[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

It's like beating your head against a wall. I don't understand why you guys think it's OK for a straight white man to get assaulted, but not the victims groups. How about we have stiff sentences for any assault?

Get your head out of your ass. No person has said this, and your desperate assertion of such smacks of an inability to form any kind of coherent argument.

Disagree with it if you must, but targeted victems because of their race and sexuality is a hate crime because the motivator is hate, not that they looked like easy pickings, were weak, or in the wrong place at the wrong time. Get it into that head of yours - targeted for what they are, not the circumstances of the victem or the assaulter.

[EyeBrock]

RUEZ RUEZ:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Gays have been particulary targeted in the past for beatings for the sole reason that they were gay.

We made laws to stop this. It's a good thing.

So the regular laws against assaulting someone weren't cutting it? If someone assaults me because they hate me(not likely because I'm very lovable) they will get off a little easier because I'm a straight white male?

Oh behave!

[Brenda]

$1:

Disagree with it if you must, but targeted victems because of their race and sexuality is a hate crime because the motivator is hate, not that they looked like easy pickings, were weak, or in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Which, imo, indicates, that the easy pickings, the weak, or the ones in the place at the wrong time are not as equal as gays or coloured, and their trauma is not seen as relevant as the trauma suffered by victims of hate crimes.

[Gunnair]

Brenda Brenda:

$1:

Disagree with it if you must, but targeted victems because of their race and sexuality is a hate crime because the motivator is hate, not that they looked like easy pickings, were weak, or in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Which, imo, indicates, that the easy pickings, the weak, or the ones in the place at the wrong time are not as equal as gays or coloured, and their trauma is not seen as relevant as the trauma suffered by victims of hate crimes.

It`s seen in a different light. Stand on the corner of Yates and Wharf at 0200 and see who gets targeted by the drunk loudmouth fucktards first. The normal white guy, the nerd, or the gay guy. My money`s on the gay guy - and note that the gay guy could be built like a brick privy and he`ll still be targeted whereas the straight guy built like a brick privy will not.

See the common denominator yet?

[xerxes]

RUEZ RUEZ:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Gays have been particulary targeted in the past for beatings for the sole reason that they were gay.

We made laws to stop this. It's a good thing.

So the regular laws against assaulting someone weren't cutting it? If someone assaults me because they hate me(not likely because I'm very lovable) they will get off a little easier because I'm a straight white male?

That's not quite the rationale behind hate-crimes laws. Hate Crimes are called that because, apart from the actual crime itself, the crime is meant to send a message. A hate crime is meant to intimidate a segment of society. As abstract as that sounds, that's the difference.

[RUEZ]

xerxes xerxes:

That's not quite the rationale behind hate-crimes laws. Hate Crimes are called that because, apart from the actual crime itself, the crime is meant to send a message. A hate crime is meant to intimidate a segment of society. As abstract as that sounds, that's the difference.

I think that explains it very well.

[andyt]

Gunnair Gunnair:

andyt andyt:

It's like beating your head against a wall. I don't understand why you guys think it's OK for a straight white man to get assaulted, but not the victims groups. How about we have stiff sentences for any assault?

Get your head out of your ass. No person has said this, and your desperate assertion of such smacks of an inability to form any kind of coherent argument.

Disagree with it if you must, but targeted victems because of their race and sexuality is a hate crime because the motivator is hate, not that they looked like easy pickings, were weak, or in the wrong place at the wrong time. Get it into that head of yours - targeted for what they are, not the circumstances of the victem or the assaulter.

And what, the non-victims group person is targeted because they're loved by the assailant? Why is it any worse to hate somebody because they're gay, than because they're wearing the wrong team jersey, say? Assault should be dealt with severely no matter what group the victim belongs to, not swept under the rug as two guys just having a fight (as Eyebrock called it).

[Brenda]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Brenda Brenda:

$1:

Disagree with it if you must, but targeted victems because of their race and sexuality is a hate crime because the motivator is hate, not that they looked like easy pickings, were weak, or in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Which, imo, indicates, that the easy pickings, the weak, or the ones in the place at the wrong time are not as equal as gays or coloured, and their trauma is not seen as relevant as the trauma suffered by victims of hate crimes.

It`s seen in a different light. Stand on the corner of Yates and Wharf at 0200 and see who gets targeted by the drunk loudmouth fucktards first. The normal white guy, the nerd, or the gay guy. My money`s on the gay guy - and note that the gay guy could be built like a brick privy and he`ll still be targeted whereas the straight guy built like a brick privy will not.

See the common denominator yet?

Oh, I have always seen it, I just don't agree with it

[BeaverFever]

Andy, see my last post, I think your questions have already been addressed by myself and others.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Brenda Brenda:

What about that busdriver? Was that a hate crime because he was a busdriver, or just a random attack that deserves less punishment? Or the beheading on the Greyhound bus? Is that deserving of less punishment because the victim was not gay? Or would Li get a harsher punishment if the guy WAS gay?

Maybe you can relate better with this bit of dark history. Back in the olden days, Bruce and Huron counties in Ontario were settled primarily by the English, with a smattering of Scots and Welsh. When the Dutch started to settle the area as well, they were NOT welcome. Their barns were torched, they were assaulted if they came into town, they lived under constant threat SIMPLY for being Dutch. That's what Dayseed means by pernicious.

If you were a guy and beat me up simply because you don't like the way I look, or maybe I said something to offend you, then the only thing I might be "afraid" of is you. Either way, I'd just chalk it up to you being an asshole. But if I was gay/black/latino or whatever and you assaulted me just because I was _______, that puts fear into that particular group, plus it leaves the fear that not only you hate me for being born a particular way, but others feel the same way.
Especially when as is usually the case, it's a group that's doing the beating.

[andyt]

My concern is not that hate crimes are dealt with severely. It's that assaults to individuals not in a supposedly targeted group aren't taken seriously enough. As I said Eyebrock injected the "two guys having a fight" into this discussion, which is the easy excuse. The number one victims of violence in this country are straight young men. (By other straight young men). Why do we devalue them by not treating assaults on them seriously?

The lawyer for the defendant argued it was just a random assault, so the defendant should get time served - because that would be the norm for an assault on a straight man. But no, said the judge, because the assault was on a gay man, the defendant deserves more time in jail. Assault should be punished by the severity of the injuries the victim receives, not by what group s/he happens to be in.

[BeaverFever]

Well maybe the penalty for assault should increased, but the reason that hate crimes carry greater weight is not only that they victimize entire groups through senseless and random violence, but because they stir civil unrest and can end up pitting groups of citizens against eachother in the form of demonstrations counter-demonstrations, riots, melees, etc. Increased tensions between groups polarize commuinties, can disrupt all kinds political relationships and affect all kinds of seemingly unrelated policies.

[Brenda]

I don't necessarily agree with that. A random attack on anyone creates tensions because anyone could be next.
What is made clear, is that because this was a gay man, the attack is worse than if he was not gay. (Of course his lawyer says it was just a random attack, a hate crime would give his client more jail time)

But we ALL should worry about people like Li, who randomly kills someone, but that is apparently not as severe as if it would have been a hate crime. And that is just wrong. Imo, that is.

I am not saying that hate crime violence should be treated as a "lesser crime", I am saying that any random attack should be treated in the same way. When I get a random kick in my face, its not a hate crime because I am a white woman, but when my black friend gets a kick in the face, it is a hate crime...

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

I don't necessarily agree with that. A random attack on anyone creates tensions because anyone could be next.
What is made clear, is that because this was a gay man, the attack is worse than if he was not gay. (Of course his lawyer says it was just a random attack, a hate crime would give his client more jail time)

But we ALL should worry about people like Li, who randomly kills someone, but that is apparently not as severe as if it would have been a hate crime. And that is just wrong. Imo, that is.

I am not saying that hate crime violence should be treated as a "lesser crime", I am saying that any random attack should be treated in the same way. When I get a random kick in my face, its not a hate crime because I am a white woman, but when my black friend gets a kick in the face, it is a hate crime...

If the attacker calls you names related to gender, it would be a hate crime because you fall into one of the victim categories. And, because you're a woman the guy would get a more severe sentence even if it wasn't labelled a hate crime, because judges (and the rest of us) are biased that way.

I think you bring up a good point - many people are afraid on the street because of violence - old folks for instance. And the few times I've walked thru the DTES at night recently, I was afraid for the first time too. Maybe because I'm getting older, but I think too because it's gotten worse down there. When a guy gets on the bus at Hastings and Main with his nose pouring blood, because some guy came up to him, asked him the time and then just whacked him in the face - should that be dismissed as boy being boys/

[herbie]

Well let's put up a simple example. A couple days back an article ran about a lesbian who was beaten by some guy who wants it escalated to a hate crime charge.
Love to be the Judge on that one.
her: "He beat me because I was a lesbian"
guy: "No Your Honour. I only beat her because she was a woman."
Me the Judge: "Thank you for clearing that up. If you beat her because she was an asshole, you'd have only got the max. Now yer fucked."