Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Three teens involved in vicious hate crime to be given probation

Options
245

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    Are you off your trolly ? where did I ever say this below in your quote ?
    So your own link makes **** of 'your' and other peoples belief that prisons are full of people who have committed minor crimes.

    I never said prisons are full of people who have committed minor crimes. I said the jailing of folk that don't pay their tv licence fine are jailed compared to scumbags involved in vicious assaults.


  • Options
    #33
    keanosbeard
    Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭keanosbeard


    In Britain, that would be a " Hate Crime " and they could expect a premium to their sentence.

    Of course, if they had got on a plane to Syria and thrown the lad off a tall building or beheaded him for being gay, I think that the police would say that they had been " radicalised " by evil Twitter users and that they should come home as they had done nothing wrong.

    Britain. Funny place.


  • Options
    #34
    bb1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 5,494 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    keanosbeard wrote: »
    In Britain, that would be a " Hate Crime " and they could expect a premium to their sentence.

    Of course, if they had got on a plane to Syria and thrown the lad off a tall building or beheaded him for being gay, I think that the police would say that they had been " radicalised " by evil Twitter users and that they should come home as they had done nothing wrong.

    Britain. Funny place.

    It comes off as if you're saying Britain shouldn't classify a crime thats clearly a hate crime as a hate crime.


  • Options
    #35
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Links234 wrote: »
    I don't think you understand what a hate crime is.

    It's like in the US when James Byrd was picked up by white supremacists, savagely beaten and urinated upon, before he was chained to the back of their truck and dragged to his death for 3 miles. It's a hate crime because it's not just a murder; it's that these people were sending a message, they were terrorizing black people by killing a black man in one of the most horrific ways humanly possible.

    Do you think they should get less time in prison if they did it cause they didn't like the way his hat looked?


  • Options
    #36
    keanosbeard
    Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭keanosbeard


    Noooo

    They do different strokes for different folks

    But back the little sh!tes, custodial should have been given to teach them a lesson.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    What the ? So if I steal a car from some lady because she happened to leave her car unattended, then I stole it out of hatred towards her?
    Violent crime committed against a person or persons. But even in your example, possibly, yes. Nobody can read what is inside your head. If you admit you did it because of a hatred for the woman, then it's a hate crime! Otherwise, it's not a hate crime. The point is, whatever the case, you should only be allowed to legislate for the actual crime of stealing the car or assault or murder etc.
    Victims of hate crimes are Targeted BECAUSE of certain characteristics they possess.
    I don't dispute that. But that doesn't make it right to add years onto a sentence for assault or murder and legislate against somebody for simply being a racist or a homophobe. That's ridiculous.


  • Options
    #38
    irish gent
    Registered Users Posts: 240 ✭✭irish gent


    little fcukers** I have no time for this act send them away to prison end of storey...........


  • Options
    #39
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    K4t wrote: »
    No, it's not. A crime is a crime; and all crimes are hate crimes.

    The initial attack started because the lad was gay (clue for ya - It's in the headline to the story)

    A hate crime is a crime motivated by racial, sexual, religious or other prejudice. In countries which have hate crime legislation it means the guilty party gets a harsher sentence. The rationale behind this approach is blindingly obvious.

    As for 'all crime is hate crime', I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. Any chance you might explain?


  • Options
    #40
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    What are you trying to prove? Yes I also agree that this case sounds like a hate crime against whites but it just seems like you're trying to stir sh!t
    He's merely highlighting the absolute hypocrisy of hate crime legislation which a lot of people here evidently don't understand.


  • Options
    #41
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    Im sorry but if you think an innocent mother being beaten to the ground by three 16 year old girls and having a cigarette butt stuck in her eye and her husband being beaten unconscious is common anywhere in Ireland then your delusional.

    This kind of violence is frequent enough to be honest, especially in rougher areas. You don't hear about it because people don't often make formal complaints.
    Bongalongherb wrote: »
    Are you off your trolly ? where did I ever say this below in your quote ?

    I never said prisons are full of people who have committed minor crimes. I said the jailing of folk that don't pay their tv licence fine are jailed compared to scumbags involved in vicious assaults.

    That wasn't a quote. it is my understanding of your position. I can't see any other reason for you to post what you posted unless you don't understand the difference between a sentence and a forfeit.
    keanosbeard wrote: »
    In Britain, that would be a " Hate Crime " and they could expect a premium to their sentence.

    I don't think crimes should be classified differently but I definitely think judges should be required to consider motive before giving a sentence.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    As for 'all crime is hate crime', I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. Any chance you might explain?
    I have explained several times in my posts. You suggested Ireland should introduce hate crime legislation. I pointed out how that would be bad and a regressive step for a free and liberal nation.


  • Options
    #43
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    I remember a news story a few months ago saying... for non serious violent crimes these people will be given probation/community service because there are no places left for them in Irish prisons. It seems to have come to fruition since then as we can all see almost every single day criminals are let go with a slap on the hand. Build a new prison so.


  • Options
    #44
    Links234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    strobe wrote: »
    Do you think they should get less time in prison if they did it cause they didn't like the way his hat looked?

    So you don't think motive matters at all? Manslaughter vs. premeditated murder for example?


  • Options
    #45
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    Bongalongherb wrote: »
    I remember a news story a few months ago saying... for non serious violent crimes these people will be given probation/community service because there are no places left for them in Irish prisons. It seems to have come to fruition since then as we can all see almost every single day criminals are let go with a slap on the hand. Build a new prison so.

    Judges don't generally take the prison population into consideration when passing sentence.


  • Options
    #46
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    K4t wrote: »
    I have explained several times in my posts. You suggested Ireland should introduce hate crime legislation. I pointed out how that would be bad and a regressive step for a free and liberal nation.

    Yep I've read your posts, trouble is your attempts to explain what you mean are beyond ridiculous. This one is priceless....
    stealing a loaf of bread could be considered a hate crime against all those employed in producing that loaf of bread


  • Options
    #47
    Amazingfun
    Registered Users Posts: 3,161 ✭✭✭Amazingfun


    One of the most famous supposed "hate crimes" turned out to be something else entirely . The true narrative only emerged long after the usual suspects made great political hay of their original version, a truly lie-laced tale:

    The truth behind America’s most famous gay-hate murder

    Matthew’s tragedy began long before the night he was killed.

    Jimenez found that Matthew was addicted to and dealing crystal meth and had dabbled in heroin. He also took significant sexual risks and was being pimped alongside Aaron McKinney, one of his killers, with whom he’d had occasional sexual encounters. He was HIV positive at the time of his death.

    “This does not make the perfect poster boy for the gay-rights movement,” says Jimenez. “Which is a big part of the reason my book has been so trashed.”

    Matthew’s drug abuse, and the fact that he knew one of his killers prior to the attack, was never explored in court. Neither was the rumour that the killers knew that he had access to a shipment of crystal meth with a street value of $10,000 which they wanted to steal.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/26/the-truth-behind-americas-most-famous-gay-hate-murder-matthew-shepard


  • Options
    #48
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    Public flogging and naming those older than 10 would not just teach them that this behaviour will never be ok but that it can damage a person for a very long time!


  • Options
    #49
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 50,630 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Amazingfun wrote: »
    One of the most famous supposed "hate crimes" turned out to be something else entirely . The true narrative only emerged long after the usual suspects made great political hay of their original version, a truly lie-laced tale:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/26/the-truth-behind-americas-most-famous-gay-hate-murder-matthew-shepard

    Mod

    Your agenda pushing is getting tiresome.

    Keep at it and your forum access will be removed.

    Do no post in this thread again.


  • Options
    #50
    bb1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 5,494 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    Amazingfun wrote: »
    One of the most famous supposed "hate crimes" turned out to be something else entirely . The true narrative only emerged long after the usual suspects made great political hay of their original version, a truly lie-laced tale:




    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/26/the-truth-behind-americas-most-famous-gay-hate-murder-matthew-shepard

    You're saying it as if its okay he was brutally murdered because he sold drugs and was hiv positive
    and so what if it wasn't a true hate crime?It doesn't take away from the severity of other such hate motivated crimes. Hate crimes are different to other crimes, I don't understand what you're trying to do really.


  • Options
    #51
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Links234 wrote: »
    So you don't think motive matters at all? Manslaughter vs. premeditated murder for example?

    Were those questions supposed to be an answer?

    If you answer mine, I'll answer yours.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,381 ✭ [Deleted User]


    K4t wrote: »
    I have explained several times in my posts. You suggested Ireland should introduce hate crime legislation. I pointed out how that would be bad and a regressive step for a free and liberal nation.

    You are massively deluded if you think hate crime legislation somehow affects your rights in this free and liberal nation..

    If I get in a fight and some guy smashes me with a bottle, fair enough. If I got smashed in the face with a bottle because of my race, religion or sexuality etc. it's far different. That person is naturally predisposed to assaulting a large number of people without provocation and needs far far far tougher sentencing along with a framework allowing for them to be killed in a civil suit.


  • Options
    #53
    johnny osbourne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,017 ✭✭✭johnny osbourne


    well your my friend


  • Options
    #54
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If I get in a fight and some guy smashes me with a bottle, fair enough. If I got smashed in the face with a bottle because of my race, religion or sexuality etc. it's far different.

    How is it different, exactly? At the end of the day you're still a human who was still attacked in a horrific manner and sustained horrific injuries from said assault. Whether you were attacked because someone had an issue with your colour or because someone was on crystal meth and attacked the first person they say is irrelevant, is it not? The consequences are identical for the victim.
    That person is naturally predisposed to assaulting a large number of people without provocation and needs far far far tougher sentencing along with a framework allowing for them to be killed in a civil suit.

    So are psychopaths and gangland criminals, so why should they be treated any differently to hate crimes?

    Ironically enough, the reason I oppose the concept of hate speech and hate crimes is because I fundamentally believe in equality and egalitarianism. Part of that involves being treated as well as everyone else, but part of it also involves receiving no special treatment.


  • Options
    #55
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    What the ? So if I steal a car from some lady because she happened to leave her car unattended, then I stole it out of hatred towards her? Complete BS. Victims of hate crimes are Targeted BECAUSE of certain characteristics they possess.

    Like Paddys? Or gingers?

    I agree with hate crime legislation but it needs to be unbiased. White on black. Black on white. Homophobic attacks. Hetrophobic attacks ( as unlikely as that may be), attacks on gingers, jews, Muslims, baldies, liverpool fans, United fans etc

    Whenever it can be proven that the crime was violent becsuse of an irrational dislike of another ( particularly a stranger) rather than say financial gain.


  • Options
    #56
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    How is it different, exactly? At the end of the day you're still a human who was still attacked in a horrific manner and sustained horrific injuries from said assault. Whether you were attacked because someone had an issue with your colour or because someone was on crystal meth and attacked the first person they say is irrelevant, is it not? The consequences are identical for the victim.



    So are psychopaths and gangland criminals, so why should they be treated any differently to hate crimes?

    Ironically enough, the reason I oppose the concept of hate speech and hate crimes is because I fundamentally believe in equality and egalitarianism. Part of that involves being treated as well as everyone else, but part of it also involves receiving no special treatment.

    To my mind if you are walking down the street and attacked for a reason based on the way you look, or some other difference then that puts you statistically in much more danger than potential robberies which might turn violent or a pub row. It also makes the urban environment scary.


  • Options
    #57
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    You're saying it as if its okay he was brutally murdered because he sold drugs and was hiv positive
    and so what if it wasn't a true hate crime?It doesn't take away from the severity of other such hate motivated crimes. Hate crimes are different to other crimes, I don't understand what you're trying to do really.

    Well if it want an anti gay crime then it either wasn't a hate crime or all violent crimes are hate crimes.


  • Options
    #58
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,381 ✭ [Deleted User]


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    How is it different, exactly? At the end of the day you're still a human who was still attacked in a horrific manner and sustained horrific injuries from said assault. Whether you were attacked because someone had an issue with your colour or because someone was on crystal meth and attacked the first person they say is irrelevant, is it not? The consequences are identical for the victim.



    So are psychopaths and gangland criminals, so why should they be treated any differently to hate crimes?

    Ironically enough, the reason I oppose the concept of hate speech and hate crimes is because I fundamentally believe in equality and egalitarianism. Part of that involves being treated as well as everyone else, but part of it also involves receiving no special treatment.

    It's about prevention of crime in the future. If you commit a crime based on hate, you're going to do it again. The entire legal system hinges on motive..

    As well as that, your logic leaves no room for war crimes, terrorism or genocide either.


  • Options
    #59
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It's about prevention of crime in the future. If you commit a crime based on hate, you're going to do it again. The entire legal system hinges on motive..

    If you commit a crime based on fuelling a drug habit, you're equally more likely to do it again. Yet we don't have a special, separate category for "drug assault" in the legal system.
    As well as that, your logic leaves no room for war crimes or genocide either.

    I'm an anti-war activist. All war crimes should be dealt with in the same way as they would be if a civilian committed them or ordered them to be committed - this would actually reduce a lot of the "collateral damage" and "bad orders" BS soldiers such as the Abu Ghraib photographers use to get out of charges for what they actually did, namely assault causing harm and sexual molestation. Genocide is simply mass murder on a massively epic scale - by all means if somebody commits genocide, charge them with an individual count of murder for everyone they've killed and everything they subsequently conspired to kill before being caught.

    The end result would ultimately be the same, while at the same time maintaining the principle of equality in the legal system.


  • Options
    #60
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,381 ✭ [Deleted User]


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    If you commit a crime based on fuelling a drug habit, you're equally more likely to do it again. Yet we don't have a special, separate category for "drug assault" in the legal system.



    I'm an anti-war activist. All war crimes should be dealt with in the same way as they would be if a civilian committed them or ordered them to be committed - this would actually reduce a lot of the "collateral damage" and "bad orders" BS soldiers such as the Abu Ghraib photographers use to get out of charges for what they actually did, namely assault causing harm and sexual molestation. Genocide is simply mass murder on a massively epic scale - by all means if somebody commits genocide, charge them with an individual count of murder for everyone they've killed and everything they subsequently conspired to kill before being caught.

    The end result would ultimately be the same, while at the same time maintaining the principle of equality in the legal system.
    If the drug addict is targetting Jews and is trying to inflict as much damage as possible, it's very different.

    And you don't even know what genocide is. I'll save my effort for someone else.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You don't even know what genocide is. I'll save my effort for someone else.

    This argument would be better if you explain why he didn't understand genocide rather than that petulant whine.


Advertisement