Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/mcdonalds/mcdonalds-employee-filmed-brutal-beating-640128

Why exactly is this not being investigated for being a hate crime?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379691/Transgender-girl-beaten-seizure-McDonalds-attack-victim-hate-crime.html

This confuses me. Greatly.

Tim the Biovore wrote:This confuses me. Greatly.

Two African American women attacked a white tranvestite woman and beat her until she had a seizure. She was effectively only saved by an old lady who was there. The employees filmed it. If you listen the person laughing on the video is the manager of the McDonalds.

"The moral of the story: McDonalds Kills!"
-The Burger King.

Wow, those girls need to get padded rooms.

Frazzled wrote:http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/mcdonalds/mcdonalds-employee-filmed-brutal-beating-640128

Why exactly is this not being investigated for being a hate crime?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379691/Transgender-girl-beaten-seizure-McDonalds-attack-victim-hate-crime.html

Hate crime? Can you please define this?

Is it black/white?

Or because the victim was trans-gendered?

Do you really think that they can charge the offenders?

AvatarForm wrote:

Frazzled wrote:http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/mcdonalds/mcdonalds-employee-filmed-brutal-beating-640128

Why exactly is this not being investigated for being a hate crime?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379691/Transgender-girl-beaten-seizure-McDonalds-attack-victim-hate-crime.html

Hate crime? Can you please define this?

Is it black/white?

Or because the victim was trans-gendered?

Do you really think that they can charge the offenders?

Yes, and yes. After I spoke I noted in at least one article on the subject that it is being potentially investigated for such.

Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor or make certain crimes worse based on the mindset of the actor. In both cases, you're punishing someone for thinking "bad thoughts."

The girls commited battery, charge them for that.

Theres a psychological phenomonen (sp?) that explains why no-one intervened. Its called 'Diffusion of responsibility'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility

Essentially, everyone expects everyone else to break it up. Therefore no-one acts.

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor or make certain crimes worse based on the mindset of the actor. In both cases, you're punishing someone for thinking "bad thoughts."

The girls commited battery, charge them for that.

I'd agree but if you're going to have hate crimes laws they need to be enforced equally.

I can see the ads now. "Come to Wendys. When you are getting the royal beatdown by mouth breathers, our management will call the police and not film/post it on youtube." "Come to Carls Jr. Our customers don't kill each other." "Welcome to Taco Bell. Now with more cat." oh wait...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

CadianXV wrote:Theres a psychological phenomonen (sp?) that explains why no-one intervened. Its called 'Diffusion of responsibility'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility

Essentially, everyone expects everyone else to break it up. Therefore no-one acts.

translation, its called being a p ssy.

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor or make certain crimes worse based on the mindset of the actor. In both cases, you're punishing someone for thinking "bad thoughts."

The girls commited battery, charge them for that.

I think the world may have to end soon as I agree with you entirely. "Hate crimes" do nothing other than to move the goal posts. You beat up someone to steal their phone and they happen to be a different colour, or gay, etc, and suddenly it is a hate crime and the penalties are far greater?

Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but if you're going to have hate crimes laws they need to be enforced equally.

But that's the point of hate crimes - they aren't enforced equally because they're not intended to be enforced equally. Some thoughts are worse than others.

SilverMK2 wrote:

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor or make certain crimes worse based on the mindset of the actor. In both cases, you're punishing someone for thinking "bad thoughts."

The girls commited battery, charge them for that.

I think the world may have to end soon as I agree with you entirely. "Hate crimes" do nothing other than to move the goal posts. You beat up someone to steal their phone and they happen to be a different colour, or gay, etc, and suddenly it is a hate crime and the penalties are far greater?

I'm sure we will have something to disagree on shortly. In the meantime, welcome to the pro-freedom side

biccat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but if you're going to have hate crimes laws they need to be enforced equally.

But that's the point of hate crimes - they aren't enforced equally because they're not intended to be enforced equally. Some thoughts are worse than others.

Yep thats generally how it works out (see Jones post).

biccat wrote:I'm sure we will have something to disagree on shortly. In the meantime, welcome to the pro-freedom side

I disagree with the thought that I am somehow by default on the anti-freedom side

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor ... .

What legal behaviour would you give as an example of a non-crime which becomes a crime due to being prosecuted under "hate crime" legislation?

Kilkrazy wrote:

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor ... .

What legal behaviour would you give as an example of a non-crime which becomes a crime due to being prosecuted under "hate crime" legislation?

Insulting someone. Some thought crime legislation makes it a crime.

Typcially however, its an aggravating factor to an existing crime.

biccat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but if you're going to have hate crimes laws they need to be enforced equally.

But that's the point of hate crimes - they aren't enforced equally because they're not intended to be enforced equally. Some thoughts are worse than others.

SilverMK2 wrote:

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor or make certain crimes worse based on the mindset of the actor. In both cases, you're punishing someone for thinking "bad thoughts."

The girls commited battery, charge them for that.

I think the world may have to end soon as I agree with you entirely. "Hate crimes" do nothing other than to move the goal posts. You beat up someone to steal their phone and they happen to be a different colour, or gay, etc, and suddenly it is a hate crime and the penalties are far greater?

I'm sure we will have something to disagree on shortly. In the meantime, welcome to the pro-freedom side

If I beat up someone 'because I don't like their face' as opposed to 'they're white/black/blue/green*' what does it matter. Motive is something the media love but has little bearing on crimes in reality. The fact is crimes are done, people are charged for crimes. Finding a 'race' motive is pretty dumb. Sure it might tell us *why* Jimmy the Skinhead knobbled Paddy the African but is all that matters that someone was knobbled?

*holy cow orcs!

Has anyone been prosecuted for insulting someone?

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone been prosecuted for insulting someone?

Yes, in San Francisco.

Frazzled wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone been prosecuted for insulting someone?

Yes, in San Francisco.

And Detroit.

Although, in that case, he was jailed for threatening to insult someone.

I would be fascinated to read about both cases.

Kilkrazy wrote:I would be fascinated to read about both cases.

Here's the one I was talking about. Not sure about Frazzled's source.

Kilkrazy wrote:I would be fascinated to read about both cases.

Well the San Fran cases were pre intranetz blurbs on the news when I was there. I'm much more familiar with them being an aggravating factor to underlying crimes.

In my opinion, hate crime laws enforce the idea that people of other races are different, and should be treated specially. All crimes are fueled by hate. While there are cases where hate crime laws would be necessary, physically abusing someone should be treated the same, regardless of the races of the people involved. Just my two cents.

Sigh, here we go again. If the girls who beat her did it because of her trans gender or race it's a hate crime. If they did it because they were just stupid A holes it's a normal crime.

Now About hate crimes. If you attack somebody solely on the base of race or religion ect, it's a hate crime. If you just ran and "Beat someone because I don't like their face." you'd be a psychopath, and locked off in a loony bin. It's like the difference when an American person goes on a killing spree and a Terrorist goes on a killing spree. same outcome, diffrent motives and goals. So different crimes and punishment. Think of different degrees of murder and man slaughter, or how pre meditated murder is worse than "Heat of the moment murder.

Let me get this straight. She's transgender, and got the crap kicked out of her by two black girls. It must be because she's white!

LordofHats wrote:Let me get this straight. She's transgender, and got the crap kicked out of her by two black girls. It must be because she's white!

No I think its because she can't fight that she got the crap kicked out of her. If she were carrying a chainsaw and a hockey mask this probably wouldn't have happened. Now why it started, however, is a completely different issue.

Welcome to Cracker Barrel. You will be completely safe here. Our waitresses have been fully trained on how to turn cans of hairspray into impromptu flame throwers. Watch out for Darlene though. She's just itching to go off.

May have been because she is transgender. Either way one is gont to juvi the other to adult court. Mc donald's will be getting a nice fat lawsuit, and the world gets to see how much Americans can be donkey-caves to each other.

I bet it started because the two other girls tried to intimidate her and she stood up to them. Then they kicked her ass. When you are dealing with people like that don't stand up to them. Hit them as soon as you get in range. They most likely go around looking for trouble.

biccat wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I would be fascinated to read about both cases.

Here's the one I was talking about. Not sure about Frazzled's source.

It seems in that case the defendant was jailed for failing to post a bond, which isn't a hate crime.

There must be some documented cases, the hate crime legislation has been around for over 45 years.

I'm not really buying the "pre-internet" argument. Plenty of historical stuff happened "pre-internet" and we can still look it up on line.

Kilkrazy wrote:

biccat wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I would be fascinated to read about both cases.

Here's the one I was talking about. Not sure about Frazzled's source.

It seems in that case the defendant was jailed for failing to post a bond, which isn't a hate crime.

There must be some documented cases, the hate crime legislation has been around for over 45 years.

I'm not really buying the "pre-internet" argument. Plenty of historical stuff happened "pre-internet" and we can still look it up on line.

How about Frazzled has issues with California now and will not voluntarily go back nor look up anything there, ever?

Phototoxin wrote:

biccat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but if you're going to have hate crimes laws they need to be enforced equally.

But that's the point of hate crimes - they aren't enforced equally because they're not intended to be enforced equally. Some thoughts are worse than others.

SilverMK2 wrote:

biccat wrote:Hate crimes are bad laws. They either punish legal behavior based on the intent of the actor or make certain crimes worse based on the mindset of the actor. In both cases, you're punishing someone for thinking "bad thoughts."

The girls commited battery, charge them for that.

I think the world may have to end soon as I agree with you entirely. "Hate crimes" do nothing other than to move the goal posts. You beat up someone to steal their phone and they happen to be a different colour, or gay, etc, and suddenly it is a hate crime and the penalties are far greater?

I'm sure we will have something to disagree on shortly. In the meantime, welcome to the pro-freedom side

If I beat up someone 'because I don't like their face' as opposed to 'they're white/black/blue/green*' what does it matter. Motive is something the media love but has little bearing on crimes in reality. The fact is crimes are done, people are charged for crimes. Finding a 'race' motive is pretty dumb. Sure it might tell us *why* Jimmy the Skinhead knobbled Paddy the African but is all that matters that someone was knobbled?

*holy cow orcs!

African AND irish... wow...

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone been prosecuted for insulting someone?

Dakka Mods do it all the time

On Topic... I would be genuinely interested in seeing if the 2 offenders are ever tried and charged for more than simple assault. Afterall, reverse-racism doesnt really play back well in the media