[Cristofle]

That's never, ever worked. LOL. In the history of getting civil rights for minorities or for any group that has been oppressed. Those in power do not want to give it up, and the way to keep power is to oppress. One almost universal mode of oppression is by dehumanizing the minority group. It takes force to get them to stop and usually requires force to make sure they don't try it again. If outlawing slavery had never actually been written INTO the law, it wouldn't have stopped. If the civil rights movement hadn't turned into law, black people would still be segregated by schools and businesses.

So Zimmerman's attorney is speaking out- I don't think this was the best phrasing of things. LOL.

Zimmerman Attorney Defends ‘Troubled’ Client: ‘It Must Be Frightening Not To Be Able To Go Into A 7/11’ | ThinkProgress

Is it really the best idea to defend your client by trying to get sympathy for him not being able to go into a 7-11- when he killed a teenage boy coming home from a 7-11?

[Gray Ghost]

So you're basically laughing at the Golden Rule? We should just force people into submission to think the way we want them to think? How is that any better than the behavior of the people that you're supposedly trying to help?
Liberals aren't suppose to use force. Liberals are also suppose to be open minded and tolerant too.

You support force but only on issues that you support. If force is used on things like abortion and gay marriage then no deal and there should be a revolution over it. However, when it comes to making people buy a product(obamacare) and dealing with racism, you gladly support force.

Hypocritical!

[Cristofle]

It has nothing to do what what people think and everything to do with how they act. No one can MAKE another like homosexuality or black people. But we CAN demand they treat them with basic human respect and acknowledge their basic civil rights in this country. I don't care what men THINK about my using birth control- all I care about is whether or not they attempt to infringe upon my rights. The Golden Rule is one you can live your life by, but it alone is not sufficient to govern a country.

[Gray Ghost]

Cristofle, you basically said in an earlier post that you support force. Care to explain?

[Cristofle]

By force, I mean laws. You can't hope for the best when it comes to basic civil rights of minorities- there need to be laws in place that protect minorities, against the majority if need be. And those laws need to be enforced.

[sunnykerr]

OKay, what is the world is this "Golden Rule" you speak of?

Is this a U.S. thing? Or perhaps an English language thing?

Because the only one I can think of is the Buddhist precept, echoed by Islam and Hinduism... and that one favours Trayvon Martin like a mother in this instance.... so I can't imagine that's the context in which it was first evoked here.

Remember... this is a thread about CRIME. Crime discussion, not an argumentative pas de deux.

[Gray Ghost]

The Golden Rule is basically do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Ron Paul mentioned that America should follow the golden rule on foreign policy and was booed because of it during one of the debates. Apparently, treating people the way you want to be treated is bad.


Minorities and the majority should not have any laws that promote preference, bias, and discrimination. That means bye bye to affirmative action.

Hate crimes should not exist. Hate is not a crime nor illegal. It is a feeling that all human beings experience. If you are going to say it's a crime and illegal then every human must be arrested for it.
A suspect should not get a harsher sentence because they hated the victim of their crime. They should get a harsher setence based on their criminal record, lack of remorse, and the severity of the crime.

And you're gonna paint me as this gay hater or minority hater or women hater, so don't even bother. I already know that you're gonna do it.


You can't force people to think the way you want them to think. Where's the tolerance and compassion in forcing a human being to think the way you think just because you are offended by their thinking? When you do that, you're a bigot and should be called out on it.

[TheAngel]

...do you read what you write or do you just push that reply button after another bout of word vomit?

Anyway, no you can't force people to think a certain way. But hate crimes are a little different than other crimes. They're premeditated, for one. They have a tendency to be much more violent, for another. Just look at what happened with Matthew Shepard or Teena Brandon just because one way gay and the other transexual. And generally, hate crimes are handled in the same way that other crimes are. Hate crimes is simply a categorical term.

Sure, I'll follow the golden rule but you're naive if you think people are actually going to do that. Laws protect minority groups from the majority. It keeps people from having to drink out of different water fountains and go to different schools, or from being fired because they're Muslim and their boss is Christian. I have never felt like I've lost out on a job or a school or a scholarship to someone of a minority group and I don't know very many people who have in this day and time but perhaps you have your own personal issues because you keep harping on Affirmative Action even though I rarely see it in play right now.

[Cristofle]

And in news that I'm sure shocks us all, the Tulsa shooters have indeed been charged with a hate crime:

Tulsa DA Files Murder, Hate-Crime Charges In Good Friday Rampage - NewsOn6.com - Tulsa, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports - KOTV.com |

[Avatar]

Not surprising.

[Gray Ghost]

Because it happened in racist Oklahoma?


Again, hate crimes trivialize the victims and do more harm than good. Those guys that killed Matthew Sheppard were punished because they killed a human being, not because they hated a gay man. Please remember that.
I know that you want hate to be a crime which I honestly find hilarious but hate is not a crime nor illegal. It is a feeling that every human being has experienced.

I oppose affirmative action because it's pure racism and discrimination. If you don't understand then you're a sad ignorant person that's in denial.

[Avatar]

No, because all of the victims were black and because "[a] Facebook page attributed to England contained racial slurs and hinted that the victims were targeted because of their race.".

Hate, in itself, is not a crime. But when it manifests - in speech or actions - then it is, and it could be punished as such. I don't think that's a difficult distinction to understand.

[Cristofle]

So basically Jacob, if I disagree with YOU about affirmative action than I'm ignorant, but if you disagree with me about gay marriage being a basic civil right then why can't we all just get along and be respectful. You have never once posted a respectful post on this board. You have never once been kind. And yet you consistently demand respect you don't offer in return.

Regardless, affirmative action (and I do disagree with you, and I am not ignorant on the facts of the topic) is for another thread. As with heightened charges when someone kills a cop, hate crimes are charges rendered in the hopes of combatting a serious problem against under-represented groups who are at a higher risk of violence simply because they look or act different from the norm. I'd suggest that if YOU don't see the institutionalized racism in the United States and the way the system, in everything from education to the work force to ESPECIALLY the justice system continues to work against minorities, then YOU have a problem. There is no such thing as colorblind. Denying racism as a serious problem is just another, newer form of racism.

[Nick HeyRee]

Evening all, The story below risen to public notice here in the UK over the past few days.

Cornwall eye-gouge man Shane Jenkin admits blinding girlfriend A man who blinded his girlfriend by gouging her eyes has admitted causing grievous bodily harm with intent. Shane Jenkin, 33, of Sea Lane, Hayle, Cornwall, also severely beat Tina Nash, fracturing her jaw and breaking her nose, Truro Crown Court heard. He was arrested after assaulting the 31-year-old mother of two at her house in Hayle on 20 April last year. Jenkin, who had attacked her before, kept Ms Nash imprisoned for 12 hours after the attack, the court heard. Although there had been violence in the couple's relationship, Ms Nash told police she thought she could change Jenkin, even admitting she had helped him get out of trouble for hurting her on previous occasions. After the "vicious" attack in April, attempts were made to save the sight in one of Ms Nash's eyes, but they failed and she was left completely blind. She said the attack had left her feeling "buried alive, claustrophobic and not in control of my life". She said: "I truly feel that, when he was strangling me, he was trying to murder me. "He has taken everything from me and robbed me of one of the most precious things in life - my sight." She added: "I actually look forward to going to sleep because in my dreams I have sight. It's when I wake up that the truth hits home. "Some days I just don't want to get up, but I'm determined to provide a future for my children and this is my motivation." Her sons were aged 13 and three at the time of the attack. 'Shocking case' Ms Nash said Jenkin blamed her after the attack. She said: "He was saying 'it's all your fault, I'm going to get years for this'." She added that she was glad that he had "at least taken responsibility for changing my life forever". Det Insp Chris Strickland, of Devon and Cornwall Police, said it was the "most shocking" case he had ever dealt with. He added that he was relieved that Ms Nash did not have to go through a court case and give evidence. He said: "It was a premeditated, sustained and vicious attack on a defenceless woman. "Our view is that Jenkin deliberately strangled Tina into a state of unconsciousness in order that he could inflict these terrible injuries. "Tina's life will never be the same, and her lifelong disability will be a constant reminder of the attack. Violent relationship "Her injuries were so shocking that friends who saw her soon after the incident found it difficult to stay in the room." Mr Strickland said Ms Nash's previous attempts to try to protect her abuser and change Jenkin were not unusual. "Unfortunately, we do see that a lot and it's because they [victims] are positive, good people. "But we would say that if you are in a violent relationship, it probably isn't going to change. People need to come to us and report if they're being abused. "People can stop it by reporting it earlier." Jenkin is due to be sentenced next month.

BBC News - Cornwall eye-gouge man Shane Jenkin admits blinding girlfriend



We have a couple of areas of particular note i feel: the extent to which such wanton cruelty should be factored into sentencing [for i suspect that "GBH with intent" is not going to pass muster when it comes to a prison term], and the possible existence of a list for those found guilty of domestic violence.

Do you have the latter where you are? We do not have one in Britain at present.

[sunnykerr]

No, I think domestic violence laws are rather renowned for being universally lax, aren't they? If there is such a list anywhere in the world, well it's not in Canada, and I haven't heard of it period.