11
   

The Horror of Hate Crimes

 
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:38 am
Let's look at another hate crime which appears to be quite similar to the one in Mississippi. This one randomly targeted, and killed, a Latino man.
Quote:
On Long Island, New York on November 8, 2008, Marcelo Lucero, a 37 year-old Ecuadorian real estate agent, was beaten and fatally stabbed by seven teenagers who were driving around to "go find some Mexicans to f— up." The teens spotted Lucero and a friend, then proceeded "[l]ike a lynch mob...got out of their car and surrounded Mr. Lucero," beating and stabbing him, according to the local prosecutor. The teenagers, all 17 and 16 years old, were charged with felony gang assault. One of them was also charged with manslaughter as a hate crime. http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/hispanics.html

The prosecutor in this case had alleged that Jeffery Conroy and his friends often hunted for Hispanic men to assault, an activity that the authorities said they referred to as “Mexican hopping" or "beaner-hopping".
Quote:
Three of the 12 jurors said in interviews outside the courthouse that the debate among them throughout four days of deliberations focused on Mr. Conroy’s intent...Mr. Engel and another juror, Eric Kramer, 42, an environmental engineer, said the phrase that sent the seven teenagers to Patchogue that night was important. “It was, ‘Let’s go beat up Mexican guys,’ ” Mr. Kramer said. “They never said, ‘Let’s go kill some guys, let’s go murder some guys.’
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/nyregion/20patchogue.html

Jeffrey Conroy was convicted of first degree manslaughter as a hate crime. And he received the maximum sentence possible for that crime.
Quote:
The teenager, Jeffrey Conroy, now 19, stood next to his lawyer in State Supreme Court here as Justice Robert W. Doyle told a courtroom filled with relatives, friends and supporters of both Mr. Conroy and the immigrant, Marcelo Lucero, that the proof of Mr. Conroy’s guilt was “overwhelming” and that he was convicted of “senseless and brutal crimes.”

The 25-year sentence was the longest possible for first-degree manslaughter as a hate crime, the most serious charge Mr. Conroy faced. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/nyregion/27patchogue.html


Under NYS law, where this crime took place, there was no doubt in the jury's mind that this crime was bias-related.
Quote:
According to Title Y, Hate Crimes Act of 2000,
Article 485 of the New York State Penal Law, the
New York State legislature has defined a hate crime
as one in which the victim is intentionally selected,
in whole or in part, because of “race, color, national
origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice,
age, disability or sexual orientation.”
.
Under NYS law, a bias-related crime carries enhanced penalties beyond the usual penalties for such acts when not motivated by bias.

The beating and killing of a man at random, simply because he was Hispanic, is not an act of "simple stupidity" as BillRM suggests. It was a brutal act of overt prejudice--the beating and killing of Marcelo Lucero was not just an assault or act of manslaughter, it was a vicious attack motivated only by bias toward an entire group of which Mr. Lucero was a member. Simply to punish these actions as assault, or manslaughter, misses an essential aspect of these crimes--they were fueled by prejudice toward an entire group, and these behaviors threaten the civil liberties of all members of that group in the community.

A documentary about the killing of Lucero and the response of the community is due to air on PBS next month.
Quote:
Not In Our Town: Light in the Darkness
airs on PBS nationwide Sept. 21, 2011

Not In Our Town: Light in the Darkness is a one-hour documentary about a town coming together to take action after anti-immigrant violence devastates the community. In 2008, a series of attacks against Latino residents of Patchogue, New York culminate with the murder of Marcelo Lucero, an Ecuadorian immigrant who had lived in the Long Island village for 13 years.

Over a two-year period, the story follows Mayor Paul Pontieri, the victim’s brother, Joselo Lucero, and Patchogue residents as they openly address the underlying causes of the violence, work to heal divisions, and begin taking steps to ensure everyone in their village will be safe and respected.
http://www.niot.org/LightInTheDarkness


When bias-crimes occur, it is important that the community examine the existing tensions within it's population to try to deal with these in the best manner possible. In the case of the Lucero killing, it highlighted the fact that other bias-related attacks on Hispanics had apparently been taking place, and might have been aggravated by anti-immigrant political comments, and that law enforcement might have failed to take these attacks on Latinos seriously enough or actually enabled them.
For that reason, the family of Lucero has filed a $40 million civil rights lawsuit against the county in which this crime took place and there is an ongoing investigation by the U.S. Dept. of Justice into the situation that existed in the county. You can read about it here.
http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/11/marcelo_luceros_family_files_40_million_civil_rights_lawsuit_against_police.html

When it comes to bias-related crimes, the goal is to prevent them from occurring, and to deal with them effectively when they do take place--and that must include a recognition of the bias that motivated the crimes.






0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:39 am
@BillRM,
The only post of Pamela's I have ever read is the one I commented on in this thread. It is not about the person but you don't seem to understand that. I made a comment and it was my opinion that you were out of line. Since when does doing the same thing you are accusing someone of make it right for you? You call her wrong for what she says but then you turn around and do the same thing. How is that right? That was my only point.

If Pamela had taken that attitude that you say she has in other threads then I would have told her she was out of line but she did not. All she did was post opposing documentation to an opposing view.

I am not going back to read any of her posts. They have absolutely nothing to do with this thread. Oh BTW, love the way you threw sick Christian in there. You need to look in the mirror because pointing out my Christianity is no different than being a racist. You make a good example as to why there should be hate laws.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:41 am
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:
pointing out my Christianity is no different than a racist.


Can people tell you're Christian by looking at you?
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:41 am
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
You don't want hate crimes laws I imagine because you would be guilty of them yourself.


Well I do hate people like her with all my heart and soul as is my right to do so but I had no plans on assaulting her or breaking any other law in connection to her.

Of course if the hate crime supporters get their wish to get around the first amendment and expand the law into so the call hate speak area who know concerning me however under any legal code of hate speak she would be going away for a lot of years herself.

Once more had you enjoy her postings?
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:41 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
Yes, AM I will cheerfully call a person who believes and publicly promote that blacks are sub-human as a race sub-human herself.


It's kinda mind boggling to try to understand a guy who verily rejoices in his governments' slaughter of peoples of other countries, yet presumes to lecture others for their shortcomings.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:48 am
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
The only post of Pamela's I have ever read is the one I commented on in this thread.


I cheerfully provided the link to her posting history so you can see the animal you are defensing.

Quote:
I am not going back to read any of her posts.


Of course not and assuming you are a decent person you would be throwing up on your keyboard.

And I and others are under no obligations to not remember a person beliefs from one thread to another even if you think we are and can response to that person postings in light of thousands of her other postings.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:50 am
@BillRM,
Maybe hyper-hypocrisy comes close to describing you, Bill.

Or monumental stupidity.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:51 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Once more had you enjoy her postings?


Bill, are you having trouble reading what I have posted? Let me make it a bit clearer for you: I SAID I AM NOT GOING TO READ THOSE OTHER POSTS. I HAVE READ ONE POST OF PAMELA'S AND IT WAS ON THIS THREAD.

Is that clear enough for you? I see only that you think it is okay for you to hate but if she does it well, you think that makes her subhuman? If it is not okay for her to hate then it's not okay for you to hate. To say differently is wrong (for anyone) and makes you (or anyone else doing it) a hypocrite.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:52 am
@JTT,
JTT you are like our group racist being a one note poster.

She posts on the evil of all black people and you post on the evil of the US.

In a lot of ways you and she had a great deal in common.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 11:58 am
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
If it is not okay for her to hate then it's not okay for you to hate. To say differently is wrong (for anyone) and makes you (or anyone else doing it) a hypocrite


I think it is perfectly ok to dislike or even hate a person for his or her own actions or words that you do not approve of and turn your stomach however I do not believe it is perfectly ok to hate a whole group that happen to just have skin color in common.

If you can not see the differences I suggest some form of counseling would be in order for you.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:07 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
however I do not believe it is perfectly ok to hate a whole group that happen to just have skin color in common.
Then why have you failed to address the actual topic of this thread? Very real bias crimes are taking place. These reflect not just hateful thoughts, but actual criminal behaviors motivated only by bias toward an entire group.

How do you think that killing in Mississippi should be handled? Do you think a bias-crime charge should not be appropriately included if the victim was randomly selected only because of the color of his skin?

Do you disagree with the way the case in NYS, that I posted, was handled? In that case, the jury was convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the killing was bias-related, as defined by NYS law.
Arella Mae
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:11 pm
@BillRM,
But you do think it is perfectly okay for you to hate on Christians? You think it is perfectly okay to lie? You think it is perfectly okay for you to treat me and other's like dung because we don't agree with the same things you do? Bill, I feel sorry for you. You cannot see your own hypocrisy. We should all take the plank out of our own eyes before we try to remove the speck out of another's.

By the way, I despise racism. I told you, it's not about the person. It was about your comment that I thought was inappropriate for what Pamela had posted. Nothing more and nothing less.

If something is wrong than it is wrong. If something is right than it is right. The person commiting the act is not what determines the behavior to be right or wrong.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:18 pm
@firefly,
Will mankind ever stop hating on others merely because they are different in some way? Nothing but pride and ego telling "them" they are better than "them over there." Now it's filtering down to our children. I said charge them with the crime if there is evidence of it and let the jury decide.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:23 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
But you do think it is perfectly okay for you to hate on Christians?

He also hates Muslims, and opposes their perfectly lawful right to build a mosque/community center in NYC because he doesn't approve of the location.

But, what's most troubling, is that actual hate crimes, that result in the killing of someone only because of his membership in a group, don't seem to register on BillRM with any sort of horror. That's why he really hasn't addressed the topic of this thread. These sorts of crimes, actual crimes which have taken place, don't seem to make an emotional impact on him.
Quote:
I said charge them with the crime if there is evidence of it and let the jury decide.

That is exactly what prosecutors do when a crime appears to be motivated by bias, and the final decisions always rest with a jury.

But I don't think BillRM, who is ignorant of the actual specific bias laws, trusts the jury system either--which makes it impossible to have a meaningful conversation of the topic with him. He will focus on irrelevancies and succeed only in derailing another thread. Why encourage him to do that?



BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:27 pm
@firefly,
The last I look Mississippi have capital punishment for such killings so what purpose would a hate crime law service in such cases?

Capital murder is capital murder hate crime laws or no hate crime laws.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:34 pm
@firefly,
He can't see the hypocrisy in his thinking. I don't think any of us will be able to get him to see it. His stance on rape seems to be about the same as his stance on hate crimes. It's a shame.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:36 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
The last I look Mississippi have capital punishment for such killings so what purpose would a hate crime law service in such cases?

As usual, you aren't even familiar with the case in question. This is not being regarded as a capital crime.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:42 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
He can't see the hypocrisy in his thinking. I don't think any of us will be able to get him to see it. His stance on rape seems to be about the same as his stance on hate crimes.

That's because he never focuses on the actual crimes which occur, and he is ignorant of the actual laws and how they are worded.

And, you're right, he won't see his hypocrisy--so why bother?
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:44 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
But you do think it is perfectly okay for you to hate on Christians?


My my what an emotional post and no I do not hate all Christians even if I think that all Christians along with all Muslims and all Jews are believers in roughly the same fairy tale.

I do hate the long long list of misdeeds done down through history in the name of one god or another from the good Christians torturing to death large number of men and women in the 1400 century to the Muslims who flow airplanes into building shouting god is great to the idiots who are trying to block the teaching of science in the public schools now.

Hell I even hate the idea that the Carthage citizens had the charming habit of throwing their own children into the fire in the name of their god in BC 3 hundreds or so.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:48 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

And, you're right, he won't see his hypocrisy--so why bother?


Why bother indeed! I've had my say and I tried to do it without getting angry and offensive.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

2016 moving to #1 spot - Discussion by gungasnake
Black Lives Matter - Discussion by TheCobbler
Is 'colored people' offensive? - Question by SMickey
Obama, a Joke - Discussion by coldjoint
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
The ECHR and muslims - Discussion by Arend
Atlanta Race Riot 1906 - Discussion by kobereal24
Quote of the Day - Discussion by Tabludama
The Confederacy was About Slavery - Discussion by snood
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 02:02:31