Detroit: 'Teen' Charged with Hate Crime in Brutal Mob Beating of 'Non-Teen'

I am actually shocked that a 'teen' has been charged with a 'hate crime' against a 'non-teen'....... As much as I dislike the whole 'hate crime' nonsense, if we are going to have it on the books it should go both ways......no matter how the Attorney General feels about it:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/ar...h-hate-crime-in-beating-of-driver-5391120.php

What are your opinions on 'hate crime' laws. Is the guy on life support in the hospital any less 'critical' whether or not it is classified as a 'hate crime'.....or 'ethnic intimidation'?

 

Bu-bu-bu but I though conservatives said black people never get convicted of hate crimes? (they actually get convicted of about a fifth of them)

 

But blacks commit about 90% of the 'hate crimes' (see the knockout game) yet they rarely get prosecuted as 'hate crimes'...........

 

Do they?

Other than racially biased opinion, what is the basis for such a bold statement?

Or can we safely assume it is complete and total fiction?

 

Don't pull (*)(*)(*)(*) out of your ass please. Also, race based crimes only account for half of hate crimes, the other half are divided between sex and religious based ones.

 

Isn't it amazing that the complaint seems to be that folks are not being charged with bias crimes in these isolated incidents, when they appear to be charged with bias crimes in these isolated incidents?

 

Because when black people jump and rob a white guy it's not recorded as a hate crime, but simply a robbery.

But if it was the other way around...

 

This pattern is why the KKK is so large and growing so rapidly.

 

How is someone getting beat up in Detroit worthy of a thread on a politics forum?

 

Perhaps its your post that isn't worthy.

 

Would you agree that the vast majority of crimes involving blacks and whites are black on white crimes?

 

Beating people is already illegal. Therefore, there's no need to discuss legislation or lack thereof, so what does this have to do with politics. If you cannot answer the question, my post was most definitely worthy.

 

Perhaps so. Unless they are committing the crime because of the color of their skin, it really doesn't matter. Personally, I don't think the shade of someone's skin has much to do with what kind of person they are. People commit crimes because they are criminals. Not because their skin color leaves them no choice.

 

"Hate crime" is a mistake. Crime is crime. Calling one a "hate crime" is automatically invoking thought crime, a concept that has no place in any real-world justice system.

 

But people with black skin commit a hugely disproportionate amount of the violent crime in this country................

- - - Updated - - -

We did about 1000 threads on this political forum about some black thug getting shot in Florida.......don't remember you complaining then.

 

I guess what sticks in my craw is the way the main stream media jump all over any case involving a white crime against a black person. They sensationalize things to the point that society does not really even understand that the occasional white on black crime is not a sign of oppression and widespread pogroms against black people.

White on black crime is negligible, yet it is trumpeted by race baiters like Al, Jessie and Barack.

 

I certainly did. Many times actually. That one bothered me most of all of the non-political topics here.

 

Ok, I understand. You don't think hate crime laws are necessary. Frankly---I don't either. I think if a 13 year old black girl lays wait and then savagely beats a white 10 year old while calling her cracker---that should not be deemed worse then a 13 year old black girl beating a 10 year old black girl and calling her....I dunno..."short" or something. So we may be in agreement.

However--I think that if a 13 year old black girl is beating a 10 year old white girl while calling her cracker...which means she's a bigot, race-hating girl---then we need to evaluate that. Where did she learn it? Is it prevalent? Do we have a racial issue we need to discuss?

 

Do you really see it as non-political? The Trayvon Martin case was all about politics, and the leftist media blew that issue up.

The main weapon that the progressives have is the issue of white racism, white privilege, class warfare, evil corporations, it all fits into the fictional narrative that the progressives use. They did not care at all that the Trayvon case became a fiction created by the left, of a white man murdering an innocent black child. In reality, no white person was involved, and there was no innocent victim to be found.

 

Welcome to the forum Mr. Jones............

 

Thank you for the welcome.

You can really tell when a subject is non-political when the POTUS says "If I had a son......."

 

Well, I do see the stand your ground law as a worthy topic of discussion politically speaking. Otherwise, no, I don't think it had political significance I was disturbed by liberals and conservatives making it political.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep. Obama was wrong to comment on it imo.

 

LOL.........I think I will enjoy your commentary going forward.......

 

VJ, you're right about that, and I blame the racially-divisive Democrats for it! Democrat politicians, both black and white, continually beat the "racism drum", always blaming whites for all the world's problems. Whites are demonized by the left in order to keep their enslaved black electorate in line on election days.

The truth of the matter is that the safest place for any black American citizen to be is in the company of white American citizens! Like many other data controlled by the Government, it's extremely difficult to understand the crime statistics in the forms reported by the Government. Some data are maintained as whole numbers, others as percentages, and they're seldom if ever maintained in a meaningful format. About 2 years ago I performed an analysis of the data relevant to racial violence in the US. The data included the period of 1996 through 2008, 13 consecutive years.

There are four categories of violent crime for which statistics were kept. One of the categories was "robbery" which I omitted from my analysis due to the "economics" argument that's involved. The three categories included in the analysis were titled (1) "Crimes of Violence", (2) "Rape/Sexual Assault", and (3) "Assault" (both Simple and Aggravated). The results surprised me due to the enormous difference in interracial crimes of violence.

When whites commit violence in the US, they commit the crimes against blacks only 3% of the time, with 97% of white violent crimes perpetrated against other whites. (NOTE: Only whites and blacks were included in the analysis). When blacks commit violence in the US, they commit the crimes against whites 48% of the time, with 52% of black violent crimes perpetrated against other blacks. When looking solely at violent crimes that involve either black-on-white violence or white-on-black violence, 85% of those violent crimes were committed by blacks on whites.

We seldom hear such information though, do we? It's always the "bad racist white guy" that's blamed. I don't blame blacks for the reality of violent crime. I blame the leftist, race-baiting demagogues that constitute the leadership of the progressive Democrat Party!!!!

 

There are some things that people simply do not want to hear. Society has become so "PC" that it is still possible for the leftist media to demagogue over an issue like the Duke Lacrosse non rape case, but ignore the Knoxville Horrors.

What I do not understand is how white liberals became so involved in issues of white on black crimes that do not exist in significant numbers. Progressives are using such issues as cover for promoting their economic and political agendas. Socialism is a hard sell, it takes extreme measures to sell it.