"Dumbledore is gay," says Rowling.

A hate crime is in the eye of the beholder. Consider the following:

If a Heterosexual male is beating another Heterosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Homosexual male is beating another Homosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Homosexual male is beating a Heterosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Heterosexual male is beating a Homosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?
Click to expand...


That depends on the motivation. A homosexual beats up on a hetero for example. Is it because the guy is hetero or is it because of a fight or was he mugging him? If it is because he was hetero then yes. Otherwise no. The same would apply to all the other questions
 
I dunno. I can't see a DA going after a hate crime enhancement when the victim is a caucasian heteromale. Or let me put it this way...in nine+ years of working in the legal system, I ain't seen it yet.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
I dunno. I can't see a DA going after a hate crime enhancement when the victim is a caucasian heteromale. Or let me put it this way...in nine+ years of working in the legal system, I ain't seen it yet.
Click to expand...






True enough, though by definition those would be considered hate crimes in and of themselves. But double standards live on for everyone
 
I ain't no lawyer, but as far as I understand the law here in occupied TN, hate crime is an enhancement, not a separate offense.

I could beat the shit out of you and get 3-6 years for it. If the State can prove that the reason I beat the shit out of you was because you represent something I have a known pattern of opposing, that also fulfills one of the hate crime enhancing factors, then I get 4-8 years with a greater percentage to serve before being eligible for parole consideration.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
I ain't no lawyer, but as far as I understand the law here in occupied TN, hate crime is an enhancement, not a separate offense.

I could beat the shit out of you and get 3-6 years for it. If the State can prove that the reason I beat the shit out of you was because you represent something I have a known pattern of opposing, that also fulfills one of the hate crime enhancing factors, then I get 4-8 years with a greater percentage to serve before being eligible for parole consideration.
Click to expand...




So you beat me up and it is to take my wallet but the pattern of beat up white heterosexuals then you get 3-6 but if you continue to do it to anyone who is white and heterosexual in any way then they slap it? As I had understood it, it was the motive. Say you beat up a black person solely because he is a different race. Then they list it as a hate crime,the motivation was racism and hatred. As opposed to beating him up to get his money or his car or something
 
They would have to prove the hate element. I could beat up a black person and not get charged with a hate crime, just the aggravated assault. But if the prosecutor introduces into evidence my KKK membership card, then that goes a long way toward proving consistent attitudes.
 
Professur said:
A lot of people would point to your Av as similar proof ... blindly.
Click to expand...




That is true though I do not think it should be. It is a flag and a symbol of America's history (regardless of whether or not I agree with the South per se is irrelevant). I'd say his example of the membership in a racist group should count for more than the flag
 
Re: Gato_Solo

2minkey said:
by *all of it* i meant "pretty much everything you done said." i wasn't really feeling like pulling dozens of various quotes of yours where you spount on about knowing all kinds of shit (and dismissing others as not getting it).

get it now?
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Then that is what you should have said instead of putting up a line of text between * which are increasingly becoming the quotation marks of choice.

I do know a lot od stuff and I am sorry that that disturbs you so. You are among those who have yet to disprove my contention so you have chosen to opt for derision.

"Uh-uh!" and "Nuh-uh!" are not good debating techniques. If you can't dazzle me with facts you choose to try to baffle me with bullshit.

Note to 2minkey: It is still bullshit.
 
actually i'm not interested in debating much of anything with you. and that may explain the nature of my post. i'm simply unable to take you seriously given the level of ultradense bullshit, text and link dumping, and ball-sucking dismissiveness.

like i said before, you're just so many steps ahead of me, i just can't keep up...

:retard5:
 
2minkey said:
actually i'm not interested in debating much of anything with you. and that may explain the nature of my post. i'm simply unable to take you seriously given the level of ultradense bullshit, text and link dumping, and ball-sucking dismissiveness.

like i said before, you're just so many steps ahead of me, i just can't keep up...

:retard5:
Click to expand...

You have yet to debate with me on anything at all. You simply post these simpleton, nonsensical, lilliputian diatribes which have no meaning to the debate whatsoever. You exist here as an antagonist, an agent provocateur as it were. Nothing you say makes sense and is only posted to annoy.

As annoyances go, you have a long, long way to go to even become a pimple on the ass of the flea on my cat; and I don't even have a cat.

Go now child and leave the debate to the adults. When you grow up and achieve some debating skills and tact, look me up.
 
actually if you'd bothered to read some of my posts toward the beginning of this thread you would have noticed that i was acutally making relevant comments.

when it became obvious that you were utterly incapable of thinking outside your infinite all-knowing wisdom, there ceased to be a point in any debate. you know everything about this topic. just like you know everything about politics, wal-mart, whatever.

there is no "debate" with you because you just dump text ad nauseum. your assumptions about the world are utterly impenetrable. you don't even consider others' counterpoint. you just dump shit. it would be easier to convince hitler that the jews are really okay than "debate" anything with you.

i'll accept that i am antagonistic at times.

but you simply suck. you're not interested in real exchange of ideas. you want to address the crowd. don't you have enough opportunities to do that while cashiering at the frogmont wal-mart? i mean, golly, that's a lot of human contact. i bet you could make a lot of converts.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
They would have to prove the hate element. I could beat up a black person and not get charged with a hate crime, just the aggravated assault. But if the prosecutor introduces into evidence my KKK membership card, then that goes a long way toward proving consistent attitudes.
Click to expand...

What if YOU beat up a Yankee? (no, not an overpaid baseball player)
 
2minkey said:
actually if you'd bothered to read some of my posts toward the beginning of this thread you would have noticed that i was acutally making relevant comments.
Click to expand...

Here is your first "relevant" post on this thread:

i hate small, droopy tits.

if they're small, they should be perky.
Click to expand...

Your second "relevant" post on this thread:

yes, through jesus and wal-mart, with the help of lots of firearms, you, too, can prevent forest fires. channel it, baby, channel it!
Click to expand...

Your third "relevant" post on this thread:

rudy galindo. he's the gayest of all gay.

rody.jpg


... but he's not interested in your kids, or in 'converting' any grumpy, middle-aged guys in camo baseball caps.
Click to expand...

Your fourth "relevant" post on this thread:

no, but rudy galindo is REALLY fucking gay. real nellie, as they say.

and it's okay, you're allowed to think that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the word you were looking for was "irreverant", hmmmm?

Finally, you at least gave it the ol' college try HERE but disn't actually refute anything stated previously.

You actually made a point HERE and HERE but with RM and chcr. You still had yet to refute anything I had stated.

You returned to your usual ways HERE and HERE displaying again what you assume is a dashing display of your rapier wit.

Nothing of "relevance" HERE.

When I made a very valid point HERE in answer to chcr's pseudo psychiatry you picked it up and ran with it as your sig line. THIS was the best you could come up with as a "relevant" response.

I responded to your post HERE because you made the contention that homosexuals do not recruit.

chcr made the point that AIDS is so easily controllable yet it keeps growing so I responded HERE showing that the incidence of "barebacking parties" is on the rise and that is fueling the disease. It was a valid point. I provided links to sites which espouse and track these parties.

You went back to the same ol' same ol' HERE and HERE.

Do I make irreverant, irrelevant BS posts? Sure I do. THIS ONE for one; or THIS ONE. I don't treat them as "relevant". They are just a lame attempt at offbeat humor; but at least I know the difference.

You didn't say much HERE when you actually had a chance to make a real point.

You failed again HERE when you couldn't resist throwing barbs which detracted from the very real point you were actually making up to that point. Always the comedian but never really funny at all.

You did very well HERE

Short, concise, to the point HERE. Bravo!

Yet HERE is where you really started losing it. Did you really think that I would be intimidated by someone who posted 47 times in a one year period on a board he hasn't visited since 12-19-2002? I guess you didn't learn anything about the caliber of member over there in that year, did you? Did you ever learn how to clean that P226?

You did post a relevant link HERE, though. The Pink Pistols are a good group.

You asked me a question HERE which was relevant but couldn't resist a bit of dirision about a spelling error. You never commented on the answer I provided.

A real answer to a real question HERE, thank you.

Nothing relevant HERE.

I gave a perfect post for the ignition of legitimate debate HERE. Gato took it up but was debating the legal and social justice angle while the post was actually on the political aspect of hate crimes and other specialized legislation. The best you could come up with was THIS "RELEVANT" POST:

oh no the white christian nongay american guy is being overtaken by all them crazy girl jew homos.

rhett, rhett, whatever shall i do?

snoooooze.
Click to expand...

And followed that up with THIS little gem of relevant nothingness.

After all of this, you posted THIS which was -- I'm being very sincere here -- irrelevant drivel.

At which point HERE you finally admitted that you have nothing to say which brings us to where we are now.
 
BeardofPants said:
Dude, were you born this anal or did you marry into it?
Click to expand...

When asked a question I respond -- just as I am doing here. What you call "anal" -- short for anal retentive which has absolutely NOTHING to do with being thorough -- is merely that. I am being thorough.

Yes, I could come up with these knee slapper one liners like you do but that would be pointless.

2minkey made the following contention which I knew to be untrue and I have thoroughly proven it.

actually if you'd bothered to read some of my posts toward the beginning of this thread you would have noticed that i was acutally making relevant comments.
Click to expand...

2minkey had admitted that he was too lazy to post a decent response when he wrote:

i wasn't really feeling like pulling dozens of various quotes of yours where you spount on about knowing all kinds of shit (and dismissing others as not getting it).
Click to expand...

Well, I am not that lazy and that has nothing to do with being "anal".

I hope this satisfies your inquisitiveness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top