 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Hate laws
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Lox Date: 11 Aug 09 - 12:07 PM Ake, You aren't a racist. But you do play dangerous games with inflammatory ideas. An analogy would be: You aren't an arsenist, but you do drop a lot of lit matches. The inflammatory ideas you play with don't need to have life breathed back into them. Human beings are not as evolved as we like to give ourselves credit for. It is only sixty years since the whole of western Europe was a war zone and one side was fighting for the right to murder millions of people in the most unhuman way possible. This horrific propensity for humans to turn on each other out of sheer evil intent still exists today. Cambodia, Zimbabwe, East Timor, Rwanda, Uganda, the former Yugoslavia, the miiddle east etc etc I've said to you before that we live in unique times. The peace that surrounds us in western europe is a striking phenomenon of history and should not be taken for granted. It is very fragile and its integrity depends, not on anything concrete, but on two abstract concepts. The first, is Money - something which only exists in the abstract and because we all agree it does. The second, is democracy - a less easily definable concept, but one which still only exists because of popular consent. Essentially, democracy is about recognition of the rights of the individual within society. Democracy as we know it has only truly existed in the west since ALL citizens were granted a political voice and that was as recently as the 1960's. The peace that we live in, flawed as it is, our rights and freedoms and the reassurance given us by our ideology of rule of law as opposed to whim of despot, is only fledgeling and its opponents still live amongst us. thousands of years of human habit doesn't go away over night and democracy is still struggling out of its coccoon. We may debate how our democracy is shaped, and whose rights should be given precedence and why, but we must be very careful that we do not allow democracies enemies to chip away at the rights of vulnerable scapegoats, or to undermine it in other ways. Democracy must be inclusive and it must be allowed grow and spread. I would add briefly that by its very nature it can't be forced on anyone. In 20 years zimbabweans may find that they have the freedom and luxury to pontificate about how Tsvangirais economic policy made him the "real" fascist. But those who live under Mugabes Jackboot today are under no illusions about the reality of the state of Zimbabwe. There are numerous political parties all hoping to shape democracy in the image of their ideals. The BNP hopes to undermine and destroy democracy and to do so they put false and unsupportable information about. This involves tapping into peoples thousand year training in scapegoating and warmongering. The factually unsupported statements that you have lent support to on the subject of immigration, moslems etc are passed around the populace like potentially dangerous flu variants. One day humanity could be infected by one that does immeasurable harm and our assumed immunities could prove ineffective as they have before in this country and in every other country around the world. This issue is not the same as other political issues for that reason. It is about anger, blame, scapegoating and hatred. And we must not let it take hold. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 11 Aug 09 - 06:17 AM Richard, the people involved have forfeited all rights by their actions. As I've said countless times lately, "rights" are not universal but conditional on the behaviour of the individuals concerned. Thats twice you have called me a racist, if this continues I'm afraid I must start to consider you a "liberal". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Aug 09 - 11:22 PM Ake, I think I gave you an honest answer, from the point of view of somebody who worked as an investigator for 25 years. Please read it again. Organized crime thrives in closed minority communities (not just among tinkers), where outsiders are easily recognized. It takes very good and very painstaking police work to control it, but it can be done - and must be done. And to correct Dick Greenhaus, let me say that many states have "hate crime enhancements" to the penalties for criminal offenses. If the crime is deemed a hate crime, a year to several years can be added to the offender's sentence. And yes, as Dick says, there is also a federal law that allows federal prosecution for a "hate crime," even though the state has failed to convict the offender of a crime. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 10 Aug 09 - 09:39 PM Your original words, ake: - "The drug "business" used to be run by gangsters from Glasgow and Dumbarton, but gradulally has been taken over by the "tinkers" who have their own small "town" built at taxpayers expense and virtually beyond the reach of the law, because of stupid anti harassment laws." You are, condemned out of your own mouth, a racist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 10 Aug 09 - 07:15 PM Thanks :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Aug 09 - 07:12 PM Mumm's the word, Emma! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 10 Aug 09 - 06:52 PM Riginslinger, Mark Twain has been quoted on another thread today May I add to that..... "If you have nothing to say, say nothing." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Aug 09 - 06:18 PM Yes, let's stay on the side road. There's not a lot more to say about Hate Laws anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 10 Aug 09 - 05:57 PM Just to take one of those little pleasant side roads off a controversial thread for a moment, akenaton's description reminded me I was lucky enough to sit next to Duncan Willianson at a story telling/sharing session This is a review of his autobiography The Horsieman: Memories of a Traveller... With ten books to his name and storytelling visits to far-flung places, Williamson is widely known and much lauded for his storytelling. This autobiography tells of his life's work as a traveller, hawking his wares, collecting stories, and now as an international storyteller, the mouthpiece for his nomadic forbears. Son, grandson and great-grandson of nomadic tin-smiths, basket-makers, pipers and storytellers, Duncan Williamson describes his travelling life. The narrative takes him from a childhood on the shores of Loch Fyne, to work on the small hill farms in summer, walking with barrows and prams, and later with horse and cart the length and breadth of Scotland. He recalls camping with hundreds of traveller families from the 1940s to the 1960s, his marriage to cousin Jeannie Townsley and all the various traditional skills and arts which must be perfected for a man to maintain his family adequately. The narrative, based on 30 hours of taped recordings, tells of the traveller trades, construction of tents, maps of routes travelled, traditional camping sites, stories, songs, music and cures which have been the express knowledge of the travelling people of Scotland, and a keystone in their survival down through the ages. Local legends, traveller's beliefs and customs are all narrated in a perfectly natural context, within the traveller "horseman's" experiences - portraying the character and strength of Scotland's most distinctive race. Scottish Tinkers A true gentleman and Traveller of the road |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 10 Aug 09 - 05:32 PM Right so you "liberals" obviously cant read.......I'll say it again s l o w l y. I dont think all "tinkers" are drug dealers....doh!! I am talking about a specific group of "tinkers" who are selling drugs to addicts, selling drugs to children, lending money at extortionate rates of interest; and when the borrowers(usually addicts) refuse to repay the loans, slashing and stabbing them. These vermin are taking advantage of their special status as a "recognised ethnic group" to evade prosecution. Had they been ordinary gangsters they would have taken up residence in Barlinnie Hotel years ago. "tinker" was the Scottish word describing itinerant workers, who travelled round the country assisting with farm work, harvesting etc, they also earned a meagre living selling hardware, bootlaces, buttons and houshold wares...they also used the "knock on the door" (begging)to suppliment their income. Contrary to popular opinion, the old time "tinkers" were respected by the country folk and I recall that it was considered "bad luck" to turn them away from your door without a bite to eat, or some old clothing, if you could not afford their wares. One of my earliest memories is of an old tinker couple who used to come round our area every year, they were Gaelic speakers and dressed in the old fashion...Plaid shawl and long skirt for the old lady....Highland bonnet, plaid jacket and trews for the old man. They never slept indoors always preferring their bow tent(which they carried with them and erected in about ten minutes), even in the widest weather. Their name was Cameron and had a bad end to their lives, being burned to death in their little tent on a cold December night about 1960. They were remnants of the old Gaelic culture and Clan system which had all but disappeared by the time I was born Unfortunately the only similarity between these two old freedom loving individuals and the tinkers of today is the name |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 10 Aug 09 - 04:07 PM Hmm. Rig, please accurately describe your race, colour, creed, religion, sexual orientation and societal status. I think I detect the well known if less well liked philosophy "I'm all right Jack". Next please accuarately describe your ability to read - it is explained above why assault (so spelt) is not simply assault. If assault was simply assault, rape would just be assault. It is also explained above why aggravated assaults are aggravated assaults - they cause more psychological harm to the victim. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Aug 09 - 02:25 PM They're only "hate crimes" because they've been described as such. Assult is assult. Just prosecute the perpetrator for assult and let a bunch of lawyers find something more constructive to do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 10 Aug 09 - 01:08 PM From The Council of Europe Commissoner for Human Rights Hate crimes are a daily reality all over the European continent. Credible recent reports show that people suffer violence because they are black, Jewish, Roma or Muslim or because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. They give examples of how individuals have been physically attacked in the street, had their windows broken or homes put on fire. Government authorities have a responsibility to put an end to these shameful and serious crimes. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) presents facts and analysis about such crimes in its country reports and recommendations on how to counter them. All these documents demonstrate the danger of allowing prejudices against others to take root and spread. Unfortunately, the step from hate speech to hate crime is easily made. Some of these assaults may have been committed by distorted individual minds but many of them bear the imprints of neo-Nazi groups or other organised, extremist gangs who tend to be at the same time racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Roma, anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, and homophobic. They may also target foreigners and persons with disabilities. The seriousness of such crimes and the duty of governments to take action to stop them have also been underlined by the Court of Human Rights. In one judgment it underlined the importance of effective investigation in cases of racially motivated violence: "Racial violence is a particular affront to human dignity and, in view of its perilous consequences, requires from the authorities special vigilance and a vigorous reaction. It is for this reason that the authorities must use all available means to combat racism and racist violence, thereby reinforcing democracy's vision of a society in which diversity is not perceived as a threat but as a source of enrichment' - The European Court of Human Rights, in its Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Nachova and others v Bulgaria (6 July 2005) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 10 Aug 09 - 12:40 PM pointless? not to the victims I think Please read the full article in a recent edition of the N Y Times I quoted from earlier Florida leads American states for the fourth straight year in violence against the homeless in a report released Saturday by the National Coalition for the Homeless. According to the report, most assaults are committed by teens and young adults and the homeless are usually singled out for attacks because of prejudice. Homeless advocates have discovered an Internet phenomenon of ``bum fight'' or ``bum hunting'' videos in which young men attack the homeless or pay transients to fight each other. NCH executive director Michael Stoops said "If these brutal attacks were committed against any other religious or minority group to the same degree, there would be a national outcry and call for governmental action." Faced with the onslaught of violence, some states are taking measures. In October, Maryland is set to expand its hate-crimes law to increase for the first time the penalties for attacks against the homeless |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Aug 09 - 12:26 PM Yes, at the end of the day, hate laws are pretty pointless alright! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Lox Date: 10 Aug 09 - 12:16 PM There you go Ake - look who's jumping to your aid. How do you feel about that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 10 Aug 09 - 09:07 AM Oh? That the events alleged are true? On what evidence? That there is a causal link between being a "tinker" (and do please explain what you mean by "tinker") and supplying drugs to others? On what evidence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Paco Rabanne Date: 10 Aug 09 - 07:32 AM What Akenaton said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Lox Date: 10 Aug 09 - 07:18 AM Can you show me where I said you were a Liar? There is no evidence of me saying any such thing. This is a straw man. The evidence shows quite clearly that I have pointed out, rightly, that your assertions regarding immigration are unsupported. My consistent point on the subject of scapegoating is that there is no evidence to support the claims being made about minority groups. I hardly ever drink, much less get to the Pub. I know where the evidence is to support my views and I can provide links or accreditation when I make a factual claim. On the subject of Moslem immigrants, I am an eye witness with a year and a halfs sustained experience of living amongst "them" so my testimony stands as evidence on that basis. My considerable varied and comprehensive experience entirely contradicts the brief second hand testimony you have processed via your Goan friend. "I think that Muslims don't wish to integrate with mainstream UK society, but I can understand why they dont" This is not a view point, it is a statement of what you believe to be fact. It is very inflammatory and it is NOT TRUE. If you wish to assert your claim you must provide evidence. "I dislike our government's policy of encouraging mass economic immigration" Again, this is a statement of what you believe to be fact. Again, you have no evidence to support your claim. Equally there is no evidence of "Mass" Immigration occurring. Again, deeply inflammatory claims to make especially without evidence. "I feel this causes racial tension" NO! What causes racial tension is MISINFORMATION such as that which I have quoted in this post. You are right that if you tell the unemployed and disenfranchised that immigrants are coming her en masse, as a result of a deliberate policy of mass immigration, taking our jobs and refusing to integrate - that tensions could result. So if you are going to make these claims you must provide evidence. Otherwise you are stoking up resentment. And you do not have that right. On the subject of immigration and employment, I have provided evidence that shows clearly that IF THERE WERE a correlation, it would show that immigration brings unemployment down as when immigration has been at its highest over the last hundred years, unemployment has been at its lowest and most stable. However, such a facile approach to analyzing evidence would be trite and utter nonsense,as there are so many other influences on unemployment levels that are more significant that the figures don't assist in reaching any other conclusion other than that scapegoating is unsupportable. You have freedom of speech and noone here is gagging you. You are free to express any point of view you like. The points quoted above are not opinions, they are what you believe to be FACT. And they are not supported by evidence despite continued requests. I haven't read your comments on homosexuality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 10 Aug 09 - 04:00 AM What you are missing, ake, is that you are linking the behaviour of the individuals or families in question to the fact that they are "tinkers". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 10 Aug 09 - 03:42 AM Looks like you're the one who's been "down the pub" Lox, speaking for myself, I never visit the local and only drink alcohol on very rare occasions. Basically you are calling me a liar, well, that is your right but I can assure you that I would never waste my valuable time coming here to tell lies. What do you went me to do?....drag one of these vermin on here and make him confess? The local police are well aware of what is going on and have said privately how they are frustrated by anti harassment legislation. As most can surely understand, the point I am making is not a racial one, any more the points I made on the "gay" marriage threads were motivated by hatred of homosexuals....the point I am making here is how it is possible for certain minorities to abuse their "rights" and "special status". You continually scream for evidence, yet all of your opinions are based not on evidence, but politically correct "liberal" dogma. Don misrepresents everything I say here.... "You stoutly refute any suggestion of racist ideals, but by your own statements on this forum, you don't like homosexuals, gypsies, travellers, or tinkers. You are not mad keen on Muslims, Palestinians, or immigrants generally. And you absolutely HATE liberals with a passion, and regard them as responsible for all the ills of the world." None of the above is true, read and understand! I hate people who sell heroin to children. I do not hate homosexuals....I think the practice of male homosexuality is extremely dangerous and should not be promoted as a safe and healthy lifestyle. I don't hate gypsies, travellers, or tinkers in general....I dont know any gypsies and I do hate the particular group of tinkers who are distributing heroin to our kids I dont hate Muslims or immigrants,..I think that Muslims don't wish to integrate with mainstream UK society, but I can understand why they dont. I dislike our government's policy of encouraging mass economic immigration, as I feel this causes racial tension...I do not dislike the immigrants, who are simply trying to do the best they can for themselves and their families. I agree with the Palestinian cause. I love real Liberals, who believe in freedom of thought and freedom of speech. I think the other Orwellian "Liberals" who live by strict dogma, believe in thought crime and wish to stifle any debate, are misguided and an extreme danger to our society....much more of a danger than a handful of racist lunatics! I do not "like" the BNPs position on anything, even immigration, as they , just like our government, want to use it as a tool to further their own cause. Now if you can stick that lot in your memory banks, it will save much repetition.........and try to keep out of the pub Lox....remember every pint kills a thousand brain cells...:0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Lox Date: 09 Aug 09 - 07:52 PM I keepreading about witchhunts and about different cards being played. It strikes me as hypocritical therefore to have to read in the same posts, the "liberals" card being thrown repeatedly and provocatively in peoples faces. It says that the user of this card has a list of peopls that he considers to be "liberals" (I believe the inverted commas are an essential part of the term) and that he ascribes a world view to them that he fully and thoroughly understands, and which, if they understood it as well as he, they would drop like a hot potato as they might only then be able to look up from their limited perspective to see a wider and more enlightened view. In fact, everyone on this site has their own point of view, and each is equally valid. Some are backed up with evidence. Ake, You DO generalize about "Liberals" I read it again and again in your posts. You do consistently take up a stance that is supportive of views that demonize minorities and you are the only mudcat member apart from the BNP rabble on here who gives the slightest credence to any of their immigration related twaddle. And the only evidence you ever provide is anecdotal evidence that you've picked up down the pub. You said in a previous thread that it is obvious that the governments policy on immigration is responsible for the BNP's popularity. This claim is no different to ay other. Without evidence it means nothing. I don't know if you are playing devils advocate or not, but Dons observations are true and can be referenced throghout your posting history. I am curious now to see if you have a response to this that doesn't involve hurling abuse at me. In the past it has been your last resort and as you have protested vehemently that you are the furthest thing possible from a reactionary, people have cut you a lot of slack rather than upset you. In fact, an objective analyisis of your posts compared to most other posts on here shows that there are many other members here who are significantly further from being reactionary's than you are. Your inverse logic that their distance from such views in fact makes them more reactionary than you because they are the "true fascists" doesn't stand up to sustained scrutiny. Don has said nothing that isn't true and the fact that you should call him a Prick rather than offer an intelligent and SUPPORTED explanation says more about you than it does about him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Peace Date: 09 Aug 09 - 07:03 PM I agree with that in part. I too hate people who sell drugs to kids. I think that's a given for most of us. However, I seem to have lost the 'plot' of this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 09 Aug 09 - 06:47 PM Don sometimes you can be a real prick! I hate people who sell heroin to children! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 09 Aug 09 - 06:26 PM ""The drug "business" used to be run by gangsters from Glasgow and Dumbarton, but gradulally has been taken over by the "tinkers" who have their own small "town" built at taxpayers expense and virtually beyond the reach of the law, because of stupid anti harassment laws."" Well now! Eight families doesn't constitute a small "town", more like a medium sized gang. And on that basis you choose to say that all travellers are somehow tainted. You DO seem to specialise in sweeping generalisation, based on little or no factual evidence. You stoutly refute any suggestion of racist ideals, but by your own statements on this forum, you don't like homosexuals, gypsies, travellers, or tinkers. You are not mad keen on Muslims, Palestinians, or immigrants generally. And you absolutely HATE liberals with a passion, and regard them as responsible for all the ills of the world. You DO, however, seem to quite like the BNP's position on foreigners, of which, I should point out, you are one, in England at least. Now..........You were saying?...... Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 09 Aug 09 - 05:32 PM Richard ...don't be shocked by what I say.....and don't call it "racism". These people are of the same race as I am, Irish and Scottish extraction, but race doesn't come into this, these are simply a group who are using the protection of their "special status" to terrorise a whole town. I've always looked on you as a friend here Richard, but please make sure you know what you're talking about before you start throwing words like racist about. If you want to be shocked come up here and see what these bastards do to kids who can't pay their drug debts or repay loans at massive interest rates. There is nothing about the drug "business" locally, that I don't know, and these people are the lowest form of life. Over the last eight years, there have been five separate groups bringing in and distributing heroin, of the five groups only the "tinkers" condone the selling of drugs to under 16year olds, or using knifes to enforce their "business". The two Glasgow groups and one group from Dumbarton were put out of business by police action, the other Dumbarton group was burnt out by the "tinkers" who now have the operation to themselves. They are almost untouchable, as they cannot be raided like the other groups, if they are raided and nothing is found the police are accused of "harassing an ethnic minority" or something equally stupid. The "tinkers encampment" is in fact a small village, purpose built, surrounded by woods and scrub, it is accessible only by a single track road about half a mile long, so the chances of any police raid being successful are virtually nil. There are about eight families living there permenantly all related and most involved in the drug and money lending "trades" I dont think Ewan invisaged this scenario when he wrote the famous lines. "The old ways are changing you cannot deny The day of the traveler is over There's nowhere to go and there's nowhere to bide So farewell to the life of the rover" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 09 Aug 09 - 04:00 PM PS. Note the Codnor thread. Use of public resources to restrain peaceful demonstrations against the British Nazi Party and their even less pleasant friends. No attempt to stop Eastern European Nazis from rallying in England. It'd be different if they were Muslims coming for a quiet barbecue in the Derbyshire countryside, wouldn't it? Is the Grand Wizard of the KKK coming? Would our plod do anything if he was? NB - if the US police had had the assistance of our Public order Act, would the great civil rights march have taken place? Who has a dream? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 09 Aug 09 - 03:49 PM Get well soon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: GUEST,mauvepink Date: 09 Aug 09 - 03:06 PM Forgive me Emma... I do not always sign in but I am a member... Any exactness of treatment to our fellow human beings that I imply is with full respect to their differences but within the law. I am sometimes scatterbrained at saying things the right way around but Richard Bridges sums it up well: "The concept of the rule of law (or what some might summarise as "justice") is that all are treated equally before the law - are equally restrained by it and equally protected by it." That said if we do treat everyone with the same respect and fairness - with due consideration for differences of gender, colour, creed, sexuality, disability etc. etc. - it would be the same of sorts of treating everyone the same, but different! :-) Where people are directly discriminated against because of difference then I do think we need legislation to correct the imbalance. Most folk in minority groups actually do not like a fuss being made or attention drawn. They merely wish to integrate mostly within the larger community. We are all so different. I maintain we all belong to a minority group of one.. our unique self. The sooner we can all be ourselves - within the law of the land - and have a true mix of all the diversity that exists within people, the sooner I think we will have reached beyond the hate and bigotry that often exists for no other purpose than a person being 'different' in some way. It is an impossible dream I know. I doubt I could be up to such a task but we can strive to to get there. I once again use folk music as an example. Look at all the differences that constitute folk music: the songs, the instruments, those that sing it. No wrong way, no right way to do folk music. Just all very different and we are richer for those differences I think I'll shush again now. If I make no answers for a few days it's because I go into hospital tomorrow so will not be ignoring anyone. I'll take a peep when I get back home hopefully by next weekend Great thread! mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 09 Aug 09 - 02:19 PM A series of good posts Emma, but I think MauvePink tends correctly too. The concept of the rule of law (or what some might summarise as "justice") is that all are treated equally before the law - are equally restrained by it and equally protected by it. Some have special needs that the law ought to address but sometimes fails to do: an example is the Romany and associated communities in England who are often refused the consideration that all agrarian users receive, for the grazing that they need for their horses, and are often refused teh liberty to stop and travel on that for centuries they exercised: leaving, as Romany Man's moving words fitted to tune by the Barden of England have it - just "marks in the grass". Some travelling groups do not live up to this standard, but it is in my view hard to excuse penalising those who do. Ake - I am close to shocked by what appears to be your racism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: dick greenhaus Date: 09 Aug 09 - 09:53 AM To reiterate--the purpose (in the US, at least) of hate crime laws is toput them under national jurisdiction, rather than having them tried by local authorities who often may be overly sympathetic towards the perpetrators. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 09 Aug 09 - 08:58 AM while serving on a jury recently I heard evidence about a homeless young man with alcohol problems who had twice been badly beaten in the few weeks before his death. I read the following article earlier today in The New York Times "Attacks on Homeless Bring Push on Hate Crime Laws" WASHINGTON — With economic troubles pushing more people onto the streets in the last few years, law enforcement officials and researchers are seeing a surge in unprovoked attacks against the homeless, and a number of states are considering legislation to treat such assaults as hate crimes. This October, Maryland will become the first state to expand its hate-crime law to add stiffer penalties for attacks on the homeless. A report due out this weekend from the National Coalition for the Homeless documents a rise in violence over the last decade, with at least 880 unprovoked attacks against the homeless at the hands of nonhomeless people, including 244 fatalities Sometimes, researchers say, one homeless person attacks another in turf battles or other disputes. But more often, they say, the assailants are outsiders: men or in most cases teenage boys who punch, kick, shoot or set afire people living on the streets, frequently killing them, simply for the sport of it, their victims all but invisible to society. Michael Stoops, the group's executive director, said social prejudices were "dehumanizing" the homeless and condoning hostile treatment. He pointed to a blurb titled "Hunt the Homeless" in the current issue of Maxim, a popular men's magazine. It spotlights a coming "hobo convention" in Iowa and says: "Kill one for fun. We're 87 percent sure it's legal." The push has lacked any organized support by major civil rights groups. In Florida, which leads the country in assaults on homeless people, groups like the Anti-Defamation League have opposed recognizing those attacks as a hate crime. Opponents argue that homelessness, unlike race or ethnicity, is not a permanent condition and that such a broadening of the law would have the effect of diluting it. "I hear the same rhetoric all the time," Ms. Johnson (Representative Democrat of Texas) said. "They ask, 'Why is their life more important than anyone else's?' " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 09 Aug 09 - 08:28 AM Guest mauvepink, I'm sorry you are not a member and I'm unable to PM you as I'm sure that from, your reasoned posts, you did not mean to imply that all people should be treated exactly the same but please correct me if I misunderstood The essence of social equality lies not in treating everyone in the same way, as this fails to recognize the differences between people and can itself cause unfairness and inequality, but in treating everyone with equal concern and respect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: GUEST,mauvepink Date: 09 Aug 09 - 07:14 AM Emma took the words right out of my mouth almost! Thanks Emma. I would see this as you, and the majority of the traveller and gypsy community would - that being part of a minority does not give you any protection in breaking the law. I know of one gypsy woman - a Romany - who is the Poilce and Community Liaison for her group of folks. None of them travel around. They live on a site in their own caravans, pay council tax and work legitimately in the area. She has a hard job because many gypsies have, historically, been treated badly by the authorities and there is still a lot of suspicion in some elders as to motives when people treat them 'nice'. Yes. Some gypsy/travellers commit crime but not all. Most are law abiding and accusing all 'tinkers' (which are menders or pots and pans) of being lawbreakers is like calling all men rapists because a man rapes a woman. We ALL have the ability to commit crime but because someone in our community breaks the law does not mean we all will or even want to. People will often use the word 'liberal' as if it was an insult to hold such beliefs of equal treatment and fairness (though I am not suggesting that was akentons purpose). I believe ALL people should be treated the same, in life and in the law, and would welcome a day to come when we do not need hate laws or equality acts because every is treated and seen as the same. That will call on some minorities also to do some work too as we all need to integrate and respect each other if such laws and acts are to become a thing of the past I remember being in a diversity training session with someone who had come from the gypsy/traveller community to speak to us. It was an eye opener and I would certainly hate to be treated like some of them get treated daily. I guess unless you have walked a mile in their shoes it can be hard to see sometimes what true discrimination and hate can mean. If I am correct the gypsys and travellers are very different too so do forgive any 'combining of titles' here. I do not mean to imply they are the same. Both have very long histories going back to before Christ. I'll shush again now ;-) mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 09 Aug 09 - 06:27 AM A report from Shelter (Scotland) states that many Gypsies/Travellers feel that discrimination against their community is considered more acceptable than discrimination against other races, such as black or Jewish people although an employment tribunal judgment in 2008 determined that Scottish Gypsies/Travellers are a distinct ethnic group, and therefore covered by the Race Relations Act. However ethnic origin does not place anyone outside the law just as it is necessary to challenge the notion that respect for family life in different cultures should deter us from enforcing the law against domestic violence so to quote one worker with the Gypsy/Traveler* community "A criminal is a criminal no matter what their beliefs or ethnic background" That's the view of this 'liberal' anyways Ake * I use the term Gypsies/Travellers as it is an official term, used by the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government as the term 'tinker', like 'Gypo', is frequently used as a term of abuse. Scotland's Gypsies/Travellers a resource from the Commission for Racial Equality in Scotland |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Aug 09 - 03:50 AM That's a problem in any closed community, Ake, not just Tinkers. In the U.S., we've had youth gangs, and Jewish and Italian Mafia organizations. You can't punish every youth or Jew or Italian or whatever for crimes committed by their group. It takes hard work on the part of police agencies, but society has a right to expect police agencies to respect civil rights in spite of the difficulties that causes for police investigations. I think hate crime laws are a good thing. Once upon a time in the not-too-distant past, crimes that were an expression of hatred from the majority were sometimes not punished at all - because the majority condoned such hate crimes. Blacks and Jews and others lived in fear of lynchings and beatings and firebombings - white people didn't have to put up with that fear. The fear is a secondary effect of a crime, but it can often be as damaging as the direct effect of the primary action. Ten years ago, two men firebombed all three synagogues in Sacramento, California, where I lived. They were caught a year later, when they murdered a gay couple. Because of these crimes, the gay and Jewish communities of the area lived in fear for a long time, and the effects still linger. Yeah, I think there should be additional punishment for such crimes, because hate crimes cause a terrible additional effect. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 09 Aug 09 - 02:34 AM Yes...I agree with Rig here. These laws are indeed stupid, I'll give one example, on the West coast of Scotland there is a severe drug problem. I live near one small town with over 200 registered addicts and god knows how many others who are afraid to admit their problem and seek help. The drug "business" used to be run by gangsters from Glasgow and Dumbarton, but gradulally has been taken over by the "tinkers" who have their own small "town" built at taxpayers expense and virtually beyond the reach of the law, because of stupid anti harassment laws. The ex-travellers control almost all the drugs and all the illegal money lending which goes on to support the drugs trade....the retribution handed out to anyone who wont or cant pay them is vicious, stabbings and slashings are common. Most of the local people hate the "tinkers", as they watch more of their kids come under the influence of drugs and to make it worse the police seem unable or unwilling to do anything about it. Seems to me this sub-culture, rather than being victims, are victimising the rest of the community. This is all factual,most of the sub-culture are inter related, so it does not mean that one or two bad apples are involved. Would some of the "liberals" here please explain how they would deal with this problem?.....and I dont just mean, "move to Essex"...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Riginslinger Date: 07 Aug 09 - 09:31 PM Yes, hate laws are really, really stupid! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 07 Aug 09 - 08:30 PM An interesting point. For those unfamiliar with the murder of Sophie Lancaster in 2007 referred to by mauvepink Wiki does an adequate summary here '..discussion of the case has led to an online petition to the Prime Minister "to Widen the definition of 'Hate Crime', to include crimes committed against a person or persons, on the basis of their appearance or subcultural interests" on the 10 Downing Street website. .. In May 2009 the Justice Minister Jack Straw said while he could not change the law, he could amend the sentencing guidelines to require judges to treat an attack on a member of a subculture as an aggravating factor similar to a racially motivated or homophobic assault when sentencing perpetrators' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: GUEST,mauvepink Date: 07 Aug 09 - 08:09 PM Oops... forgot to sign in again so rteposted... Good point Simon G. I suspect there are lots of minorities that are not protected by hate crime legislation. The recent case of a young woman killed because she was a Goth is a case in point here. I do not think any hate contingent was added to sentence and yet she was killed for the way she chose to dress in essence. I think assaults etc caused in football situations may already be covered by laws that take in the aggravated part of the assault. I am not sure. mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Simon G Date: 07 Aug 09 - 08:24 AM No protection for football (soccer) fans then. I would have thought the single most common aggravating factor in assaults - hate the shirt, hate the wearer. Why don't the hate laws protect them or indeed people hated because they live in the wrong street or wrong part of town. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Emma B Date: 07 Aug 09 - 06:34 AM "The issue of hate crimes is one which reaches down into every community, that effects real lives on a daily basis in a deeply harmful way," a quote from Green Party co-leader Patrick Harvie who steered the Offences (Aggravation by Prejudice) (Scotland) Bill through Holyrood as MSPs voted unanimously to pass the legislation a couple of months ago In a BBC news report Dr Paul Iganski, who lectures in criminology at Lancaster University, said the added aggravated element to some crimes reflected the greater harm inflicted by the offender. Norman McBreen from Paisley was stabbed in a homophobic attack "Clearly, when a person is targeted because of some aspects of their identity, in this case their disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity, evidence shows that it hurts victims more than identical crimes that are carried out for similar reasons," he said. "Victims suffer particularly psychological or emotional harm and therefore offenders by getting an extra penalty are simply getting their just deserts - the greater the harm, the greater the penalty." Scotland already had legislation giving religious-inspired crime the same status as racial crime and thus a longer jail sentence. The First Minister in 2001, Henry McLeish, after visiting an Edinburgh mosque which had been the subect of fire-bomb attack stated - "The floor where the children pray was melted. The stench of burnt plastic filled the air........these are hate crimes, by extremists and bigots and those who have no place in a modern Scotland." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 07 Aug 09 - 02:34 AM Sometimes the difference is so subtle that only the person it is aimed at would know the offence (as some bigots are very subtle how they say and do things: others often hide behind humour or some sort to make a hate comment). The victim can tell you the difference between someone making a comment/expressing a view to someone who is being horrible. Some hate crime is an extension beyond bullying and no-one would have a problem identifying bullying when they saw it. Hate crime can be more subtle and is not always 'in your face'." Oh Fuck!!!! Be afraid.......Be *very* afraid! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 06 Aug 09 - 06:38 PM Er, no, it was the tight riding wellies... Oh what a giveaway! Anyway, I had a quick look at the Dachshund thread, and scrolled down - and for a split second read "hate paws"! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: akenaton Date: 06 Aug 09 - 05:06 PM I don't know if it had been repealed but it used to be treason under the Treason Act to "compass the ravishment of the sovereign's daughter" so that saying "Cor I fancy that Princess Anne" would have been a bit risky! Certainly would Richard, unless you fancied a riding crop up your rectum! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 06 Aug 09 - 04:40 PM A very good idea! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: dick greenhaus Date: 06 Aug 09 - 02:31 PM In the US, at least, Federal laws against "hate crimes" serve mainly to bypass the local authorities, who may or may not wish to pursue perpetrators. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: mauvepink Date: 06 Aug 09 - 01:21 PM A kind Gentleman on here found my piece from this morning in Goiogle cache and has kindly sent it me so here it is as was... (I have left the definition bit out as that is above).. Thank you SG :-) It has its grey areas BUT is designed to try and add weight to sentencing when a crime against someone is known to be hate based. Hate crime in the UK, as with some other types of crime, has extra penalties added on if shown to be motivated by hate. Also, I believe that if something is percieved to be hate based then the law can try and intervene earlier to 'nip it in the bud' and stop it being escalated. In short, I do not think our law discriminates against free thought or speech but it does try to stop it going beyond what is reasonable comment and opinion into actions that are wrong. Each case is very much looked at on its own merits, as while many hate crimes have similarities, each has their own particular motivations. If someone gets beaten up, say, as they walk past a night club as it is letting out, then that would clearly be assault or GBH. But if the same person was attacked as they passed and someone shouted hate comments as they carried the attack out, that would suggest they are not being singled out at random but that the attack was hate based. The victim is still traumatised and injured and that carries a penalty BUT if that person has been singled out just because of various traits then extra offences are committed. The law and sentence reflects that. Sometimes the difference is so subtle that only the person it is aimed at would know the offence (as some bigots are very subtle how they say and do things: others often hide behind humour or some sort to make a hate comment). The victim can tell you the difference between someone making a comment/expressing a view to someone who is being horrible. Some hate crime is an extension beyond bullying and no-one would have a problem identifying bullying when they saw it. Hate crime can be more subtle and is not always 'in your face'. People in certain minority groups are more likely to experience hate crimes. Some people in minority groups discriminate against other minoriy groups or people within their own community so no-one suggests that people in minority groups are all innocent. Ultimately all people are individuals, in a minority of one, and individuals are all capable of hate and incitement. The majority never would do so. Lots of grey areas - as with a lot of law - but certainly required, IMHO, and something people should be more aware of and try to understand. No-one should be singled out and picked on because of differences they have. Ultimately we all have far more in common with each other than we do differences. We are all human. Live and let live. Discuss, comment, opine: but it can never be right to let hate be a good reason to cause someone harm just because they appear different to what is considered normal. When we have a proper definition for 'normal' then mabe we can say what is abnormal but I doubt 'normal' will ever be satisfactorily defined for all. We are all so different. I'll shush now mp
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: mauvepink Date: 06 Aug 09 - 01:11 PM Not to worry... I have refound the Home Office definition for those interested: Hate crime Hatred is a strong term that goes beyond simply causing offence or hostility. Hate crime is any criminal offence committed against a person or property that is motivated by an offender's hatred of someone because of their: race, colour, ethnic origin, nationality or national origins religion gender identity sexual orientation disability Hate crime can take many forms including: physical attacks – such as physical assault, damage to property, offensive graffiti, neighbour disputes and arson threat of attack – including offensive letters, abusive or obscene telephone calls, groups hanging around to intimidate and unfounded, malicious complaints verbal abuse or insults - offensive leaflets and posters, abusive gestures, dumping of rubbish outside homes or through letterboxes, and bullying at school or in the workplace Our definition of a hate crime: Any incident, which constitutes a criminal offence, which is perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by prejudice or hate. There you go! I will leave it there for now Thanks for the kind words Richard mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Hate laws From: Richard Bridge Date: 06 Aug 09 - 12:04 PM That is rather a shame: MauvePink pretty well immediately re-posted to reclaim the post, and it was a well-put one of medium length and some delicacy of expression. It would be onerous to require her to re-post by hand in the circumstances. THer are two different kinds of "hate-crime" inthe UK. They are not my field of expertise. First there are factors that by statute aggravate another crime - for example racially aggravated assault. Then there are purely speech-crimes - for example "incitement to racial hatred" - and some of the ones dealing with speech about terrorism go quite a bit further than that. I don't know if it had been repealed but it used to be treason under the Treason Act to "compass the ravishment of the sovereign's daughter" so that saying "Cor I fancy that Princess Anne" would have been a bit risky! |
