and I know that rather than engage you would prefer to just keep saying 'victim blaming' and it possibly makes you feel better about yourself and that's all well and good.

Well, if the shoe fits maybe you shouldn't wear it?

old hippy

People should be allowed wear what they want, without fearing for their safety. Despite the machinations of conservative Ireland, we are not dominated by the Taliban. Or are we? :eek: