Hate crime? Really?

Hector Savage

Candie wrote: »

Attacks on the disabled tend to make the news. Anyone who can't defend themselves (like a six foot odd footballer, say), like the elderly, children, the disabled - people (well, other people obv) tend to care about them and feel empathy for their relative vulnerability.

Except for the odd few who don't see the problem because they're just too cool.

I'm not saying there is not problem, and I agree with you here, attacks on people less able to defend themselves do make news more and are worse.

My issue is calling it a "hate" crime.
If I go out and beat up a guy wearing a man U shirt and it's supposed I did it cos I hate man U fans - is that a hate crime ?


Or is it just a horrible ****ing crime full stop ? Assault - that's it.

Now if the guy is black or a traveler is it a different sort of hate crime ?
How many categories do we need ?
one for every race, then others for gay/trans/short/star trek fan/ .... you see when you start with identity politics it just opens pandoras box.

weldoninhio

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yeah, sure - she's hanging out with Gaga, Saoirse Ronan and Christine Lagarde, and she makes up stories about what happens on Marlborough St for 'attention' - have you any idea how ridiculous you sound?

She alleges it happened on O’Connell Street.

ohnonotgmail

weldoninhio wrote: »

She alleges it happened on O’Connell Street.

yeah that totally discredits the post you replied to. :rolleyes:

weldoninhio

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah that totally discredits the post you replied to. :rolleyes:

I was stating fact, not trying to discredit any other poster.

watn_a_van

Your Face wrote: »

I don't think we should overlook her story of being publicly belittled.
I know it might be low on the list of hate crimes but we shouldnt look down on anyone.

How is this a red card?

watn_a_van

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Sure most of the posts in this thread are the same as what those kids did. Making fun of her, for the amusement of people on the internet in the hopes of getting some internet points.

Bet no one would care about Mary Harney getting called fat.

I suppose you'll tell me its because Harney chose to be fat?

ohnonotgmail

weldoninhio wrote: »

I was stating fact, not trying to discredit any other poster.

and completely ignoring the substance of the post. And i said you were trying to discredit the post not the poster.

weldoninhio

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and completely ignoring the substance of the post. And i said you were trying to discredit the post not the poster.

I said it to point out the fact that it allegedly happened on Ireland's busiest street, not Marlborough Street.

batgoat

weldoninhio wrote: »

I said it to point out the fact that it allegedly happened on Ireland's busiest street, not Marlborough Street.

You were also previously labelling such behaviour as harmless so you're moving from condoning to claiming it never happened.

AndrewJRenko

weldoninhio wrote: »

She alleges it happened on O’Connell Street.

Go read the Vogue article - she is not specific about where exactly it happened. The last landmark noted is -"just passed the Department of Education" which is on Marlborough Street.

But as others have pointed out, does it really matter?

weldoninhio

batgoat wrote: »

You were also previously labelling such behaviour as harmless so you're moving from condoning to claiming it never happened.

Did any harm come to her??

AndrewJRenko

weldoninhio wrote: »

Did any harm come to her??

Yes, it did

"walked past me again with a frightening grin. I was furious and scared. "


"I was crying, the kind of crying where you can’t catch your breath and speaking is difficult even though there is so much you need to say. People walked past. They saw my distress - but kept walking"

weldoninhio

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes, it did

"walked past me again with a frightening grin. I was furious and scared. "


"I was crying, the kind of crying where you can’t catch your breath and speaking is difficult even though there is so much you need to say. People walked past. They saw my distress - but kept walking"

So no harm done, just bruised feelings.

AndrewJRenko

weldoninhio wrote: »

So no harm done, just bruised feelings.

So mental health isn't an issue in your little world - gotcha.

weldoninhio

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So mental health isn't an issue in your little world - gotcha.

Careful, you might offend me. :rolleyes: Or hurt my feelings.

AndrewJRenko

weldoninhio wrote: »

Careful, you might offend me. :rolleyes: Or hurt my feelings.

Come back to me when you've had two lads twice your size jumping all over you - but presumably you want to keep diverting attention from what actually happened and how it impacted Sinead.

Are you seriously suggesting that physical intimidation is fine if there is no physical contact?

Bobblehats

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that physical intimidation is fine if there is no physical contact?

My mother was good at that, she’d shape up to hit you without ever laying a finger. I came to the conclusion it is better to have been lumped than to have never been lumped at all!

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Come back to me when you've had two lads twice your size jumping all over you

Again, not taking away from what happened to Sinead but your insistence for hyperbole is odd.

One lad.

not "all over" just over.

Blueshoe

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Again, not taking away from what happened to Sinead but your insistence for hyperbole is odd.

One lad.

not "all over" just over.

He gets way too carried away

weldoninhio

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Come back to me when you've had two lads twice your size jumping all over you - but presumably you want to keep diverting attention from what actually happened and how it impacted Sinead.

Are you seriously suggesting that physical intimidation is fine if there is no physical contact?

I’d imagine a 6’10” 15/16 year old would be pretty handy to track down.

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

Again, not taking away from what happened to Sinead but your insistence for hyperbole is odd.

One lad.

not "all over" just over.

Apologies for the inaccuracy, yes, one lad jumped all over her, while the other lad recorded the incident on video, which is now presumably circulating amongst his WhatsApp contacts for all to have a great laugh, like the big lads having a laugh on this thread.

AtomicHorror

Blueshoe wrote: »

He gets way too carried away

This from the guy who cited the theory of ****ing evolution as a justification for not caring about people being victimised. Yeah you seem well-grounded.

Hector Savage wrote: »

I'm not saying there is not problem, and I agree with you here, attacks on people less able to defend themselves do make news more and are worse.

My issue is calling it a "hate" crime.
If I go out and beat up a guy wearing a man U shirt and it's supposed I did it cos I hate man U fans - is that a hate crime ?

Only if Man U fans were born that way. I guess some people would say they are, but it is not comparable to race or disability and that should be obvious.

Hector Savage wrote: »

Or is it just a horrible ****ing crime full stop ? Assault - that's it.

Now if the guy is black or a traveler is it a different sort of hate crime ?
How many categories do we need ?
one for every race, then others for gay/trans/short/star trek fan/ .... you see when you start with identity politics it just opens pandoras box.

Not really, it's quite simple - it's all the same crime. Excluding the Star Trek fan.

weldoninhio wrote: »

So no harm done, just bruised feelings.

Intimidation is obviously harmful. Even the folks quibbling over whether this is a hate crime seem to understand that. You're really clutching at straws.

weldoninhio wrote: »

I’d imagine a 6’10” 15/16 year old would be pretty handy to track down.

You meant that to be devastatingly clever, didn't you? But all you did was highlight your privilege in this context. You can't ever be intimidated in the manner that Sinead was, so that's all you need to dismiss it as harmless. That's as basic as it is for you. If it can't happen to you, you don't give a **** if it happens to someone else.

weldoninhio

AtomicHorror wrote: »

This from the guy who cited the theory of ****ing evolution as a justification for not caring about people being victimised. Yeah you seem well-grounded.



Only if Man U fans were born that way. I guess some people would say they are, but it is not comparable to race or disability and that should be obvious.



Not really, it's quite simple - it's all the same crime. Excluding the Star Trek fan.



Intimidation is obviously harmful. Even the folks quibbling over whether this is a hate crime seem to understand that. You're really clutching at straws.



You meant that to be devastatingly clever, didn't you? But all you did was highlight your privilege in this context. You can't ever be intimidated in the manner that Sinead was, so that's all you need to dismiss it as harmless. That's as basic as it is for you. If it can't happen to you, you don't give a **** if it happens to someone else.

Anyone can be intimidated you don’t have to be a small person for that to happen.

Someone doing something, most likely as an immature dare, is far from a hate crime. It’s pathetic that it even gets mentioned in the same breath as what happened. Not everything that happens that you don’t like is a crime or worthy of having a breakdown over. No one died, no one even got hurt. Life goes on.

Blueshoe

weldoninhio wrote: »

Anyone can be intimidated you don’t have to be a small person for that to happen.

Someone doing something, most likely as an immature dare, is far from a hate crime. It’s pathetic that it even gets mentioned in the same breath as what happened. Not everything that happens that you don’t like is a crime or worthy of having a breakdown over. No one died, no one even got hurt. Life goes on.

That Sinead one is more over the incident thanthe poster . I heard he is driving his Micra around Dublin every night looking for the culprits.
Someone said he dresses up like "Kick Ass"

AndrewJRenko

weldoninhio wrote: »

Anyone can be intimidated you don’t have to be a small person for that to happen.

Someone doing something, most likely as an immature dare, is far from a hate crime. It’s pathetic that it even gets mentioned in the same breath as what happened. Not everything that happens that you don’t like is a crime or worthy of having a breakdown over. No one died, no one even got hurt. Life goes on.

Yes, anyone can be intimidated, but there is something particularly odious about intimidating a person with a disability, using the disability in your method of intimidation.

And if nobody got hurt, why do you think that Sinead was crying and shaking afterwards?

AndrewJRenko

Have any of the big lads with the little jokes been at the heart of major exhibitions at UK museums?

https://twitter.com/TheSineadBurke/status/1129486417787334656?s=19

Nah, didn't think so.

gormdubhgorm

So that is what it is called now a 'hate crime'?
To me it is just bullying/ignorance/nastiness on behalf of the young lads in question.
For Sinead Burke to dress it up as a 'hate crime' makes her seem over ostentatious about it and attention seeking. in my opinion anyway.
To call it a 'hate crime' actually dilute's the woman's argument and makes it seem a bit silly.
For me I would associate 'hate crime' with serious racial attacks ranging from murder to serious assault.

What happened this woman was that an eejit of a young lad pole vaulted over her, and she got upset.
She could have just laughed if off - or told them to fúck off.
But instead she went to the papers.
I would see the main problem she has is the perception of 'little people'.
Even that PC phrase sounds a bit silly and needs work, they should come up with another term.
There is also the problem that the 'little people' are perceived as joke type people in the media - 'Warick Davis' (Star Wars) 'Peter Dinklage' (Game of Thrones). They just look comical to others.

But in reality the 'little people' are people like another:

Warick Davis family:



But for Burke to call the incident a 'hate crime'. My reaction is 'get over yourself women' those two gobshítes of teenagers don't hate you because you are a 'little person' they just thought it was funny.

He didn't pole vault.

She didn't call it a hate crime.

She didn't go to the papers about it.

She has a disability. They did it to her because of that disability.

gormdubhgorm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have any of the big lads with the little jokes been at the heart of major exhibitions at UK museums?

https://twitter.com/TheSineadBurke/status/1129486417787334656?s=19

Nah, didn't think so.

Posting that is only going to give those people more ammo for jokes to be honest.
A 20 ft high poster....body beautiful?

It is like a red rag to a bull.

Hego Damask

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So mental health isn't an issue in your little world - gotcha.

So again and again as kept coming back to on this thread, if it were a "normal" height person that had a lad jump over them and then said " he then walked past me again with a frightening grin. I was furious and scared."

Would that be a hate crime ?
Surely it should be ? - we have to take their word for it if they were "scared" ..