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.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/03/manchester-police-goths-punks-hate-crime

From that well known hotbed of pinko commie subversivism The Grauniad, but it has been reported in The Metro and on the BBC as well.

Summary
Following a case in 2007 in which a young woman was kicked to death for walking in the park wearing Goth fashions, Manchester Police are to keep a record of "hate" crimes against members of distinctive subcultures.

This does not have the force of law, and has not been adopted elsewhere.

My thinking on this is split.

I certainly agree that people who are members of persecuted minorities deserve proper protection. However, you don't choose to be black or gay, while you do choose to be a Goth.

That said, the point of living in a liberal society with the rule of law is that people can choose to be a Goth, and if someone does object, we have parliament and the legal system to decide what should be done.

I figure the police are just flailing around trying to deal with this sort of anti social behaviour.

I don't know what the solution to it is, but I doubt this is it.

Sorry but I don't really see the point in this sort of thing being classified as a 'hate' crime. As opposed to what exactly? Nobody gets murdered or beaten to within an inch of their life by someone who likes them.

If the police want to keep records of the motivations of various crimes then I can see why that might be useful information, but hate crime is such a bizarre phrase.

I don't know many people who make fun of goths, emos, punks and metalheads to there faces as a lot of people seem to be afraid of them, sub cultures like hippies or hipsters who are less intimidating looking I would imagine get more harassment. Either way does it really matter if it's a

hate crime or not the fact that she was kicked to death is bad enough itself.

How about if you kick someone to death you get deaded and your head is put on a pike outside the White Tower like the good old days. Come on Brits I thought you were all about tradition!

 Cheesecat wrote:


hate crime or not the fact that she was kicked to death is bad enough itself.

Agreed, but the two scroats that did it where both caught and given life sentences. Given that there is no more severe punishment under British law what would classifying it as a 'hate crime' achieve? The system clearly already takes this sort of thing very seriously indeed.

If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

I don't like lists of groups of peoples that can be hated. And how when violent crime is commited against a person on the list it is a hate crime. It results in some really bizzare and stupid hatabilty debates.

I think hate crimes should be a state of mind issue for a jury like the difference between a 1st degree murder and a 2nd degree murder.

 LuciusAR wrote:
Sorry but I don't really see the point in this sort of thing being classified as a 'hate' crime. As opposed to what exactly? Nobody gets murdered or beaten to within an inch of their life by someone who likes them.

If the police want to keep records of the motivations of various crimes then I can see why that might be useful information, but hate crime is such a bizarre phrase.

Little bit of a fun fact:
Hate crimes are also known as "bias-motivated crimes" or "race hate". The accepted definition is that a hate crime occurs when a perpetrator targets someone because of their perceived membership in a social group.

Goths are primarily considered a subculture, but also a social group.

As to why the police(or more likely the prosecutor who will be filing the charges) are trying to classify it as a hate crime?
If they have evidence which could arguably used to classify it as a hate crime, that sets a precedent that can be used later on for similar cases--and what's more allows them to tack on heftier charges over the assault.
The individuals who committed the assault might be people that the police have had encounters with before but have been unable to get substantive evidence to hold them over and are pushing for the hate crime angle to make sure that the offenders are kept off the streets for awhile longer as well.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

Don't some goths wear jeans? Also is there any stats that show goths get attacked more than others as I found a lot of people in my home town tend to leave the metalhead, punk, emo and goth community alone as many people find them scary looking (yes, I know it's anecdotal evidence).

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

If you just transported convicts to Australia it wouldn't be an issue. Murder-Australia!, battery - Australia!, littering- Australia!

 Frazzled wrote:
How about if you kick someone to death you get deaded and your head is put on a pike outside the White Tower like the good old days. Come on Brits I thought you were all about tradition!

FFS! Death by trebuchet!

Why won't anyone listen to me? I'm bringing it back, baby!!

 Kanluwen wrote:

Little bit of a fun fact:
Hate crimes are also known as "bias-motivated crimes" or "race hate". The accepted definition is that a hate crime occurs when a perpetrator targets someone because of their perceived membership in a social group.

Goths are primarily considered a subculture, but also a social group.

As to why the police(or more likely the prosecutor who will be filing the charges) are trying to classify it as a hate crime?
If they have evidence which could arguably used to classify it as a hate crime, that sets a precedent that can be used later on for similar cases--and what's more allows them to tack on heftier charges over the assault.
The individuals who committed the assault might be people that the police have had encounters with before but have been unable to get substantive evidence to hold them over and are pushing for the hate crime angle to make sure that the offenders are kept off the streets for awhile longer as well.

I don't know about Britain (the UK any all countries in that group of islands), but it definitely seems like in the US the term "hate crime" applies only when a "majority" race commits a crime against someone of a "minority" race, not the other way around.

Now, if the Brits do manage to successfully integrate various culture groups like Goths or Hipsters into a "hate crime" category, I could only hope that this helps everyone out, and ultimately we'd hope bring about more social equality. Of course, this can go terribly wrong, since if you want to me literal or technical about things, all crime perpetrated against another human being is a hate crime... yeah, things would get ugly that way.



Personally, I prefer George Carlin's method of public execution: Bring back the guillotine, but with a twist. Place the device on the top of a hill or knoll, with three runs beneath, where the head, now removed from body will roll down one trough into a numbered basket. The point here is that in Vegas, and other legal to gamble establishments, bets will be taken as to which basket the head will land in

Well according to the spokesman for Greater Manchester Police this won't change the sentencing or the CPS's approach to such crimes, but will allow the victim access to some forms of support not currently accessible to them.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

If you just transported convicts to Australia it wouldn't be an issue. Murder-Australia!, battery - Australia!, littering- Australia!

I'm more than happy with this idea as long as we can have a Hipster- Britain! in reply. I'm seriously thinking about comitting hate crimes against hipsters, in my day they were called posers or spankers and it seems like we have a whole generation of them atm.

/Old man rant off

Bullockist wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

If you just transported convicts to Australia it wouldn't be an issue. Murder-Australia!, battery - Australia!, littering- Australia!

I'm more than happy with this idea as long as we can have a Hipster- Britain! in reply. I'm seriously thinking about comitting hate crimes against hipsters, in my day they were called posers or spankers and it seems like we have a whole generation of them atm.

/Old man rant off

What's wrong with hipsters? I'm sure if you got to know some of them you would find most of them are pretty decent people.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I don't know about Britain (the UK any all countries in that group of islands), but it definitely seems like in the US the term "hate crime" applies only when a "majority" race commits a crime against someone of a "minority" race, not the other way around.

Don't worry that's how it works in the UK too. Same with racism.

This is not PC gone mad, this is giving victims support that was not previously available.

 MetalOxide wrote:
This is not PC gone mad, this is giving victims support that was not previously available.

I think it's a joke title.

I'm not really a big fan of hate crime laws. If someone brutally murders or beats someone else, how much the perpetrator disliked the victim shouldn't really be a major factor.


There is absolutely no justification for beating someone to death because the victim is a part of a certain subculture or group, and it doesn't matter whether they're a member of that group by birth or by choice. But I don't think a perpetrator who murders someone who isn't a member of a protected group or subculture to death should get a lighter sentence than one who does.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:
This is not PC gone mad, this is giving victims support that was not previously available.

I think it's a joke title.

Yeah, KK has already created a thread called "PC gone mad!!" about a school that banned triangular flapjacks (too sharp and throwable), so he's just working off the theme

 Hordini wrote:
I'm not really a big fan of hate crime laws. If someone brutally murders or beats someone else, how much the perpetrator disliked the victim shouldn't really be a major factor.


There is absolutely no justification for beating someone to death because the victim is a part of a certain subculture or group, and it doesn't matter whether they're a member of that group by birth or by choice. But I don't think a perpetrator who murders someone who isn't a member of a protected group or subculture to death should get a lighter sentence than one who does.

I was on the fence about this as well and made an argument very much like you did. Someone here - Mannahin or Manchu, probably, perhaps Sebster or Dogma - explained it to me in a way that made sense though, and hopefully will do so again since I'm about to mangle their explanation.

I believe that it was along the lines of: We already take into account the motivation and mindset of an attacker when we prosecute crimes. We expect that a crime of passion - a spouse coming home and catching their partner in bed with someone else and shooting them both - lack premeditation and so are punished less severely then a calculated and planned attack. This isn't an analogy about why a bias crime is somehow a crime of passion; just reiterating the principle that we do consider mindset and intent for prosecution to try and reinforce desired societal norms (don't murder people). Hate crimes are an extension of that.

Bashing a guy in the head with a brick because he's gay isn't just an attack on a man, it's an attack on free society in a way.

The shorthand is; hate crimes victims need special protections because they are singled out for special wrongs.


Man this was explained to me a lot better, and more persuasively.

The UK is very good at one-upping the rest of the world when it comes to crazy PC nonsense. Really puts America, Canada and Australia to shame.

Soon as I finish this here cheeseburger and extra big-ass fries, I'mma gonna strap on my AR-15, hop on my Rascal, and we'll see about affixin that. Ain't no one one-uppin 'Murica.

I dunno, I have a hard time assigning special status to sub culture members as "hate crimes". Then again I have a hard time conceptualizing the need to beat someone over the same, I mean ye gods and little fishes it's music, weird hair cuts and poor dress sense, if that warranted an beat down most of the western world's needed to be taken out back at least once.

 kronk wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
How about if you kick someone to death you get deaded and your head is put on a pike outside the White Tower like the good old days. Come on Brits I thought you were all about tradition!

FFS! Death by trebuchet!

Why won't anyone listen to me? I'm bringing it back, baby!!

Kronk, bringing sexy back, this time with more cowbell.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Little bit of a fun fact:
Hate crimes are also known as "bias-motivated crimes" or "race hate". The accepted definition is that a hate crime occurs when a perpetrator targets someone because of their perceived membership in a social group.

Goths are primarily considered a subculture, but also a social group.

As to why the police(or more likely the prosecutor who will be filing the charges) are trying to classify it as a hate crime?
If they have evidence which could arguably used to classify it as a hate crime, that sets a precedent that can be used later on for similar cases--and what's more allows them to tack on heftier charges over the assault.
The individuals who committed the assault might be people that the police have had encounters with before but have been unable to get substantive evidence to hold them over and are pushing for the hate crime angle to make sure that the offenders are kept off the streets for awhile longer as well.

I don't know about Britain (the UK any all countries in that group of islands), but it definitely seems like in the US the term "hate crime" applies only when a "majority" race commits a crime against someone of a "minority" race, not the other way around.

Now, if the Brits do manage to successfully integrate various culture groups like Goths or Hipsters into a "hate crime" category, I could only hope that this helps everyone out, and ultimately we'd hope bring about more social equality. Of course, this can go terribly wrong, since if you want to me literal or technical about things, all crime perpetrated against another human being is a hate crime... yeah, things would get ugly that way.



Personally, I prefer George Carlin's method of public execution: Bring back the guillotine, but with a twist. Place the device on the top of a hill or knoll, with three runs beneath, where the head, now removed from body will roll down one trough into a numbered basket. The point here is that in Vegas, and other legal to gamble establishments, bets will be taken as to which basket the head will land in

Not hipsters. They deserve to get the crap kicked out of them, daily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bullockist wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

If you just transported convicts to Australia it wouldn't be an issue. Murder-Australia!, battery - Australia!, littering- Australia!

I'm more than happy with this idea as long as we can have a Hipster- Britain! in reply. I'm seriously thinking about comitting hate crimes against hipsters, in my day they were called posers or spankers and it seems like we have a whole generation of them atm.

/Old man rant off

When Frazzled and Bullockist agree on something, there's a tremor in the force, as if a million voices cried out...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:

Bullockist wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If Goths are more likely to be attacked than people wearing jeans, perhaps that is a fact we ought to know so that they can be better protected.

If you just transported convicts to Australia it wouldn't be an issue. Murder-Australia!, battery - Australia!, littering- Australia!

I'm more than happy with this idea as long as we can have a Hipster- Britain! in reply. I'm seriously thinking about comitting hate crimes against hipsters, in my day they were called posers or spankers and it seems like we have a whole generation of them atm.

/Old man rant off

What's wrong with hipsters? I'm sure if you got to know some of them you would find most of them are pretty decent people.

Cheesecat's lying again. Bad kitty bad! It puts the dunce cap on its head or else it gets the hose again.

 Ouze wrote:

Man this was explained to me a lot better, and more persuasively.

We'll have to take your word for it.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
What's wrong with hipsters? I'm sure if you got to know some of them you would find most of them are pretty decent people.

Cheesecat's lying again. Bad kitty bad! It puts the dunce cap on its head or else it gets the hose again.

Well, I can't speak for the hipster community I know with a lot of metalheads that I've interacted with that they're fairly normal people who just happen to like metal music, wear 3 shades of black (studded accessories, band patches, etc), love beer and smoking pot, but honestly I wasn't

limited to those topics when conversing with them and was able to talk about anything with them, the only time I have trouble talking with them is in group environments as they're more likely to use lingo and conversations more familiar to there community.

The question is how you identify a member of a subculture group.

Presumably that is determined partly by their self-detemination and partly by their attacker's motivation.

In other words, a hate crime is defined by the hatred of the perpetrator towards the victim. This means it can only be identified after the event.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The question is how you identify a member of a subculture group.

By the way they dress and there interests.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In other words, a hate crime is defined by the hatred of the perpetrator towards the victim. This means it can only be identified after the event.

Aren't all crimes determined after the event?