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

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

Options
1…9091939596…333

Comments

  • Options
    #2762
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    batgoat wrote: »
    Are you so ill informed that you're oblivious to the fact that people have faced harassment and violent attacks because of their race, religion, orientation etc? Meanwhile culchies and red haired people do not. No shocker that you choose to be oblivious to the obvious though.

    Joey used the example of a Pakistani man being mugged then getting called a "paki bastard" during the mugging. That's not a hate crime that's assault and robbery many attacks have an element of verbal abuse whether that be based on race, appearance, hair colour, clothing etc.

    I do not believe that racial abuse or so called hate crimes are a major issue in this country and when in the vent they do occur I do not see why our current laws cannot combat these incidences


  • Options
    #2763
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    To be fair I used to work with a ginger lad who got a payout off transdev because a luas ticket inspector called him 'ginger pubes' or some crap.
    Well there ya go. We don't need Joey's law.
    If somebody gets abused in some way, there are ways of getting payback already.


  • Options
    #2764
    pinkyeye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭pinkyeye


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    I've never heard of it until now so I can't speak of the all lives matter movement.

    Well the left regularly go on about equality but then celebrate diversity don't you think it's a tad hypocritical to say we're all equal then celebrate diversity. Why does diversity matter if we're all equal?

    Do you know what diverse means? It means different, not lesser or superior.


  • Options
    #2765
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Lots of african countries white people are robbed, mugged and tortured for being white, south africans being kicked off their farms etc... does happen, just not here , well except anecdotal evidence of the roaming african gangs in some estates targeting white lads

    And what country are you in Eric?
    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Joey used the example of a Pakistani man being mugged then getting called a "paki bastard" duringbthe mugging. That's not a hate crime that's assault and robbery many attacks have an element of verbal abuse whether that be based on race, appearance, hair colour, clothing etc.

    I do not believe that racial abuse or so called hate crimes are a major issue in this country and when in the vent they do occur I do not see why our current laws cannot combat these incidences

    Yes, it would be classified as a hate crime as there would be an indication that race was the motivating factor.... In fairness, you don't even believe in hate crimes.


  • Options
    #2766
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    batgoat wrote: »
    And what country are you in Eric?

    Luckily Ireland where we still have time to act before areas become like parts of east london or malmo where people are targeted for being white by immigrant gangs.

    Although as somebody who has heard of white women being abused on the bus near adamstown im surprised that the new 'racism has no place on public transport' posters have none of white people, seems a bit......racist....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2767
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    Careful talking about gingers, Mike.ie has expressed a dislike to conversations of this nature in another thread


  • Options
    #2768
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    batgoat wrote: »
    ... In fairness, you don't even believe in hate crimes.

    So you admit hate crime ideology requires a belief structure similar to that of a religion?
    With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.-Steven Weinberg

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4WVvlWCs9s


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOwNtYbU02U


  • Options
    #2769
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    Kimsang wrote: »
    So you admit hate crime ideology requires a belief structure similar to that of a religion?

    Not at all, I'd just say that he tends to be a bit deluded.


  • Options
    #2770
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    pinkyeye wrote: »
    Do you know what diverse means? It means different, not lesser or superior.

    Agreed. So all laws should be applied equally to everyone, for everyone and against everyone IMO.


  • Options
    #2771
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    batgoat wrote: »
    Yes, it would be classified as a hate crime as there would be an indication that race was the motivating factor.... In fairness, you don't even believe in hate crimes.

    Joey thinks gender should be included too if a man is doing it to a woman. Wonder if he thinks a woman abusing a man is in the same boat too? North vs South of the border? Urban vs rural? Where do we draw the line?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2772
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    Omackeral wrote: »
    Joey thinks gender should be included too if a man is doing it to a woman. Wonder if he thinks a woman abusing a man is in the same boat too? North vs South of the border? Urban vs rural? Where do we draw the line?

    Joey thinks it should be pursued if one is targeted because they are a woman. We have unfortunately had people target women for misogynistic and warped reasons.


  • Options
    #2773
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    batgoat wrote: »
    .. In fairness, you don't even believe in hate crimes.
    batgoat wrote: »
    Not at all, I'd just say that he tends to be a bit deluded.
    In fairness, you just jumped the shark. You are now telling people what they believe, even when they tell you something else.
    He said "I do not see why our current laws cannot combat these incidences" not that they don't exist.


    It would be very rare for some attacker to run up to somebody and break their arm, just because of that person's skin colour. But if that happened, how is it any worse for the victim than if they had been randomly selected by an equal opportunity psychopath?


  • Options
    #2774
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    batgoat wrote: »
    Joey thinks it should be pursued if one is targeted because they are a woman. We have unfortunately had people target women for misogynistic and warped reasons.

    Not denying that. What if the shoe is on the other foot though? Or if it's woman hating other women? That's where it gets muddied. If someone has an innate hatred of all women, there's probably mental issues at play too. What I'm saying is, it's hard to legislate for this type of thing. Tough to define. Just prosecute people for the crimes and if the mens rea is present, apply the necessary laws that are there.


  • Options
    #2775
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    batgoat wrote: »
    Joey thinks it should be pursued if one is targeted because they are a woman. We have unfortunately had people target women for misogynistic and warped reasons.

    And those people are generally charged with crimes such as rape and sexual assault


  • Options
    #2776
    pinkyeye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭pinkyeye


    recedite wrote: »
    Or somebody from the country gets called a culchie cnut, or a red haired person is called a ginger tosser. Nope, none of these things count under Joey's law.
    Because they don't feature on his hierarchy of victimhood.

    But most if not all assaults are going to be accompanied by some form of personal verbal abuse.

    Whatever about redheads, culchies are certainly not a minority. :D

    If someone deliberately went looking for a redhead to attack then yes that's a hate crime.


  • Options
    #2777
    bobmalooka
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭bobmalooka


    Some pathetic stawman arguments in here.

    We have an equal stays act, this would be a reasonable basis for defining what categories of people could be subjected to hate crimes.

    Gender is one of them so worry not lads, if men are attacked by women because they are men I would say there’s a reasonable argument that that is a hate crime.

    Lobby your local TD if you feel culchies, gingers or baldies should also be protected under the act - as I meet 2 of those 3 categories and am rapidly approaching all 3 I would welcome such a development.


  • Options
    #2778
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    bobmalooka wrote: »
    Some pathetic stawman arguments in here.

    We have an equal stays act, this would be a reasonable basis for defining what categories of people could be subjected to hate crimes.

    Gender is one of them so worry not lads, if men are attacked by women because they are men I would say there’s a reasonable argument that that is a hate crime.

    Lobby your local TD if you feel culchies, gingers or baldies should also be protected under the act - as I meet 2 of those 3 categories and am rapidly approaching all 3 I would welcome such a development.

    Might just be easier if we upgrade all crimes to hate crime status, then we can have justice again.


  • Options
    #2779
    pinkyeye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭pinkyeye


    For all those who have a problem with hate crime legislation can I ask exactly why?

    By that I mean I presume no-one on here is going to attack anyone anyway so we'll never have to worry about it.

    How will it affect our lives?


  • Options
    #2780
    bobmalooka
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭bobmalooka


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Might just be easier if we upgrade all crimes to hate crime status, then we can have justice again.

    Excellent point, that’s me told


  • Options
    #2781
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    pinkyeye wrote: »
    For all those who have a problem with hate crime legislation can I ask exactly why?

    It's hard to prove. It's muddled at best. It's essentially necessitates two trials and ties everything up more. There are existing laws there that can be used to punish people for transgressions. Who decides what constitutes hate-speech/hate-crimes. Things like that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2782
    jackboy
    Registered Users Posts: 4,462 ✭✭✭jackboy


    pinkyeye wrote: »
    For all those who have a problem with hate crime legislation can I ask exactly why?

    By that I mean I presume no-one on here is going to attack anyone anyway so we'll never have to worry about it.

    How will it affect our lives?

    Crimes are currently dealt with based on actions. Hate crimes are dealt with based on actions in conjunction with the thoughts of the accused. Massive potential for errors.


  • Options
    #2783
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    pinkyeye wrote: »
    For all those who have a problem with hate crime legislation can I ask exactly why?

    By that I mean I presume no-one on here is going to attack anyone anyway so we'll never have to worry about it.

    How will it affect our lives?

    because it seems like everything is escalating to be 'motivated by hate' these days. The last thing we need is you drunkenly end up in a minor fight with some random lad and are going down for 2 years because you didn't know he was a gay jew , or some woman shouting her mouth off at another woman over a disagreement on the street and all of a sudden its a conviction because one of them was black.


  • Options
    #2784
    bobmalooka
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭bobmalooka


    Omackeral wrote: »
    It's hard to prove. It's muddled at best. It's essentially necessitates two trials and ties everything up more.

    Presumably the DPP will relegate ‘hate crimes’ to ‘regular crime’ status if the appropriate evidence threshold can’t be met in the case of an alleged hate crime

    Edit: I accept it is harder to prove and thus an unsatisfactory level of actual hate crimes would be charged as such - however I don’t accept this as reason enough to reject the concept


  • Options
    #2785
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    bobmalooka wrote: »
    Presumably the DPP will relegate ‘hate crimes’ to ‘regular crime’ status if the appropriate evidence threshold can’t be met in the case of an alleged hate crime

    Who decides what constitutes a hate-crime? Is it black and white, excuse the pun, or is it on a sliding spectrum. Would jurors, if required, by asked to judge for themselves? Would there have to be people of various colours, belief systems and ability on duty?


  • Options
    #2786
    TaurenDruid
    Registered Users Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Omackeral wrote: »
    It's hard to prove. It's muddled at best. It's essentially necessitates two trials and ties everything up more. There are existing laws there that can be used to punish people for transgressions. Who decides what constitutes hate-speech/hate-crimes. Things like that.

    When someone attacks someone because of their nationality, sexuality, race or religion - it's a hate crime.

    When someone daubs swastikas or other graffiti on a place of worship - it's a hate crime.

    When someone urges violence against people or places because of their nationality, sexuality, race or religion or there are asylum seekers living there - it's a hate crime.

    When someone burns down a direct provision centre - it's a hate crime.

    It's not hard.


  • Options
    #2787
    bobmalooka
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭bobmalooka


    Omackeral wrote: »
    Who decides what constitutes a hate-crime? Is it black and white, excuse the pun, or is it on a sliding spectrum. Would jurors, if required, by asked to judge for themselves? Would there have to be people of various colours, belief systems and ability on duty?

    Well the legislature, then the DPP interpretation of legislation in combination with evidence provided by AGS and then ultimately a judge after hearing the car presented by the DPP and defended by the defendant.

    As pointed out already, the equal stays act defines 9 categories of discrimination- this would be a reasonable starting point for defining categories of hate motivated crimes


  • Options
    #2788
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    pinkyeye wrote: »
    For all those who have a problem with hate crime legislation can I ask exactly why?

    Markus Meechan was convicted under hate laws in Scotland for making a joke. He was in fact making a joke at the expense of nazis, but he was told by the court that context doesn't matter.

    Chelsea Russell was arrested for paying tribute to her dead friend by posting rap lyrics on a facebook page.

    What good does hate crime legislation do? It makes people feel better.


  • Options
    #2789
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    pinkyeye wrote: »
    For all those who have a problem with hate crime legislation can I ask exactly why?

    By that I mean I presume no-one on here is going to attack anyone anyway so we'll never have to worry about it.

    How will it affect our lives?

    Because I support justice being served. As a white person if I become a victim of crime I would like to see the perpetrator brought to justice. I would not like to see a situation where an <insert minority here> who gets attacked perpetrator gets a harsher sentence becuase of their race.


  • Options
    #2790
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    TaurenDruid wrote: »
    When someone attacks someone because of their nationality, sexuality, race or religion - it's a hate crime.

    When someone daubs swastikas or other graffiti on a place of worship - it's a hate crime.

    When someone urges violence against people or places because of their nationality, sexuality, race or religion or there are asylum seekers living there - it's a hate crime.

    When someone burns down a direct provision centre - it's a hate crime.

    It's not hard.


    Yeah and that's not always easy to prove. For example, daubing swastikas could be teenage vandalism designed to get a rise. People can simply be kunts. I've seen it. Eejits that just do it. Anyone burning down a synagogue or church should be done for arson. Anyone doing it with occupants inside should be done attempted murder. There are laws in place already. Prosecute to them to the full extent of it.

    Also, should we have jurors from every ethnic and cultural background to ensure diversity? Or specific jurors from the background of the alleged victim?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2791
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    bobmalooka wrote: »
    Well the legislature, then the DPP interpretation of legislation in combination with evidence provided by AGS and then ultimately a judge after hearing the car presented by the DPP and defended by the defendant.

    As pointed out already, the equal stays act defines 9 categories of discrimination- this would be a reasonable starting point for defining categories of hate motivated crimes

    We have scumbags getting off with suspended sentences for far more serious crimes than saying offensive words or adding insult to injury. I'd much rather that was dealt with to be honest.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement