nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

[Deleted User]

She's permanently on twitter now tweeting links to wacky stories from a few years ago and every single conspiracy theory she can get her hands on

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

[Deleted User]

pinkyeye wrote: »

So why do you have a problem with hate crime laws then?

He literally explained how they're pretty redundant in the very post you quoted.

Stephen15

pinkyeye wrote: »

So why do you have a problem with hate crime laws then?

So if two people are victims of a mugging both equally traumatised and received the same injuries and the attacks were very similar but one had a racial element and the other did not younthink the one with the racial element should get a tougher sentence. .

Do you think that is fair on the person who a victim of a non racially motivated attack that someone whondid the exact same thing gets a tougher sentence? It's also verybhard tomprove and quite frankly a waste of resources policing.

Annasopra

Stephen15 wrote: »

So if two people are victims of a mugging both equally traumatised and received the same injuries and the attacks were very similar but one had a racial element and the other did not younthink the one with the racial element should get a tougher sentence. .

Do you think that is fair on the person who a victim of a non racially motivated attack that someone whondid the exact same thing gets a tougher sentence? It's also verybhard tomprove and quite frankly a waste of resources policing.

Yes it is perfectly fair because that person was not specifically targeted because of their identity.

Overheal

Omackeral wrote: »

He literally explained how they're pretty redundant in the very post you quoted.

I don’t see how they’re redundant, rather they codify in statute how the courts are to consider such cases in addition to other factors. This prevents weak Court precedent from weakening punishments to such crimes by way of “boys will be boys” style rulings and suspended sentencings.

[Deleted User]

Stephen15 wrote: »

Can you give examples of hate crime laws work well in order jurisdictions? Look at the UK where the hate crime laws clearly do not work as the police seem more interested in policing offensive tweets despite the fact the UK is in the midst of a murder epidemic.

Really? How many hate tweets have the police investigated and how many murders have they investigated? I'm interested to see how you came to the conclusion that they're more interested in tweets? I'm trusting that you actually have some real numbers behind these points, and you're not just using the coverage on your alt-right sites and discussions as your measure.

Stephen15 wrote: »

People are wondering how can it be proven that a crime is a hate crime. Is it really worthwhile wasting Garda time and/or the time of the DPP and courts investigating whether hate crime when they should be taking care of other crime.

It's not an either/or choice. In investigating a crime, Gardai gather the necessary information to decide whether to prosecute a hate crime or not. Judge or jury make a decision about what is proven, just like any other crime. And it works fine in many other jurisdictions.

pinkyeye

Stephen15 wrote: »

So if two people are victims of a mugging both equally traumatised and received the same injuries and the attacks were very similar but one had a racial element and the other did not younthink the one with the racial element should get a tougher sentence. .

Do you think that is fair on the person who a victim of a non racially motivated attack that someone whondid the exact same thing gets a tougher sentence? It's also verybhard tomprove and quite frankly a waste of resources policing.

Yes I think it's completely fair and I'll explain why.

Because it points out to people that you can NOT decide to attack someone purely based on their race, difference, sexuality etc.

And will perhaps provide some deterrent.

At least I live in hope.

Stephen15

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Really? How many hate tweets have the police investigated and how many murders have they investigated? I'm interested to see how you came to the conclusion that they're more interested in tweets? I'm trusting that you actually have some real numbers behind these points, and you're not just using the coverage on your alt-right sites and discussions as your measure.

I couldn't find exact figures about hate crimes in the UK but I know the police are taking an interest in offensive comments online in fact the police are even admitting they are taking an interest in non crime incidents when their job is to be investigating and preventing CRIME.

https://twitter.com/syptweet/status/1038891067381350401?s=19

Meanwhile there is a crime epidemic in the UK with murder through the roof. Btw it is not a knife epidemic it is a murder epidemic as most who use knifes use it with the intent to murder another another individual not assault them. In my belief anyone caught using a knife to attack someone should charged with either murder or attempted murder.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42749089

Blueshoe

Stephen15 wrote: »

I couldn't find exact figures about hate crimes in the UK but I know the police are taking an interest in offensive comments online in fact the police are even admitting they are taking an interest in non crime incidents when their job is to be investigating and preventing CRIME.

https://twitter.com/syptweet/status/1038891067381350401?s=19

Meanwhile there is a crime epidemic in the UK with murder through the roof. Btw it is not a knife epidemic it is a murder epidemic as most who use knifes use it with the intent to murder another another individual not assault them. In my belief anyone caught using a knife to attack someone should charged with either murder or attempted murder.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42749089

Have a look at London 999 feed on twitter. The daily violence is on another level over there

Stephen15

pinkyeye wrote: »

Yes I think it's completely fair and I'll explain why.

Because it points out to people that you can NOT decide to attack someone purely based on their race, difference, sexuality etc.

And will perhaps provide some deterrent.

At least I live in hope.

No it is not acceptable to attack someone for any reason FULL STOP. Pointing out to people that they can not attack purely based on their race, difference, sexuality etc. suggests to some scumbags that it is acceptable to attack someone if it is not based on the factors which you outline.

The deterent should be tougher sentences across the board for all crimes

[Deleted User]

Stephen15 wrote: »

I couldn't find exact figures about hate crimes in the UK but I know the police are taking an interest in offensive comments online in fact the police are even admitting they are taking an interest in non crime incidents when their job is to be investigating and preventing CRIME.

https://twitter.com/syptweet/status/1038891067381350401?s=19

Meanwhile there is a crime epidemic in the UK with murder through the roof. Btw it is not a knife epidemic it is a murder epidemic as most who use knifes use it with the intent to murder another another individual not assault them. In my belief anyone caught using a knife to attack someone should charged with either murder or attempted murder.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42749089

So you're claim that they were more interested in investigating tweets was just BS then?

Kimsang

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So you're claim that they were more interested in investigating tweets was just BS then?

Well they were told not to investigate the rape gangs because it might be seen as racist, they weren't allowed to stop and search because that was racist, they don't have much left to do than go online and target little girls that post rap lyrics in tribute to their dead friends.

[Deleted User]

Kimsang wrote: »

Well they were told not to investigate the rape gangs because it might be seen as racist, they weren't allowed to stop and search because that was racist, they don't have much left to do than go online and target little girls that post rap lyrics in tribute to their dead friends.

And you have reliable sources for all those claims, yeah?

Annasopra

Kimsang wrote: »

Well they were told not to investigate the rape gangs because it might be seen as racist, they weren't allowed to stop and search because that was racist, they don't have much left to do than go online and target little girls that post rap lyrics in tribute to their dead friends.

Stephen was asked a question. You answered it with whataboutery!

Kimsang

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And you have reliable sources for all those claims, yeah?

Yes feel free to look them up.

Sadiq khan has famously backtracked on his campaign promise to end 'racist stop and search'

This is what Labour MP Keighley Ann Cryer said in 2012

"Complaints to social workers and the police were ignored because they were "petrified of being called racist"

The girl who posted rap lyrics name is Chelsea Russell.

Kimsang

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Stephen was asked a question. You answered it with whataboutery!

The question about what the police are more interested in is a red herring. The point was made that people would prefer to see police resources diverted to real and actual crimes and not internet hurt feelings.

The fact that the police do waste an enormous amount of money policing twitter is quite frankly ridiculous, considering how they continue to complain about a lack of funding.

[Deleted User]

Kimsang wrote: »

Yes feel free to look them up.

Sadiq khan has famously backtracked on his campaign promise to end 'racist stop and search'

This is what Labour MP Keighley Ann Cryer said in 2012

The girl who posted rap lyrics name is Chelsea Russell.

So you're confirming that the stop and search hasn't been stopped then. Interesting.

And you're taking one comment by one MP as gospel. Interesting.

And you've no details about how much time the police are continuing to spend on other crimes. Interesting.

[Deleted User]

Kimsang wrote: »

The fact that the police do waste an enormous amount of money policing twitter is quite frankly ridiculous, considering how they continue to complain about a lack of funding.

How much is this enormous amount of money please?

Kimsang

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So you're confirming that the stop and search hasn't been stopped then. Interesting.

And you're taking one comment by one MP as gospel. Interesting.

And you've no details about how much time the police are continuing to spend on other crimes. Interesting.

Since you're so obtuse, I won't refer you to sources, you can look them up yourself. Stop and search was removed and reintroduced.

Your ignorance is astonishing and only dwarfed by your conviction.

[Deleted User]

Kimsang wrote: »

Since you're so obtuse, I won't refer you to sources, you can look them up yourself. Stop and search was removed and reintroduced.

Your ignorance is astonishing and only dwarfed by your conviction.

So you're confirming a second time that stop and search is continuing. Interesting.

Stephen15

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yes it is perfectly fair because that person was not specifically targeted because of their identity.

So you support inequality when it comes to handing out sentences

[Deleted User]

Stephen15 wrote: »

So you support inequality when it comes to handing out sentences

Do you think that a child with a disability should get additional supports in school?

Stephen15

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you think that a child with a disability should get additional supports in school?

Now that's what I call whataboutery!

Skylinehead

Stephen15 wrote: »

So you support inequality when it comes to handing out sentences

Being a racist isn't protected under discrimination laws.

Unfortunately for you.

davedanon

recedite wrote: »

Blood and soil.
These are the two main ways people get their citizenship.
Jus soli and Jus sanguinis.

Just seen this. Shameful. How dare you.

Overheal

Stephen15 wrote: »

No it is not acceptable to attack someone for any reason FULL STOP. Pointing out to people that they can not attack purely based on their race, difference, sexuality etc. suggests to some scumbags that it is acceptable to attack someone if it is not based on the factors which you outline.

The deterent should be tougher sentences across the board for all crimes

Now I’ve heard you say some ridiculous **** but this is the most convolutedly stupid thing you’ve clutched at yet. As if scumbag racists are suddenly going to go “ah balls, can’t beat up this minority I have a deep seated irrational hatred for, i better wail on this person from my same ethnic background, because that’s the best way to channel my racism.”

Like I mean hey, you’re demonstrably a racist Stephen15, you’ve made that clear: are you going to tell me that you’d (if you were so hypothetically and violently inclined) avoid beating on an immigrant and would instead go curbstomp an anglo such as yourself, because you’re mad at immigrants but you prioritized a stiffer punishment over ‘friendly fire?’ Clearly, deep seated irrational hatred begets commensurately irrational arguments.

You know what else: Anders Breivik mowed down dozens of people who weren’t even immigrants, because he was pissed off about immigrants. Guess what he never said though - ‘well I shot all those camp kids instead because I wanted to avoid it being considered a hate crime.’

[Deleted User]

Stephen15 wrote: »

Now that's what I call whataboutery!

Now that's what I call avoiding the question - why won't you answer?

Annasopra

Stephen15 wrote: »

So you support inequality when it comes to handing out sentences

No. Bringing in hate crime legislation is a way to actually work towards adressing structural inequalities.

Annasopra

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Why? Why do you refuse to acknowledge that there is wider impact not just on individuals. Its kind of almost like you feel that your whiteness shouldnt be seen as inferior. Its almost as well like you refuse to acknowledge that hate crimes exist and refuse to acknowledge their impact. Why is that?

Intersting you ignore these questions Stephen

pjohnson

These UKIP/Robinson/Farage/GranTurismo/GemGem fanboys are amazing. I mean these acolytes tie themselves in knots trying to deny what they believe out of some fear of being called racist. They seem concerned about "PC" and cry about the "left" and "PC" while also crying about free speech at every chance while they try to gag themselves.

SoundsRight

Gardai state they believe it's a random attack, not a hate crime, and still that 'peace & integration' guy al-Qadri is pushing that it was a hate crime. Ideally he should be arrested for trying to stir up racial tensions. I'm sure the Gardai already keep a close eye on his like anyway.