They "attacked" a mosque with bacon sandwiches. Such drama........
Ham Sandwich = 12 months in prison and murder
Put a ham sandwich on a mosque doorstep = hate crime, prison.
Muslims in prison then murder him?
http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/29/man-w...acon-sandwiches-found-dead-in-prison-6350609/
and
http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/29/man-w...acon-sandwiches-found-dead-in-prison-6350609/
Muslims in prison then murder him?
http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/29/man-w...acon-sandwiches-found-dead-in-prison-6350609/
and
http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/29/man-w...acon-sandwiches-found-dead-in-prison-6350609/
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Well when you cross the line from talking about how you hate mosques to actually interfering with one trespassing on their property and blocking the Muslims access to their own building by putting bacon on the doors, you have committed a misdemeanor crime.
Such thugs should be in jail, and although I think a whole year is excessive , the Muslims in prison could've attacked him and killed him shortly after his arrival .
The government's failure is not maintaining order in the prisons.
I have no problem with putting racist gang members in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other churches' operations . If you want to exercise your right to engage in hate speech or even rude and hateful actions, (protests, demonstrations, boycotts), you damn well better be sure you don't break the law while doing it because if you do break the law expect to be slammed hard .
Such thugs should be in jail, and although I think a whole year is excessive , the Muslims in prison could've attacked him and killed him shortly after his arrival .
The government's failure is not maintaining order in the prisons.
I have no problem with putting racist gang members in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other churches' operations . If you want to exercise your right to engage in hate speech or even rude and hateful actions, (protests, demonstrations, boycotts), you damn well better be sure you don't break the law while doing it because if you do break the law expect to be slammed hard .
That sounds a lot like a calculated attempt to deny a person's firstI have no problem with putting racist gang members in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other churches' operations . If you want to exercise your right to engage in hate speech or even rude and hateful actions, (protests, demonstrations, boycotts), you damn well better be sure you don't break the law while doing it because if you do break the law expect to be slammed hard .
amendment right to free speech.
Let's change one word that and see how it sounds..
Or perhaps a more secular version...I have no problem with putting Jews in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other churches' operations . If you want to exercise your right to engage in unwanted speech or even rude and hateful actions, (protests, demonstrations, boycotts), you damn well better be sure you don't break the law while doing it because if you do break the law expect to be slammed hard.
Sorry, not a fan of such actions even if taken against abhorrent speech.I have no problem with putting Republicans in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other party's operations . If you want to exercise your right to engage in unwanted speech or even rude and hateful actions, (protests, demonstrations, boycotts), you damn well better be sure you don't break the law while doing it because if you do break the law expect to be slammed hard.
Should all the anti Trump protesters be tossed in the slammer then? Blocking roads, restricting access, pushing supporters and shouting hate speech at the same time should have qualified everyone of them for hate crime charges under such conditions as you describe.Well when you cross the line from talking about how you hate mosques to actually interfering with one trespassing on their property and blocking the Muslims access to their own building by putting bacon on the doors, you have committed a misdemeanor crime.
Such thugs should be in jail, and although I think a whole year is excessive , the Muslims in prison could've attacked him and killed him shortly after his arrival .
The government's failure is not maintaining order in the prisons.
I have no problem with putting racist gang members in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other churches' operations . If you want to exercise your right to engage in hate speech or even rude and hateful actions, (protests, demonstrations, boycotts), you damn well better be sure you don't break the law while doing it because if you do break the law expect to be slammed hard .
I have no problem with putting racist in jail and it does little to to make me feel bad they are attacked in jail. The problem I have is when you pick and chose which racist are to be put in jail and which are allowed to go on destructive, interruptive rampages through the streets. You don't have to be white, confederate flag waving skin head to be a racist.
Agreed. Only gang members who are racist should be put in prison.I have no problem with putting racist gang members in prison for even a slight violation of the law, including minor interferences with other churches' operations .
With all the starving children in the world... Of course it is.wasting bacon is a crime.
Then he could have just given the bacon sandwich to me and I would have put it to better use.
Yeah, those anti-Trump protesters would be committing a number of misdemeanor crimes, each of which could earn them some months, with a upper limit of either 6 mo. or 12 months, in jail. Not prison, but a local jail.Should all the anti Trump protesters be tossed in the slammer then? Blocking roads, restricting access, pushing supporters and shouting hate speech at the same time should have qualified everyone of them for hate crime charges under such conditions as you describe.
....
But the main point is that the more morally reprehensible the person's views are, the more punishment is appropriate when he or she commits crimes to advance those views.
That's why we have "hate crime" laws that give enhanced penalties to crimes that would be a lot less serious if committed for other reasons. The person's motivation behind the crime IS a legitimate thing to consider. Not their race or religion, but what illegal and un-American and uncivilized goals they wish to accomplish through their crimes against innocent people.
If I am hungry and I steal 5 loaves of bread from your store to eat it over the next month, I think that's a crime that should carry a low penalty.
If am greedy and want a new video game, but have no money to pay for it, and I steal 5 loaves of bread from your store and then sell them on the street to buy that video game, that calls for a moderate penalty.
Now suppose that I am hateful against asians and I go into a store owned by a Vietnamese -American, and say "You filthy gooks need to get out of our country. We should have nuked you all back in 1973. I'm going to impose a 5-loaf bread tax on you. As a white American, I can do whatever I want to you ***********. I'm taking these 5 loaves as compensation for me paying taxes to support the war we fought 40 years ago to try to save your people from communism, which was a wasted effort anyway." I then take the bread I just stole and rip the bags open and throw it in that store's own dumpster before I leave the scene. I didn't want the bread in the first place-- I just wanted to make a point.
Now THAT would be the kind of motivation that justifies a MAXIMUM sentence. Even though it's "only" the theft of 5 loaves of bread, just like in hyptothetical #1 and #2.
Hate crime laws are garbage that should not exist. Actions should be punished, not thought.That's why we have "hate crime" laws that give enhanced penalties to crimes that would be a lot less serious if committed for other reasons.
I reject that entirely.But the main point is that the more morally reprehensible the person's views are, the more punishment is appropriate when he or she commits crimes to advance those views.
So if I break your jaw just because I am evil, and I enjoy inflicting harm upon others, then minimum sentence for me. If I do so, however, because I hate you, for some "morally reprehensible" reason, or viewpoint, then I should get the maximum.
Do I have it correct?
Do I have it correct?
No, breaking an innocent victim's jaw just for the sadistic thrill of it-- and the desire to commit evil acts-- puts your assault into the "maximum penalty" category.
Sadistic infliction of pain, like torture, shows a depraved heart. The highest kind of malice. Surely that's an aggravating factor. You'll get a near-maximum sentence for it, if you have no better reason or excuse for doing it than "I like hurting people."
If you break my jaw because I call you a 98-pound weakling and tell you "go away boy, you bother me," in my best Foghorn Leghorn voice, that would put your crime in the "minimum penalty" category.
Sadistic infliction of pain, like torture, shows a depraved heart. The highest kind of malice. Surely that's an aggravating factor. You'll get a near-maximum sentence for it, if you have no better reason or excuse for doing it than "I like hurting people."
If you break my jaw because I call you a 98-pound weakling and tell you "go away boy, you bother me," in my best Foghorn Leghorn voice, that would put your crime in the "minimum penalty" category.
Thank you, oh sane one.Hate crime laws are garbage that should not exist. Actions should be punished, not thought.
I reject that entirely.
The government's failure is in kowtowing to Islam. Those same mosques and their imams get a free pass for preaching their "anti-everybody-that-isn't-muslim" hate and condoning murder of the same.Well when you cross the line from talking about how you hate mosques to actually interfering with one trespassing on their property and blocking the Muslims access to their own building by putting bacon on the doors, you have committed a misdemeanor crime.
Such thugs should be in jail, and although I think a whole year is excessive , the Muslims in prison could've attacked him and killed him shortly after his arrival .
The government's failure is not maintaining order in the prisons.
Woke. Excellent video.
Okay, so how would you punish the theft of 5 loaves of bread from a convenience store? Consider three scenarios for the theft, differing only on my motivation and how I express that while committing my theft.Hate crime laws are garbage that should not exist. Actions should be punished, not thought.
I reject that entirely.
.
SCENARIO 1: I am hungry and I steal 5 loaves of bread from your store to eat it over the next month. I grab it and walk out the door, saying, "Dude, I need this more than you do. I'm hungry!"
SCENARIO 2: I am greedy and want a new video game, but I have no money to pay for it. I go to your convenience store, pretend to "shop" for 5 loaves of bread, but then I just walk right out the door without stopping to pay for them. I say, "I'm gonna get some bread for this bread, Dogg!"
SCENARIO #3: Now suppose that I am hateful against asians and I go into a store owned by a Vietnamese -American, and say
"You filthy gooks need to get out of our country.
We should have nuked you all back in 1973.
I'm going to impose a 5-loaf bread tax on you.
As a white American, I can do whatever I want to you ***********.
I'm taking these 5 loaves as compensation for me paying taxes
to support the war we fought 40 years ago to try to
save your people from communism,
which was a wasted effort anyway."
I then take the bread I just stole and rip the bags open and throw it in that store's own dumpster before I leave the scene.
I didn't want the bread in the first place-- I just wanted to make a point.
What sentence? The range is from a small fine and no probation up to 12 months in jail, or maybe a split sentence of 8 months jail followed by 4 months probation with restitution and community service.
Are you going to impose the same sentence for each scenario, Judge?
Yes.Are you going to impose the same sentence for each scenario, Judge?
The exact same sentence (whatever it may be) in each of the three cases.
In each case, the crime is exactly the same. Five loaves of bread were stolen. I cannot support the criminalization of thought.
Sorry, not sorry. I just can't.
Nobody's asking to to "criminalize thought."
What I'm suggesting is that your thoughts, WHEN COMMUNICATED OR KNOWN TO OTHERS, can be a factor in deciding how much penalty you get.
The "crime" would still be a crime no matter what your thoughts were, or even if the State offered no evidence as to what motiviated you.
What I'm suggesting is that your thoughts, WHEN COMMUNICATED OR KNOWN TO OTHERS, can be a factor in deciding how much penalty you get.
The "crime" would still be a crime no matter what your thoughts were, or even if the State offered no evidence as to what motiviated you.
If the penalty can change because of your thoughts, that is criminalizing thought. You are being punished more severely because of what you were thinking.
I know that a person's expressed thoughts can be used to enhance punishment for crimes (hate crime laws). I'm simply stating that I do not agree with it.
Consider the case in Chicago where the four black people kidnapped and tortured a white kid. Now assume that four other black people kidnapped and tortured a black kid in exactly the same way. You're going to tell the parents of the black kid that his experience is not worthy of as much punishment as the experience of the white kid simply because of what the attackers were thinking? Do you really think the black kid or his parents care what the attackers were thinking?
I know that a person's expressed thoughts can be used to enhance punishment for crimes (hate crime laws). I'm simply stating that I do not agree with it.
Consider the case in Chicago where the four black people kidnapped and tortured a white kid. Now assume that four other black people kidnapped and tortured a black kid in exactly the same way. You're going to tell the parents of the black kid that his experience is not worthy of as much punishment as the experience of the white kid simply because of what the attackers were thinking? Do you really think the black kid or his parents care what the attackers were thinking?
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing
A forum community dedicated to Georgia firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Malum Prohibitum
409 Replies
Nemo
355 Replies
seajay
113 Replies
Recommended Communities
