Hate crime? Really?

15-06-2019 6:15pm

Potential-Monke wrote:

Not that I agree with one of them, but it's law so can't be ignored. And while it doesn't specifically say 'Hate Crime', it outlines that anything that could be considered 'hatred' is against the act, so technically this is the legislation for 'hate crimes'.

Good stuff. Thanks for that. So leapfrogging isn't regarded a hate crime.

Potential-Monke · 15-06-2019 6:19pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Good stuff. Thanks for that. So leapfrogging isn't regarded a hate crime.

I agree, but I also can see how it could be construed as one. Like, if it was a child would they have done it, or why don't they regularly do it. But it wasn't a child, it was a dwarf, and they only did it because it was an adult, not a child. So it could be construed that way.

AndrewJRenko · 15-06-2019 6:24pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Good stuff. Thanks for that. So leapfrogging isn't regarded a hate crime.

Just ICYMI, it's not a definition of hate crime, it is a definition of hatred, in the context of incitement to hatred - the speech or words that might incite a person to hate.

15-06-2019 6:41pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Just ICYMI, it's not a definition of hate crime, it is a definition of hatred, in the context of incitement to hatred - the speech or words that might incite a person to hate.

Sorry Andrew, as you've stated previously, your opinion means nothing and are unwilling to give your opinion when asked for it so I'll just talk with the people who engage in grown up talk if that's ok with you.

Talk soon buddy.

15-06-2019 6:45pm

Potential-Monke wrote:

I agree, but I also can see how it could be construed as one. Like, if it was a child would they have done it, or why don't they regularly do it. But it wasn't a child, it was a dwarf, and they only did it because it was an adult, not a child. So it could be construed that way.

Careful chief. That "d" word can be misconstrued as hate speech these days.

I disagree. I think it would need to show a hatred of the person rather than being an opportunistic bad taste prank.

If a gay guy hit me unprovoked would that be a hate crime?

It's too murky to have extra protection for a crime depending on the victim. Laws should protect everyone equally otherwise you will get a lot of falsified testimony in order to get the verdict they want.

But I get your point.

AndrewJRenko · 15-06-2019 6:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry Andrew, as you've stated previously, your opinion means nothing and are unwilling to give your opinion when asked for it so I'll just talk with the people who engage in grown up talk if that's ok with you.

Talk soon buddy.

You're of course welcome to ignore whatever you like - but that's not an opinion, that's a fact. Feel free to continue to bury your head in the sand though, if that's your thing.

15-06-2019 6:55pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

You're of course welcome to ignore whatever you like - but that's not an opinion, that's a fact. Feel free to continue to bury your head in the sand though, if that's your thing.

It's ok buddy. I, of course, won't ignore you. That would be just rude. You do you and chip in whenever you think you have some nugget of wisdom.

AndrewJRenko · 15-06-2019 7:21pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's too murky to have extra protection for a crime depending on the victim. Laws should protect everyone equally otherwise you will get a lot of falsified testimony in order to get the verdict they want.

Though it's worth noting that this generally isn't a significant problem in the many countries that have implemented hate crime legislation around the world.

15-06-2019 8:46pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Though it's worth noting that this generally isn't a significant problem in the many countries that have implemented hate crime legislation around the world.

It's really not worth noting but again, thanks for the input.

AndrewJRenko · 15-06-2019 8:47pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's really not worth noting but again, thanks for the input.

Sorry, but do you own this thread or something?

15-06-2019 9:08pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Sorry, but do you own this thread or something?

Not even a little bit. I was just responding to a post that was aimed at me and I thanked you for it.

Omackeral · 15-06-2019 9:09pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm not going to play your game.

Would you play this one?

AndrewJRenko · 15-06-2019 11:10pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not even a little bit. I was just responding to a post that was aimed at me and I thanked you for it.

No, it wasn't aimed at you, but thanks for the thanks all the same.

15-06-2019 11:11pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

No, it wasn't aimed at you, but thanks for the thanks all the same.

You quoted me.

AndrewJRenko · 15-06-2019 11:13pm

Omackeral wrote: »

Would you play this one?

Probably not, though there is a photo of my leapfrogging an old style parking meter in my younger years. I'm not sure I could manage one of the pay and display machines these days.

Omackeral · 16-06-2019 4:54am

Funny how you've no problem answering my question above first time around but refuse to answer another simple one after being asked umpteen times. Very cowardly.

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 9:19am

Deleted User wrote: »

You quoted me.

I did indeed. And my point stands - the response wasn't directed at you. It was in response to the point you made, though it wasn't directed at you.

Omackeral wrote: »

Funny how you've no problem answering my question above first time around but refuse to answer another simple one after being asked umpteen times. Very cowardly.

Funny how you're so desperate to drag me down a rat hole of a discussion? Would that be to try to distract from the reality of how hate crime legislation works fine in many other countries?

Roger Hassenforder · 16-06-2019 9:41am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

O
Funny how you're so desperate to drag me down a rat hole of a discussion? Would that be to try to distract from the reality of how hate crime legislation works fine in many other countries?

Funny (not ha ha funny) how you're so extravagant* in your posts on a discussion site to reject attempts to discuss said discussion topic, repeating your unwillingness ho engage.
Mantras and slogans is your forte i reckon.

(*On mobile, cant actually check if you're top poster, but I'd wager truppence...)

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 10:53am

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Funny (not ha ha funny) how you're so extravagant* in your posts on a discussion site to reject attempts to discuss said discussion topic, repeating your unwillingness ho engage.
Mantras and slogans is your forte i reckon.

(*On mobile, cant actually check if you're top poster, but I'd wager truppence...)

Top poster on boards? I'll safely see your truppence and raise you to shilling on that one.

I haven't rejected discussion. People are welcome to discuss to their hearts content. It's funny how people really don't seem that interested in discussion their own views, but are more interested in setting themselves up to score points against me. So no, I'm not going to play your/their game, but if you/they want to kid yourselves that you know your ars3 from your elbow on these issues, by all means, be my guest.

I'll stick to the point about the need for hate crime legislation in Ireland to protect vulnerable groups.

16-06-2019 10:57am

AndrewJRenko wrote:

I'll stick to the point about the need for hate crime legislation in Ireland to protect vulnerable groups.

Grand. And I will stick to the reality that there is no need as they have protection already.

Vulnerable groups you say? Who do you deem as vulnerable? Is it an exhaustive list or can you keep adding as you go along. I mean, if I identified as feeling vulnerable, would I be protected under hate crime legislation? What's the criteria?

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 11:06am

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand. And I will stick to the reality that there is no need as they have protection already.

You should share that good news with the folks who were on Joe Duffy all week talking about the racial abuse they got on Irish Rail trains and elsewhere.

Deleted User wrote: »

Vulnerable groups you say? Who do you deem as vulnerable? Is it an exhaustive list or can you keep adding as you go along. I mean, if I identified as feeling vulnerable, would I be protected under hate crime legislation? What's the criteria?

The Wiki definition would be a great starting point;

Examples of such groups can include, and are almost exclusively limited to: sex, ethnicity, disability, language, nationality, physical appearance, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation.

It's similar enough to the nine grounds in Irish equality legislation. There might be a few issues to be worked out through the normal legislative processes.

16-06-2019 11:10am

AndrewJRenko wrote:

You should share that good news with the folks who were on Joe Duffy all week talking about the racial abuse they got on Irish Rail trains and elsewhere.

They are protected against that. I think calling it a hate crime would change absolutely sweet **** all. What extra protection would a name change do?

AndrewJRenko wrote:

The Wiki definition would be a great starting point;

Physical appearance? Please explain to me how that would work in your opinion?

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 11:18am

Deleted User wrote: »

They are protected against that. I think calling it a hate crime would change absolutely sweet **** all. What extra protection would a name change do?

Obviously, the current level of protection isn't working if people are suffering these kinds of attacks and worse because of their race or their disability or their sexual orientation.

Hate crime legislation would provide different ways of handling the enforcement, prosecution and punishment of these crimes to provide extra protection, as they do in many countries around the world.

Deleted User wrote: »

Physical appearance? Please explain to me how that would work in your opinion?

It's not something I'd have much expertise or experience on. It would work in the same way that it works in other countries around the world that have hate crime legislation.

16-06-2019 11:24am

AndrewJRenko wrote:

It's not something I'd have much expertise or experience on. It would work in the same way that it works in other countries around the world that have hate crime legislation.

Jesus you are like a broken record.

Why do you keep prattling on if you aren't willing to give your OPINION on how you think hate crime laws will work according to your definition?

Saying "I dunno, some other country does it" is a little weak.

But sure let's have a look at America then. Do they have hate crime legislation? Tell me about how there is no racism or social disharmony there.

16-06-2019 11:25am

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Obviously, the current level of protection isn't working if people are suffering these kinds of attacks and worse because of their race or their disability or their sexual orientation.

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Hate crime legislation would provide different ways of handling the enforcement, prosecution and punishment of these crimes to provide extra protection, as they do in many countries around the world.

Give me an example of how it will help. What different ways of handling the enforcement do other countries use and has it eliminated people being victimised?

Roger Hassenforder · 16-06-2019 11:39am

Everything (s)he has to offer could be written on 2x3 placard.

Just repetition of the same stuff.
"Something edge case...but something wiki...something other countries...not interested in a discussion...something".

Ample opportunities to move things along.
But no. Pages of the same shîte.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Obviously, the current level of protection isn't working if people are suffering these kinds of attacks and worse because of their race or their disability or their sexual orientation

Obviously all the legislation in relation to:

Murder
Assault
Sex assault
Rape
Theft
Drink driving
Speeding
Motor tax
Tax evasion
Litter
Fraud etc. is insufficient to protect people, irrespective of sex, race, disability, ethnicity.

Although, now that i think of it, maybe there is an arguement for increased penalties for attacks/crimes by a certain ethnic group on another, where the victims ethnicity is a factor.

Or does your bias only apply to those you deem to be vulnerable?
As your avoidance of simple questions would suggest?

Omackeral · 16-06-2019 12:11pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Funny how you're so desperate to drag me down a rat hole of a discussion? Would that be to try to distract from the reality of how hate crime legislation works fine in many other countries?

Nah just showing you in black and white that you're showing yourself up as an absolute coward is all. Of course, you already know that.

Omackeral · 16-06-2019 12:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Give me an example of how it will help. What different ways of handling the enforcement do other countries use and has it eliminated people being victimised?

What are you asking him for opinions for on here? What do you think this is... a discussion site? Why should he play that game?

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 2:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus you are like a broken record.

In fairness, if you keep asking the same question, you're going to keep getting the same answer.

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do you keep prattling on if you aren't willing to give your OPINION on how you think hate crime laws will work according to your definition?

Mainly because I recognise that my OPINION on how hate crime laws will work is about as useful as my OPINION on the inner workings of nuclear reactors or my OPINION on the fine details of heart surgery. I'm able to see that it would require considerable expertise or research on these matters to give a sensible opinion. So until I've done that research, I'll hold back rather than pontificating on something that I know very little about. I know that might seem like a novel approach here on boards. where everyone is encouraged to have an opinion about everything, including the things that they know SFA about - but that's the way I work around here.

Deleted User wrote: »

But sure let's have a look at America then. Do they have hate crime legislation? Tell me about how there is no racism or social disharmony there.

If you want me to do your research for you, we'll need to agree an hourly rate in advance. How does €100 an hour sound to you?

Omackeral wrote: »

Nah just showing you in black and white that you're showing yourself up as an absolute coward is all. Of course, you already know that.

There's no 'showing up' involved. I've made my position crystal clear from the start - that I'm not going to be drawn down a rathole for your entertainment.

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Everything (s)he has to offer could be written on 2x3 placard.

Just repetition of the same stuff.
"Something edge case...but something wiki...something other countries...not interested in a discussion...something".

Ample opportunities to move things along.
But no. Pages of the same shîte.

Obviously all the legislation in relation to:

Murder
Assault
Sex assault
Rape
Theft
Drink driving
Speeding
Motor tax
Tax evasion
Litter
Fraud etc. is insufficient to protect people, irrespective of sex, race, disability, ethnicity.

Although, now that i think of it, maybe there is an arguement for increased penalties for attacks/crimes by a certain ethnic group on another, where the victims ethnicity is a factor.

Or does your bias only apply to those you deem to be vulnerable?
As your avoidance of simple questions would suggest?

I'm not quite sure about the relevance of the motor tax and litter thing.

But just to be clear, it's not me who would deem people to be vulnerable or not - it would be part of legislation, just as it is in the many countries round the world that have implemented hate crime legislation.

Deleted User wrote: »

Give me an example of how it will help. What different ways of handling the enforcement do other countries use and has it eliminated people being victimised?

Sure - one example would be increased punishment levels as a deterrent. But maybe you'd like to do some further research yourself, before you decide whether there is value in hate crime legislation or not.

If you want me to do your research for you, we'll need to agree an hourly rate in advance. How does €100 an hour sound to you?

16-06-2019 2:47pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Sure - one example would be increased punishment levels as a deterrent. But maybe you'd like to do some further research yourself, before you decide whether there is value in hate crime legislation or not.

So increased punishment levels for crimes against vulnerable people? Who decides who is vulnerable?

If someone, who unprovoked, punched a straight man and if someone, who unprovoked, punched a gay man, should there be a harsher punishment for the man who hit who you deem to be protected even though the severity of the crime is identical?

Would that not be discriminating against the straight guy? And if it was discrimination, would he not technically be vulnerable?

I say this half in hope of a rational response but I'll get " look at wiki, it's not a game, works other places, fringe case".

AndrewJRenko wrote:

If you want me to do your research for you, we'll need to agree an hourly rate in advance. How does â‚¬100 an hour sound to you?

Good one. Your humour is as funny as your points are salient.

16-06-2019 2:49pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Sure - one example would be increased punishment levels as a deterrent. But maybe you'd like to do some further research yourself, before you decide whether there is value in hate crime legislation or not.

I've researched it. There isn't. The law should be equal for all.

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 3:25pm

Deleted User wrote: »

So increased punishment levels for crimes against vulnerable people? Who decides who is vulnerable?

The legislation would set out the criteria, and the Court would ultimately decide about whether the victim meets the criteria.

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone, who unprovoked, punched a straight man and if someone, who unprovoked, punched a gay man, should there be a harsher punishment for the man who hit who you deem to be protected even though the severity of the crime is identical?

Would that not be discriminating against the straight guy? And if it was discrimination, would he not technically be vulnerable?

It isn't a hate crime because he hit a gay man. It's a hate crime when he hit him because he's a gay man.

Do you come across many cases of straight men being beaten up because they are straight?

Deleted User wrote: »

I've researched it. There isn't. The law should be equal for all.

Great - would you care to share any details of your findings perhaps? Any of the peer-reviewed papers that you studied, or similar?

Omackeral · 16-06-2019 3:45pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It isn't a hate crime because he hit a gay man. It's a hate crime when he hit him because he's a gay man.

Do you come across many cases of straight men being beaten up because they are straight?

Obese person gets a hiding after being verbally abused for being overweight. He's hit because he's a fat man. Is that a hate crime? Exact same wording as you've used. No games, no rat-trap... just asking a direct opinion.

16-06-2019 3:45pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Great - would you care to share any details of your findings perhaps? Any of the peer-reviewed papers that you studied, or similar?

No. I can only share my opinion which is that if you treat others as different in the eyes of the law, it is no longer just and fair.

Giving opinions aren't that hard. You should try some time.

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 4:21pm

Omackeral wrote: »

Obese person gets a hiding after being verbally abused for being overweight. He's hit because he's a fat man. Is that a hate crime? Exact same wording as you've used. No games, no rat-trap... just asking a direct opinion.

Did you really think it was going to be that easy?

Deleted User wrote: »

No. I can only share my opinion which is that if you treat others as different in the eyes of the law, it is no longer just and fair.

Giving opinions aren't that hard. You should try some time.

So you didn't really do the research, right?

16-06-2019 4:23pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

So you didn't really do the research, right?

About as much as youbdid

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 4:46pm

Deleted User wrote: »

About as much as youbdid

That's true enough, though I didn't claim to have done any research.

Omackeral · 16-06-2019 6:03pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did you really think it was going to be that easy?

It would be for 99% of people. You're a very very special chap though seemingly.

AndrewJRenko · 16-06-2019 8:24pm

Omackeral wrote: »

It would be for 99% of people. You're a very very special chap though seemingly.

Why, thank you - you're too kind.

06-07-2019 1:43pm

From one of the organisers of the Trans March to "break the binary" (ha jesus)

Ireland has one of the highest levels of transphobic hate crimes in Europe and it needs to be tackled

as reported on RTE.

What a load of rubbish. As proven on this thread alone, "hate crime" can be as easy as calling someone a nasty name based on their appearance.

I would like to see the report that backs up that ridiculous claim. Total bullsh!t that the mainstream press will lap up in order to make Ireland look like it's over-run with trans bashing zealots.

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2019 1:47pm

And did you look for the report, or did you just decide that it's ridiculous before reading up? Or did you talk to many trans people about their experiences?

06-07-2019 2:04pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And did you look for the report, or did you just decide that it's ridiculous before reading up? Or did you talk to many trans people about their experiences?

Funnily enough Andrew, I did. I found a report called Lifecycle of a Hate Crime: Country Report for Ireland which I found to spout awful ****e. I read it before I called it ridiculous and has no basis in reality.

Take this peach of a quote

There is no way of recording that an offender has committed a hate crime

Yet saying in the same breath that Ireland has the one of the highest amounts of hate crime....... based on what records if it can't be recorded?

So
I have spoken to a few trans people. Have you spoken to lots? Have they a hive mind?

Anyone can have a victim mentality Andrew. In fact, I feel like you are attacking me with your questioning. That's a hate crime you know.

klaaaz · 06-07-2019 2:32pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I would like to see the report that backs up that ridiculous claim. Total bullsh!t that the mainstream press will lap up in order to make Ireland look like it's over-run with trans bashing zealots.

Even judging from the numerous threads posted here by the vitriol to transgender people, it's no surprise that there is a general transphobic hostility and hate among some sections of the general wider public. Dunno why you are surprised, it's shocking that you are surprised at all.

06-07-2019 2:35pm

klaaaz wrote: »

Even judging from the numerous threads posted here by the vitriol to transgender people, it's no surprise that there is a general transphobic hostility and hate among some sections of the general wider public. Dunno why you are surprised, it's shocking that you are surprised at all.

I don't see an overwhelming amount of vitriol. I think there is righfully some pushback when it comes to insisting that a trans person has a right to be wholesale recognised as their preferred gender. This is and has been referred to as hate speech and a hate crime. It's not.

I say this as an ally.

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2019 2:57pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Funnily enough Andrew, I did. I found a report called Lifecycle of a Hate Crime: Country Report for Ireland which I found to spout awful ****e. I read it before I called it ridiculous and has no basis in reality.

Take this peach of a quote

Yet saying in the same breath that Ireland has the one of the highest amounts of hate crime....... based on what records if it can't be recorded?

So
I have spoken to a few trans people. Have you spoken to lots? Have they a hive mind?

Anyone can have a victim mentality Andrew. In fact, I feel like you are attacking me with your questioning. That's a hate crime you know.

So that's a No then - you haven't read the report that you somehow know is ridiculous before you read it. Didn't think so.

And no, I haven't spoken to lots of trans people - two that I can recall, in fact, one of which had pretty dreadful experiences with employers, landlords and family. How about you?

06-07-2019 3:03pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So that's a No then - you haven't read the report that you somehow know is ridiculous before you read it. Didn't think so.

And no, I haven't spoken to lots of trans people - two that I can recall, in fact, one of which had pretty dreadful experiences with employers, landlords and family. How about you?

So... from me saying that I HAD read the report and found it to be ridiculous, you took that as I HADN't read the report? Thats odd Andrew. Very odd. I even gave you a quote from the report to show that I did read it.

I have spoken to some trans people. They've told me about some dreadful experiences too. Having dreadful experiences isn't isolated to Trans people though. I have also spoken to some trans people who were the most opinionated and self obsessed and held some beliefs that were so self serving and exclusionary that I found them repugnant. But that attitude isn't isolated to Trans people either.

It's almost as if, each person is an individual and they aren't defined by a single characteristic.

What is your point?

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2019 3:06pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I say this as an ally.

Right up there with

I'm not racist but...

and

I'm a cyclist myself but....

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2019 3:09pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So... from me saying that I HAD read the report and found it to be ridiculous, you took that as I HADN't read the report? Thats odd Andrew. Very odd. I even gave you a quote from the report to show that I did read it.

How exactly did you work out that particular report was the source for the comments that you questioned?

klaaaz · 06-07-2019 3:10pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see an overwhelming amount of vitriol. I think there is righfully some pushback when it comes to insisting that a trans person has a right to be wholesale recognised as their preferred gender. This is and has been referred to as hate speech and a hate crime. It's not.

I say this as an ally.

Ally?! You're very funny. There has been many threads usually started by opposers of trans rights with vitriol aimed at that tiny community.

They are legally recognised as their gender, it's the law. You're welcome to contact your local TD/political party(there are none on your side unfortunately!) to protest that law or even mount a court challenge if you wish as you are deeply affected by this issue.

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2019 3:12pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I have spoken to some trans people. They've told me about some dreadful experiences too. Having dreadful experiences isn't isolated to Trans people though.

Having dreadful experiences as a result of being trans, over and above all the other possible sources of dreadful experiences that we all face, is indeed isolated to trans people.

Hate crime? Really?

Comments