Hate crime nonsense

eleventh wrote: »

So let's say someone knife attacks someone, what would the 'ordinary version' of that offence be, as opposed to the hate version?

If someone knifes someone thats a crime.

If someone knifes while screaming "you black bastard" thats a crime and a hate crime.

Under the new proposed law the knifing incident plus the racist element to it would goto court. If the racist element could not be proven but the knifing could then its assault maybe even attempted murder etc. If it can be proved there was a hate element i.e. racist abuse in this case then the sentence could be increased.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you cross the road if you see someone walking a Greyhound/Rottweiler/Akita/Boxer/Bulldog (on a leash) , does it make you doggist if you don't cross the road when encountering similarly leashed dogs ie Labrador/Pug/Pomeranian?

It's evolution - fear is learned, and is grounded in reason and experience...

Not a response to any post in particular; just trying to get the 'logic count' up on the thread.. :cool: (obligatory smiley - that one felt most apt)

Fear does not excuse violently beating someone up because they are a traveller or black or japanese or gay.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If someone shouts "you fat bastard" while stabbing someone, should it have less of a sentence than someone shouting "you black bastard"? Or is it the same?

If someone remains mute while stabbing someone, should they get a lesser sentence than someone who was being a big meany with his words as he was plunging a knife into someone.

Whatabout whataboutery

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone shouts "you fat bastard" while stabbing someone, should it have less of a sentence than someone shouting "you black bastard"? Or is it the same?

If someone remains mute while stabbing someone, should they get a lesser sentence than someone who was being a big meany with his words as he was plunging a knife into someone.

Sentencing is intended to serve a number of functions which include;
The criminal is penalised for their action by losing their freedom.
It serves as a deterrent to others who may consider carrying out such a crime. There are more, but let's leave it at that for now.

In the instance you described, calling someone a Black B while stabbing them may indicate that the motivation for the stabbing was something to do with the person being black.
Considerations of race are a sensitive subject in society for s vast number of reasons and so the emergence of the news that someone was attacked for possibly this reason may provoke others of different race backgrounds to further inflame sentiment with either words, or actions of their own.
This is not going to be the case if someone was stabbed while the perpetrator screamed about their weight although it would still be seen as an irrational and baseless reason for which to possibly attack someone.

And so, a stabbing incident which may appear to have been motivated for particularly hateful reason, which may also provoke further public discomfort or unrest is deserving as being considered with this in mind.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So in other words, and just to make sure I am not misrepresenting you, you believe there should be harsher punishment if you use racist language while stabbing someone than if you stayed silent while stabbing them?

Should a crime be punished more if it was done by someone using racial slurs or by, I dunno, a jilted spouse?

For me I believe if someone is stabbed because of their skin colour yes then there should be harsher punishment.

Annasopra wrote: »

For me I believe if someone is stabbed because of their skin colour yes then there should be harsher punishment.

It's only 9:24am but I think you've already topped out my list of 'most ridiculous things I'll read today'.

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I understand and can admire how we must constantly update and change our laws as the demographics of the country change.
Hate crime laws when for example 1.6% of the population are black people. We should continue to change our laws, thoughts, traditions etc etc as the makeup of a population changes to accommodate those from around the world who decide to move here.
With demographics being destiny it makes sense to change Ireland early and consistently.

Plus nobody in this country has a right to attack others because of where they come from, their culture or the colour of their skin. Irish people must adapt to the changes

This first bit that I put in bold misses the point a bit. We are not only talking about hate crimes against black people but against people based on their : Race, Colour, Nationality, Religion, Ethnic or national origin, Sexual orientation, Gender, Disability

The second bit is more to the point. The reality is that many people are attacked because of their identity and this is growing. I think thats an important point that Irish society must examine how it reacts to people who are seen as different or othered by the majority. Also there seems to be sometimes this perception that you cant be black and Irish.

Annasopra wrote: »

Hate crimes tell people that they are not safe simply because of who they are. They tell people because of their identity that they are of lesser value to society than others. The psychological impacts and social isolation resulting from racist abuse and violence and the financial impacts for people forced to leave jobs and move homes are illustrated clearly in Irish Network Against Racisms 2020 Hate Crime report. I think its a good thing that we are bringing in Hate Crime Legislation. It seeks to address that imbalance where people are treated as lesser human beings because of their identity.

I think you're overthinking this somewhat in relation to your earlier point, I don't disagree the impact of racist crimes. They're terrible. However, assaults such as stabbings shouldn't be 'graded' because of skin colour/motivation. It shouldn't enter into the equation.

If I was stabbed by someone in the city centre in a robbery, I'd horrified if I heard my assaulter receiver a lesser sentence than another stabber because the victim in that case happened to have a different skin colour.

The human impact of such an assault is awful, be it racially motivated or not. I remember being mugged as 14 year old teenager in Dublin city centre many moons ago and it had me absolutely terrified to go back in for a long time as I thought I'd be targeted again.

o1s1n wrote: »

I think you're overthinking this somewhat in relation to your earlier point, I don't disagree the impact of racist crimes. They're terrible. However, assaults such as stabbings shouldn't be 'graded' because of skin colour/motivation. It shouldn't enter into the equation.

If I was stabbed by someone in the city centre in a robbery, I'd horrified if I heard my assaulter receiver a lesser sentence than another stabber because the victim in that case happened to have a different skin colour.

The human impact of such an assault is awful, be it racially motivated or not. I remember being mugged as 14 year old teenager in Dublin city centre many moons ago and it had me absolutely terrified to go back in for a long time as I thought I'd be targeted again.

But if you were black and that attack was also targeting you because you were black then the impact on you would be even worse again. So I actually disagree with you when you say that you dont disagree on the impact of racist crimes because you actually do seem to think that the impact of a crime against you versus the impact of a racially motivated hate crime has the same impact.