Hate crime? Really?

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 9:18am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Again, wilfully misrepresenting what I said.

All crimes. Not hate crimes.

Do hate crimes happen in Ireland?

A Yes or No answer would be great.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 10:10am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do hate crimes happen in Ireland?

A Yes or No answer would be great.

This has already explained to you on numerous occasions.
You really love going around in circles don't you?
You are not reading anything in this thread it seems.
I have explained the origin of the term in other jurisdictions, the problems it creates, the division it creates. And how unnecessary it is. Even in the layman's understanding of it.
It is already covered under regular Irish criminal law legislation - assault/ harassment and so and so forth.
You still seem to stick to the view that hate crime legislation will be a magic panacea to all problems when nothing could be further from the truth.
You refuse to look at the motivations and agenda calling for 'hate crime' legislation stuck in an 'indenty politics' mindset.

Are you learning anything from this thread?
Do you even know what a hate crime is yourself in your own words?
You have refused to say what it is and who you would apply it to?
Which scenarios would it apply to and which it would not.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Your bolded statement is absolutely correct.

But amazingly enough, that doesn't stop hate crimes from happening every day in Ireland to vulnerable people.

This is incredible hubris and pure delusion on your part.
Why is the term so important to you?
You are not even in a so called 'vulnerable group' as you would term it.
I know the term 'hate crime' is not important to me, and I am supposed to be a member of one of these 'vulnerable groups'.
If I was assaulted I would just go through the same process like any other individual in this state. Yet you feel YOU have a right to re-brand a crime that would be perpetrated against me not you.
Just to make yourself feel good, and further identity politics? You have some neck on you.
I find the madness of this whole idea insulting to me, as an Irish citizen first and foremost.
You are basically treating me as a second class citizen, for no tangible reason.
If assault happened against me it would still have happened no matter what you term it. Calling it a 'hate crime' - is not going to give me some superpowers with a protective shield.

Also, it is a bit rich in my view of someone like you, asking what a 'hate crime' is, when you do not even seem to really know what it is yourself and the idea behind the term.

As for your comments about under reporting of 'hate crime' in another post.
I also think that is sensationalist as regular 'crime' as you would term it is under-reported to the gardai according to CSO figures

https://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0928/819843-crime-cso/

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/reviewofcrime.pdf

An estimated 17% of crime reported to An Garda Síochana in 2015 via their
CAD equipped divisions does not appear to be captured on PULSE.

Are you learning anything from this thread at all?
Or are you still stuck in the calling a crime a 'hate crime' solves it all mindset?
Are you even questioning your belief why it might not be as great a thing as you once thought?
Or are you going to ignore the reality that it is merely a re-branding and re-criminalisation of what is already there?
Do you even realise how the use of the term 'hate crime' can be divisive and insulting?

Shemale · 28-05-2019 10:24am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

https://giphy.com/gifs/1AIeYgwnqeBUxh6juu

Settle down snowflake, just because things arent in the paper doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

Shemale · 28-05-2019 10:32am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This says so much more about you than it does about Sinead

No, not really, if her siblings dont have dwarfism are they "activists"

Raheem Sterling, is the poster boy for kick it out but he only gets involved in situations affecting black players.

I am a white male, I wont tolerate people being nasty about others who are different and regularly call them out or tell them to shut up. I dont call myself an activist or go to papers about it.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 10:43am

Shemale wrote: »

Settle down snowflake, just because things arent in the paper doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

So leapfrogging is a thing now on nights out? Who do you think that you're kidding?

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 10:45am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

This has already explained to you on numerous occasions.
You really love going around in circles don't you?
You are not reading anything in this thread it seems.
I have explained the origin of the term in other jurisdictions, the problems it creates, the division it creates. And how unnecessary it is. Even in the layman's understanding of it.
It is already covered under regular Irish criminal law legislation - assault/ harassment and so and so forth.
You still seem to stick to the view that hate crime legislation will be a magic panacea to all problems when nothing could be further from the truth.
You refuse to look at the motivations and agenda calling for 'hate crime' legislation stuck in an 'indenty politics' mindset.

Are you learning anything from this thread?
Do you even know what a hate crime is yourself in your own words?
You have refused to say what it is and who you would apply it to?
Which scenarios would it apply to and which it would not.

I'm a bit confused now. Is this a Yes or a No answer as to whether hate crimes happen in Ireland?

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 10:53am

Shemale wrote: »

No, not really, if her siblings dont have dwarfism are they "activists"

Raheem Sterling, is the poster boy for kick it out but he only gets involved in situations affecting black players.

I am a white male, I wont tolerate people being nasty about others who are different and regularly call them out or tell them to shut up. I dont call myself an activist or go to papers about it.

No, really. It says so much more about you that you feel threatened by the idea of an activist. Go have a look at her Ted talk and see if you think her activism is necessary.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 10:55am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

This is incredible hubris and pure delusion on your part.
Why is the term so important to you?
You are not even in a so called 'vulnerable group' as you would term it.
I know the term 'hate crime' is not important to me, and I am supposed to be a member of one of these 'vulnerable groups'.
If I was assaulted I would just go through the same process like any other individual in this state. Yet you feel YOU have a right to re-brand a crime that would be perpetrated against me not you.
Just to make yourself feel good, and further identity politics? You have some neck on you.
I find the madness of this whole idea insulting to me, as an Irish citizen first and foremost.
You are basically treating me as a second class citizen, for no tangible reason.
If assault happened against me it would still have happened no matter what you term it. Calling it a 'hate crime' - is not going to give me some superpowers with a protective shield.

How exactly did you decide that I'm not a member of a vulnerable group?

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 11:09am

Der Stier wrote: »

I walked by a tiny bloke the other day, couldn't believe how small he was - maybe 5 ft ?
But he wasn't a dwarf, if I jumped him would that be a hate crime ? honest question.

According to the proponents of hate crime legislation it would be termed that if you had proved a bias towards that individual as a result of his genetic features. It is basically criminalising the apparent motivation of a crime, not just the act of the crime itself
Which shows how silly the whole thing gets.

Proposed Hate Crime Bill 2015 Ireland -

http://enarireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/WG-Bill-2015-Criminal-Law-Hate-Crime-Bill.pdf

Where a 'protected group' is termed as follows:

“protected group” includes individuals who are identified on the basis of their race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, membership of the Traveller or Roma communities, property, birth, disability, age, gender, gender expression, gender identity,sexual orientation, residence status or health;

Basically it is like butter to bread, it can be applied as liberally as you wish based on that definition of 'protected group'

I used a similar example of an old woman with Osteoporosis four foot tall and leapfrogged like Sinead's scenario - with no dwarfism just osteoporosis.

But AndrewJRenko refused to answer whether he considered this a 'hate crime' as he is not a legal expert! Yet he has no issue calling the crime against Sinead a 'hate crime'.

Presumably AndrewJRenko and those like him, struggle with some cognitive dissonance when faced with other scenarios (like the one above) that do not fit into his own personal view of what a 'hate crime' is?
He was unwilling to answer what he thought about other scenarios similar to Sinead's but affecting those from within protected groups

That is another problem with using the term 'hate crime'.

I even used Bláthnaid Ní Chofaigh as an example.
Where if she was assaulted when speaking the Irish language and was called an Irish speaking, ginger bitch - would this be a hate crime?

AndrewJRenko was again strangely silent on that issue.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 11:12am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How exactly did you decide that I'm not a member of a vulnerable group?

Because you are so bloody patronising to 'vulnerable groups' you seem that you could not possibly be in one.
I could be wrong of course.
You speak like a Victorian similar to the 'white man's burden' helping those beneath you etc. The same mindset.

Or are you going to share what 'vulnerable group' you consider that you are from, and enlighten us all?

Shemale · 28-05-2019 11:13am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So leapfrogging is a thing now on nights out? Who do you think that you're kidding?

So drunk people doing things they dont normally do isnt a thing? Who do you think you are kidding?

I was in a niteclub before and two girls came over and said, "do you think you could do the Dirty Dancing lift?" and I said I think so and the girls took a turn runming to me and I lifted them over my head like in the film. I can tell you now that situation would never have occurred at lunchtime on a Tuesday in a shopping centre or on a footpath.

You might note earlier I called the guys that jumped and filmed toerags and said something like toerags are toerags, that situation isnt normal irrespective of dwarfism or someone else short in stature. Scumbgs do this, normal decent people dont

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 11:13am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

No, really. It says so much more about you that you feel threatened by the idea of an activist. Go have a look at her Ted talk and see if you think her activism is necessary.

:eek:

This is really silly.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 11:21am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm a bit confused now. Is this a Yes or a No answer as to whether hate crimes happen in Ireland?

If there is one thing we can all agree on on this thread, it is that yes you are definitely 'confused' full stop.

I have elaborated on the answer to this question on numerous occasions. and applied proposed legislation and current legislation to it.
I have stated things extremely clearly.
I suggest you re-read my posts and try and educate yourself on the issue, rather than seeing what you wish to see.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:25am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I could be wrong of course.

Yes indeed.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:27am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

If there is one thing we can all agree on on this thread, it is that yes you are definitely 'confused' full stop.

I have elaborated on the answer to this question on numerous occasions. and applied proposed legislation and current legislation to it.
I have stated things extremely clearly.
I suggest you re-read my posts and try and educate yourself on the issue, rather than seeing what you wish to see.

Very interesting to see that you can't give a clear Yes or No answer to a simple question. Is that because you know well that the answer is YES but you just can't possibly bear to admit your mistake?

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 11:28am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes indeed.

Deflection again that seems to be your super power.
Which vulnerable group do you consider yourself to be in AndrewJRenko?

You have the floor and everyone's undivided attention.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 11:32am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Very interesting to see that you can't give a clear Yes or No answer to a simple question. Is that because you know well that the answer is YES but you just can't possibly bear to admit your mistake?

It is not very interesting I have on numerous occasions! You just refuse to read or understand the posts to the point of deliberate obtuseness.
So I repeat myself over and over again, where you seem to lack a simple understanding of the issue.
You refuse to even read posts and declare what a hate crime means to you.

At this stage I have to ask myself are you trolling on this thread?

The simple answer is there is no 'hate crime' in Ireland. Both from a legal and layman's standpoint.
Only in the minds of the lobbyists who are agenda led, and people such as yourself. They then force others to use this term like on this thread for example.

A vaccum cleaner is not strictly called a 'hoover'.
Hoover is a brand of vacuum cleaner.
But some use that term is incorrectly used when describing a vaccum cleaner by many in Ireland.
We know what that person means, but they are strictly incorrect.
It is merely an incorrect appropriation of a term now we have 'hoovering' etc.
The term has been used incorrectly for so long it has become accepted in it's usage in normal conversation.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hoover

It is the same when a person uses the term 'hate crime' in Ireland to describe harassment or assault etc etc. It is incorrect.
It is not even a correct appropriation of a term at layman's level - it is mostly for done agenda based political reasons - 'identity politics'
From a legal level 'hate crime' is not a crime it is not legislated for in Ireland.

But how can I explain how the term 'hate crime' has come into the lexicon, when you yourself do not seem to understand what the term means to you and who it applies from your point of view?
If you do not understand from that level how can you understand it from a legal standpoint?

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:39am

Shemale wrote: »

So drunk people doing things they dont normally do isnt a thing? Who do you think you are kidding?

I was in a niteclub before and two girls came over and said, "do you think you could do the Dirty Dancing lift?" and I said I think so and the girls took a turn runming to me and I lifted them over my head like in the film. I can tell you now that situation would never have occurred at lunchtime on a Tuesday in a shopping centre or on a footpath.

You might note earlier I called the guys that jumped and filmed toerags and said something like toerags are toerags, that situation isnt normal irrespective of dwarfism or someone else short in stature. Scumbgs do this, normal decent people dont

Drunks? Sure. Dirty Dancing? Sure. Picking people up? Sure.

But leapfrogging? Let's be honest - you don't know short people that this happened to.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:41am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

You refuse to even read posts and declare what a hate crime means to you.

I declared days ago that the Wikipedia definition is what hate crimes means to me.

Now it's your turn - can you please give a straight Yes or No answer as to whether hate crimes happen in Ireland?

Shemale · 28-05-2019 11:41am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

No, really. It says so much more about you that you feel threatened by the idea of an activist. Go have a look at her Ted talk and see if you think her activism is necessary.

LMAO, threatened ?

My issue is people calling themselves "activist" when they are merely in it for career / ego purposes. Its just snowflake garbage.

A close relative of mine is disabled as a result of a childhood disease. She worked all her life, she is very kind, loads of friends, great craic, she never let it get her down, never took **** or special treatment. Now she is in her 70s and has always made herself available to be poked and prodded in hospital to aid research to try eradicate the disease. Not once has she used her condition to get special treatment, preached through media or called herself an "activist"she is merely inspirational by her actions.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:43am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Deflection again that seems to be your super power.
Which vulnerable group do you consider yourself to be in AndrewJRenko?

You have the floor and everyone's undivided attention.

Why would I want or need to disclose personal information to you?

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:45am

Shemale wrote: »

LMAO, threatened ?

My issue is people calling themselves "activist" when they are merely in it for career / ego purposes. Its just snowflake garbage.

A close relative of mine is disabled as a result of a childhood disease. She worked all her life, she is very kind, loads of friends, great craic, she never let it get her down, never took **** or special treatment. Now she is in her 70s and has always made herself available to be poked and prodded in hospital to aid research to try eradicate the disease. Not once has she used her condition to get special treatment, preached through media or called herself an "activist"she is merely inspirational by her actions.

Good for her. A lot of the services that she gets know are available to her because of the activists of previous generations who ensured that people with disabilities are not locked away in homes.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 12:04pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why would I want or need to disclose personal information to you?

Deflection again, but I have told you I had no issue with it.
So now you can pretend that you may or may not be from a so called 'vulnerable group' in this thread.

It is an interesting tactic. Considering you did not know the basic difference between positive discrimination and disabled accessibility.
I sincerely doubt whether you are in a 'vulnerable group' as you term it. Plus you made offensive comments about those with mental disabilities earlier in the thread. With an hilarious 'horny analogy' for sexual assault. You would not commit assault on a person with mental disabilities because you were horny - I believe you said.

If I were to put you in a group it would be a bluffer group.
I could lobby to put that in proposed hate crime legislation for you.

Plus at this stage if I saw you on the street I would probably feel like battering you. Not because of what group you are from.
Just because you are a bit of an @rse!

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 12:06pm

Shemale wrote: »

LMAO, threatened ?

My issue is people calling themselves "activist" when they are merely in it for career / ego purposes. Its just snowflake garbage.

A close relative of mine is disabled as a result of a childhood disease. She worked all her life, she is very kind, loads of friends, great craic, she never let it get her down, never took **** or special treatment. Now she is in her 70s and has always made herself available to be poked and prodded in hospital to aid research to try eradicate the disease. Not once has she used her condition to get special treatment, preached through media or called herself an "activist"she is merely inspirational by her actions.

Finally someone who get's the issue.
Fair play. I could not have put it better myself.
The lobbyists like the ICCL are more interested in thier organisations self-promotion to make money, not for those they purport to represent.
I do not doubt Sinead feels good about herself while doing her activism.
But the reality is people will always single out difference, even the person with glasses and braces in class etc.
It is not only those from the 'trendy' so called vulnerable groups who get assaulted.

Shemale · 28-05-2019 12:13pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Good for her. A lot of the services that she gets know are available to her because of the activists of previous generations who ensured that people with disabilities are not locked away in homes.

Some man for the assumptions arent you? I said she never looked for or took special treatment. Her parents paid taxes, like every citizen she got treated in hospital until she wasnt contagious and fit to go home. She moved to Dublin to get a job, in time bought her own apartment and drove a modifed car. Some people are tough and get on with it, others wallow and call themselves activists for their own benefit.

No comparison between real activists and snowflaked self professed and self serving activists.

Anyway you are peddling your agenda so I will leave you to it.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 12:20pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Good for her. A lot of the services that she gets know are available to her because of the activists of previous generations who ensured that people with disabilities are not locked away in homes.

Not so long ago on this thread you were claiming I was one of those who wanted to lock the disabled away in homes as well.

As Shemale said you are clearly peddling an agenda.
But worst still you do not seem to have a grasp of the issues at all, even from a proposed Hate Crime Bill standpoint, or even why you think 'hate crime' legislation should be a term. Or what real benefits using the term does in your own view!
I think Shemale is right at this stage you are best left to your own devices.

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 12:27pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I declared days ago that the Wikipedia definition is what hate crimes means to me.

Now it's your turn - can you please give a straight Yes or No answer as to whether hate crimes happen in Ireland?

I did not ask for wikipedia's defintion.
I asked for your view in your own words.

I already have given you detailed answers and explained this on this very page - AGAIN.
But I will leave you to it at this stage. It is pointless responding to you. as this thread demonstrates.
I will follow the advice of this site and ignore you.
https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-internet-trolling-3485891

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 12:27pm

Shemale wrote: »

Some man for the assumptions arent you? I said she never looked for or took special treatment.

I never mentioned 'special treatment'. Ensuring that people with disabilities have access to normal services, including normal hospitals, modified cars and more is a direct result of the activism of previous generations.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 12:29pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I did not ask for wikipedia's defintion.
I asked for your view in your own words.

But I will leave you to it at this stage it is pointless responding to you as this thread demonstrates.

I'm happy with the Wiki definition thanks. I'm not here to do homework for you.

Now your turn - any chance of a straight answer to the Yes or No question?

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 12:35pm

This message is hidden because AndrewJRenko is on your ignore list.

There might be some who consider this a 'hate crime'......

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 12:49pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

This message is hidden because AndrewJRenko is on your ignore list.

There might be some who consider this a 'hate crime'......

After all those days of discussion, and you couldn't answer a simple Yes or No question. I wonder why.

Omackeral · 28-05-2019 1:34pm

Andrew, did someone leapfrog you before?

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 1:41pm

Earlier on this thread I used the scenario if Bláthnaid Ní Chofaigh was harassed/assaulted because she had Ginger hair and was an Irish speaking woman would it be considered a hate crime'?
(Notably it was not answered by the most vocal advocate of hate crime to 'protect' vulnerable groups on this thread)

Well under proposed Irish legislation the Criminal Law Hate Crime Bill 2015 would make such instances a hate crime.

http://enarireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/WG-Bill-2015-Criminal-Law-Hate-Crime-Bill.pdf

But it would lead to extreme division. Plus create unnecessary laws which are already covered under assault and harassment. etc.
Hate crime legislation focuses on difference for difference sake. It does not focus on real positive affirmative action, such as job creation which would really benefit those groups it is claiming to help'.

I notice the strong advocates of hate crime legislation immediately only think of LGBT, disabled groups, or different racial groups.
They do not think of the wider consequence such legislation could have.

Look at this hyperbole and creation of further lines of division when discussing Blaithnaid and her struggles to use the Irish language in Ireland.
It hardly creates a inclusive atmosphere does it?

https://ansionnachfionn.com/2012/03/03/lets-speak-the-truth-those-who-hate-irish-speakers-do-so-because-they-are-racists/

I assume some proponents of hate crime legislation only mean to include the same groups that are always listed - LGBT, Race, disability - and will have some cognitive dissonance if other categories such as age, language etc are included in that definition.

First and foremost they might not think others should be listed in a protective group alongside thier group. As they feel that thier group are real victims and others are not!
It creates competition among the groups for 'recognition' - among the groups when placed alongside each other.
xyz against blacks is a 'hate crime'?
xyz against an Irish speaker is a 'hate crime'?

People who call crimes 'hate crimes', normally have an identity politics agenda - politically correct.
But they do not realise/choose to ignore it's negative consequences - as it is dangerous and divisive.
Needlessly, placing people in separate boxes with the stroke of a pen is not inclusive - protected groups etc.
So they are not worthy of being called (just) crimes like the ones everyone else has?
Assault harassment etc are no longer good enough terms for those with an agenda.
They must at all costs encourage victim-hood for a 'cause'!

Currently there is no hate crime in Ireland from a layman's point of view and legal point of view.
There are only those who seek to add a further layer of division by re-branding existing current criminal law legislation - to suit thier agenda - to hell with it's consequence.
It is a sad state of affairs, when you really think about it.

28-05-2019 1:43pm

gormdubhgorm wrote:

Currently there is no hate crime in Ireland from a layman's point of view and legal point of view. There are only those who seek to add a further layer of division by re-branding existing current criminal law legislation - to suit thier agenda - to hell with it's consequence

Yeah but..... Yes or no?

Legend_DIT · 28-05-2019 1:45pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

After all those days of discussion, and you couldn't answer a simple Yes or No question. I wonder why.

‘The simple answer is there is no 'hate crime' in Ireland. Both from a legal and layman's standpoint’ - posted at 11.32 with further clarification...

I don’t have a dog in this fight but it does seem the yes or no question was answered.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 2:17pm

Omackeral wrote: »

Andrew, did someone leapfrog you before?

Yes, they did. And I leapfrogged them back. They were good days in High Babies (as Senior Infants used to be called).

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 2:20pm

Legend_DIT wrote: »

‘The simple answer is there is no 'hate crime' in Ireland. Both from a legal and layman's standpoint’ - posted at 11.32 with further clarification...

I don’t have a dog in this fight but it does seem the yes or no question was answered.

That’s actually a slightly different question to the one I asked - which is "do hate crimes happen in Ireland"?

gormdubhgorm · 28-05-2019 2:32pm

From an American point of view here is synopsis of the term 'Hate Crime' in america.

https://www.factretriever.com/hate-crime-facts.

It is very fair and explains how the term 'hate crime' came into esistance in America.
It also explains its definition clearly which some of those on the other side of the argument to me, seem to fail to grasp.

There is also this point in it number 9 -

Although the existence of hate-based organizations has increased in recent years, the number of actual hate crimes committed has not, leading some to believe that hate crime laws do not deter Americans from bias and that hate crimes are largely not being committed by those who engage in hateful speech.

I would also argue how can you criminalise thought?
If one person commits a physical assault on another person and says nothing, writes nothing, and made no indications they were going to single that person out for a bias based on 'difference' How do you prove thier motivations - was there a bias there?

'Hate Crime' legislation can easily be circumvented it the perpetrator is sophisticated enough.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 3:09pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Currently there is no hate crime in Ireland from a layman's point of view .

Though it's interesting to note that the term is used on a regular basis by journalists and politicians.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 3:12pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Although the existence of hate-based organizations has increased in recent years, the number of actual hate crimes committed has not, leading some to believe that hate crime laws do not deter Americans from bias and that hate crimes are largely not being committed by those who engage in hateful speech.

Perhaps the absence of increase in the hate crime numbers is due to the effectiveness of the hate crime legislation as a deterrent?

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 3:16pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I would also argue how can you criminalise thought?
If one person commits a physical assault on another person and says nothing, writes nothing, and made no indications they were going to single that person out for a bias based on 'difference' How do you prove thier motivations - was there a bias there?

'Hate Crime' legislation can easily be circumvented it the perpetrator is sophisticated enough.

It's worth noting yet again that many countries have effective hate crime legislation in place that deal every day with these challenging dilemmas that you keep coming up. There is nothing specific to Ireland in your points, so they don't constitute a reason NOT to have hate crime legislation.

Omackeral · 28-05-2019 6:55pm

Omackeral wrote: »

Andrew, did someone leapfrog you before?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes, they did. And I leapfrogged them back.

Did you grin menacingly at them though!?

28-05-2019 7:36pm

Omackeral wrote:

Did you grin menacingly at them though!?

Hey.... That's not fair. He could have PERCEIVED that they did. That's a hate crime.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 28-05-2019 7:43pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How exactly did you decide that I'm not a member of a vulnerable group?

Andrew you are as white as the driven snow, as upper middle class as an upper middle class person, as hypocritical as your standard member of your class. Beware of swings.

I’m in favour of existing crime legislation being policed and enforced before we move on. Most hate crimes are crimes anyway.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 7:56pm

Omackeral wrote: »

Did you grin menacingly at them though!?

I'll have to be 100% honest and say I don't remember that level of detail. I may well have got Mummy to deal with them, but I can't be sure.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 7:57pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Andrew you are as white as the driven snow, as upper middle class as an upper middle class person, as hypocritical as your standard member of your class. Beware of swings.

I've missed our little chats Franz. Good to see you again. Love to Mrs P and all the little Peppercorns.

AndrewJRenko · 28-05-2019 11:17pm

Here's some thoughts from one of those dreadful activist people - why can't they just keep their heads down and live in their mammy's front room like the good old days, am I right?

https://twitter.com/luberachi/status/1133354685891600385?s=19

28-05-2019 11:43pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Here's some thoughts from one of those dreadful activist people - why can't they just keep their heads down and live in their mammy's front room like the good old days, am I right?

How odd. Are you saying we are actively trying to encourage crimes against people with disabilities by treating crimes against them the same as crimes against able bodied people?

YOU are the one that is trying to denormalise people. I look as them as the same. If a black person got beaten up or abused for being black, if a ginger got beaten up or abused for being ginger, if I got beaten up or abused because someone just was being a dick, I would call for them all to get justice against the perpetrators of the crime.

I see people as equal and expect the law to see them as such. Anyone can be a victim of abuse and anyone can be intimidated. Some handicapped people are stronger mentally and physically than people who wouldn't fit into your group and would be appalled that they are grouped in one of your assigned categories.

28-05-2019 11:44pm

AndrewJRenko wrote:

am I right?

As you are a fan of yes or no answers...

No. No you aren't.

gormdubhgorm · 29-05-2019 11:05am

Having looked at all the issues regarding the use of the term 'hate crime', the term has now been appropriated over here for headlines by journalists (and others) like the one who wrote the Independent article the OP linked.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/education/sinead-burke-talks-about-the-hate-crime-that-led-to-her-new-campaign-in-dublin-schools-38007423.html[

Without getting into intricacies of legal argument - what is clear is the proponents of hate crime legislation want to re-brand the following crimes as 'hate crimes' against particular groups in society - verbal abuse, obscene/offensive calls, text, mail or emails, assault, harassment, criminal damage, arson, manslaughter, murder.

That part is beyond debate regardless of which side is on in the discussion.

To really answer the question of why they want to do this you have to examine not only the effectiveness of so called 'hate crime' legislation itself but the agenda/motives of those calling for the legislation in this country.

To me there are two distinct groups advocating for 'hate crime' legislation.

1) Those who are from outside the proposed-protected group(s) that they want hate crime legislation to apply to.
This group may include lobbyists advocating for a particular grouping in society (they themselves do not belong to), so that the advocacy group gets more notice. So they can make more money for the advocacy group.
Another subset also included - journalists (like the OP's) article and politicians who's patronising narrative is that that they are helping those 'less fortunate' than them in society. Also politicians jump on the bandwagon as it is an easy 'vote-getter' the optics of the headlines are great. For this grouping it is the furtherance of identity politics - the focus on the individual groupings rather than society as a collective. A furtherance of labeling, branding, and headlines

2) The second distinct grouping who are advocates of hate crime legislation who are inside the proposed protected group(s) they want hate crime legislation to apply to.
What are these groups motivations? It is simple this grouping are seeking the intangible word 'empowerment'.
It has little to with how effective hate crime legislation may/may not be in comparison to current legislation.
These groups view themselves as activists at the vanguard they view it as a 'cause' a battle. Re-branding is important to them. Strangely it is always only a very narrow cohort of groupings making the most noise. Any crime given the prefix 'hate crime' by a self interested group automatically attempts to elevate any crime against them.
In thier eyes it elevates it as worse, than other similar crimes committed in wider society assault/harassment etc.
For them the use of the word harassment (in Sinead's case) is no longer enough.
It must be viewed on another level than the rest of society as far as they are concerned.

But they are so focused on this mystical 'empowerment' a furtherance of the 'them' v 'us' - they do not see the larger consequences of introducing such legislation and do not even consider it.
They are focusing solely on their own grouping and have an entitlement complex.
They feel thier group deserves this 'special privilege' of being called a 'hate crime', rather than assault/harassment for example.
Whether the 'hate crime' legislation is actually more effective than current criminal law is not the real concern to them.
What are really concerned with is notice for thier grouping - thier 'cause'.

Sinead Burke herself is one of these 'activists'

https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/sinead_burke_892017

From her website we learn - she is

currently undertaking a PhD in Trinity College, Dublin on human rights education

https://www.sinead-burke.com/about (at the end of the page)

Also the Times in England seemed to imply from the article below that Sinead called the 'leapfrog' a hate crime (The rest is behind a paywall.)

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/leap-frog-was-hate-crime-says-sinead-burke-6rr300g33

Then I then did further digging on Sinead's website -

https://www.sinead-burke.com/about

There I found the original vogue article:

https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/how-little-people-of-ireland-is-transforming-hate-through-education

Where Sinead does use the term 'hate crime' in a quote-

'In turn, I speak to the graduating police in the Garda Training College
and try to widen the lens on how they perceive hate speech and hate crime.
Mostly, I ask them to root their policing in empathy.'

@

But now you must ask yourself the question -
Where has it been shown that introducing 'hate crime' legislation is actually more effective than current legislation in deterring crime?
Any clear, unbiased. empirical evidence, or data demonstrating it?
I have yet to see it. It seems to be just an appearance of doing something rather than anything else. All for the sake of optics, superficial change for the sake of it.

It would end up creating even more division/labels in society rather then promoting real inclusiveness
Taking the OP's example if hate crime legislation was available what difference would it have made to the crime of harassment perpetrated on Sinead?
None - the crime of harassment would still have been committed.

I think Sinead is going about things the right way looking for her own 'empowerment' by talking about these issues to others in that sense. It makes her feel good and if it educates a few people along the way that it is 'nice to be nice' to everyone, that is a good thing. She is all about the use of her favorite buzz words (on her website) 'design empowerment, beauty, disability and empathy'
This is fine this is how Sinead defines herself, and her causes close to her heart.
But unfortunately (in my view) she misguidedly uses the term 'hate crime' in the vain hope the use of it will increase her 'empowerment' and her 'cause'.
She does not realise the wider consequences of using such terms in society - division, focus on difference, competition among these different groupings. It furthers victim-hood mindset for these groupings, that is not a good thing.

The use of the term 'hate crime' appears on the surface to promote inclusiveness, but in reality it does the exact opposite - another needless layer, another needless label, another needless separate box, another needless division.

This is viewed in America - where it is argued there is real negative consequences to hate crime legislation in 2016

https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol37/iss1/9/

(anyone can download the full article and read it here)
https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1941&context=plr

It echoes many of the same concerns by American legal experts who believe - Hate Crime Laws Are Unnecessary and Undesirable back in 2009.

In my view, if people want to re-brand crimes to 'hate crimes' they should be honest about thier own motivations for doing so.
Ask will it really help those they purport to help?

Hate crime? Really?

Comments