|
No point in talking about this, it's a hate crime and there are punishments for hate crimes, end of story.
|
On October 28 2011 22:34 Derez wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 22:27 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:18 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:15 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:14 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 22:12 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:04 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 21:59 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 21:55 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 21:45 marvellosity wrote:
[quote]
But he was gay.
And you're greatly deluding yourself if you think gay kids getting creamed at school like this doesn't happen regularly. It does, and it's a serious issue.
Basically, two things:
1) A physical assault like this is fucking horrible, no matter what kid it was done to
2) Gay kids at school are the victims of far more bullying in school than straight kids, so yes, it does matter that he's gay
But it doesn't matter And you're greatly deluding yourself if straight kids getting creamed at school doesn't happen regularly, and like wise it's a serious issue 1)Yes getting attacked is pretty horrible 2)Fat kids, Kids of different race, nerds, geeks, are victims to similar bullying school compared gay kids, so no, don't consider gay on a special tier, they're not that special. What I don't understand, gays want equality with us straights, and we don't mind that, so don't make each case into a special case because the victim is gay, being gay doesn't make them more special than the rest of us Don't be dumb. My point 1 directly addressed that anyone getting creamed at school is a bad thing and serious. The point is gays get proportionately massively more bullying than straight kids. Is the same true of black kids or whatever? Yes, also awful. But the point in hand is that the kid is gay and gays get an extremely tough time of it in schools. you are saying more gay kids get beaten up like its even relevent, its not. more women get raped than men, but is raping a guy any better or worse? no its just rape, its all bad. by singling out the bully by saying "what you did was more bad because the victim was gay" we are supporting the notion that gay people are different to straight people, and that they need to be treated differently. we are agreeing with the bullys madness if not his method. Gay kids ARE different, because they get picked on disproportionately. Do we wish this wasn't the case? Yes. If, in a world that wasn't this one currently, gays don't get bullied all the time and in this instance the kid just HAPPENED to be gay, I'd completely agree with you. But we live in a world where gay kids do get picked on disproportionately, and it doesn't help to sweep it under the mat by saying "they want equality, this should be treated like nothing else", because gay kids DO get treated differently, all around the world. It isn't irrelevant that he's gay, because gay bullying is a specific and awful problem. Just take a look at any of the teen suicide rates. To all the gays who attempt/commit suicide because of their mistreatment by their peers, this is a very serious issue. Unless you're suggesting that vastly higher suicide rates aren't something we should be looking at, because gays are no different. Gays and straights get bullied alike, Punish the offense for what it is don't make special case for gay victim They get bullied alike, but gays suffer it 10x more. That's the difference. Of course I'm pulling 10x out of my arse, but it is massively, massively more. prove to me that a gay suffers any different to a fat/ginger/short/tall/skinny/white/black/latino kid. and even if they do, if you pinch my arm and i break down crying and having a fit, no one would be saying, hey that guy needs to go to jail, look at the reaction he caused in that straight white guy. now dont take my words out of context, im not saying people shouldnt feel bad or upset or hurt when they are attacked, what im saying is their reaction to getting attacked should have no baring on the punishment for the perpetrator. it just doesnt make sense You probably don't understand the law. There is an attribute in the law where intentions impact the severity of the case, mens rea. For example (and I can only speak of the US here) a premeditated intentional killing is capital, punishable by upto the death penalty. For the same crime of killing someone in a fit of passion, is 2nd degree and you can't get the death penalty for this. For doing so without any intent is manslaughter. They all have a varying level of punishment and for good reason. The law isn't just about retribution it is for protection of society. Someone who has shown they intentionally harm someone based on discriminatory intentions is worse than someone who does so because they lost control in a moment of anger. This is why hate crime legislation exist, because intent and action are both considered by the law. The intent to do harm to a segment of society makes the action worse That's because you're comparing cases that aren't equal to begin with. Mens rea considers IF the crime was pre-meditated, not what the pre-meditation consisted of. You should be comparing examples like this: - The pre-meditated murder of a woman by her husband for personal reasons with the pre-meditated murder of a gay person for homophobic reasons. I'm not willing to punish one of them more harshly then the other, because both come from thoughts that degrade the victim to a point where he/she isn't 'worthy' of life. Explain to me please why one is worse then the other please, and why a higher punishment in one of the cases is justified.
You don't understand mens rea if you think it doesn't consider why the premeditation takes place. Euthanasia is a good example of why premeditation for different reasons incurs different charges. Other examples abound in law. Murder in the commission of a crime is felony murder. Murder for hire is capital murder. Murder of political victims is assignation (edit: obviously I meant assassination. Seriously Chrome? assignation?) . Murder to change political opinion is terrorism. Murder to stop the abuse of a child (premeditated) is manslaughter (and often actually not even that).
Mens rea is about looking at intentions. Not just what the intent was but why it exists. This is why there is hate crime law - because premeditation (or even impulsive actions) combined with the intent to do so because of protected attributes is worse than doing so because of a personal vendetta.
|
On October 28 2011 22:41 redviper wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 22:34 Derez wrote:On October 28 2011 22:27 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:18 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:15 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:14 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 22:12 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:04 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 21:59 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 21:55 Blasterion wrote:
[quote]
But it doesn't matter
And you're greatly deluding yourself if straight kids getting creamed at school doesn't happen regularly, and like wise it's a serious issue
1)Yes getting attacked is pretty horrible
2)Fat kids, Kids of different race, nerds, geeks, are victims to similar bullying school compared gay kids, so no, don't consider gay on a special tier, they're not that special.
What I don't understand, gays want equality with us straights, and we don't mind that, so don't make each case into a special case because the victim is gay, being gay doesn't make them more special than the rest of us
Don't be dumb. My point 1 directly addressed that anyone getting creamed at school is a bad thing and serious. The point is gays get proportionately massively more bullying than straight kids. Is the same true of black kids or whatever? Yes, also awful. But the point in hand is that the kid is gay and gays get an extremely tough time of it in schools. you are saying more gay kids get beaten up like its even relevent, its not. more women get raped than men, but is raping a guy any better or worse? no its just rape, its all bad. by singling out the bully by saying "what you did was more bad because the victim was gay" we are supporting the notion that gay people are different to straight people, and that they need to be treated differently. we are agreeing with the bullys madness if not his method. Gay kids ARE different, because they get picked on disproportionately. Do we wish this wasn't the case? Yes. If, in a world that wasn't this one currently, gays don't get bullied all the time and in this instance the kid just HAPPENED to be gay, I'd completely agree with you. But we live in a world where gay kids do get picked on disproportionately, and it doesn't help to sweep it under the mat by saying "they want equality, this should be treated like nothing else", because gay kids DO get treated differently, all around the world. It isn't irrelevant that he's gay, because gay bullying is a specific and awful problem. Just take a look at any of the teen suicide rates. To all the gays who attempt/commit suicide because of their mistreatment by their peers, this is a very serious issue. Unless you're suggesting that vastly higher suicide rates aren't something we should be looking at, because gays are no different. Gays and straights get bullied alike, Punish the offense for what it is don't make special case for gay victim They get bullied alike, but gays suffer it 10x more. That's the difference. Of course I'm pulling 10x out of my arse, but it is massively, massively more. prove to me that a gay suffers any different to a fat/ginger/short/tall/skinny/white/black/latino kid. and even if they do, if you pinch my arm and i break down crying and having a fit, no one would be saying, hey that guy needs to go to jail, look at the reaction he caused in that straight white guy. now dont take my words out of context, im not saying people shouldnt feel bad or upset or hurt when they are attacked, what im saying is their reaction to getting attacked should have no baring on the punishment for the perpetrator. it just doesnt make sense You probably don't understand the law. There is an attribute in the law where intentions impact the severity of the case, mens rea. For example (and I can only speak of the US here) a premeditated intentional killing is capital, punishable by upto the death penalty. For the same crime of killing someone in a fit of passion, is 2nd degree and you can't get the death penalty for this. For doing so without any intent is manslaughter. They all have a varying level of punishment and for good reason. The law isn't just about retribution it is for protection of society. Someone who has shown they intentionally harm someone based on discriminatory intentions is worse than someone who does so because they lost control in a moment of anger. This is why hate crime legislation exist, because intent and action are both considered by the law. The intent to do harm to a segment of society makes the action worse That's because you're comparing cases that aren't equal to begin with. Mens rea considers IF the crime was pre-meditated, not what the pre-meditation consisted of. You should be comparing examples like this: - The pre-meditated murder of a woman by her husband for personal reasons with the pre-meditated murder of a gay person for homophobic reasons. I'm not willing to punish one of them more harshly then the other, because both come from thoughts that degrade the victim to a point where he/she isn't 'worthy' of life. Explain to me please why one is worse then the other please, and why a higher punishment in one of the cases is justified. You don't understand mens rea if you think it doesn't consider why the premeditation takes place. Euthanasia is a good example of why premeditation for different reasons incurs different charges. Other examples abound in law. Murder in the commission of a crime is felony murder. Murder for hire is capital murder. Murder of political victims is assignation. Murder to change political opinion is terrorism. Murder to stop the abuse of a child (premeditated) is manslaughter (and often actually not even that). Mens rea is about looking at intentions. Not just what the intent was but why it exists. This is why there is hate crime law - because premeditation (or even impulsive actions) combined with the intent to do so because of protected attributes is worse than doing so because of a personal vendetta.
so if i beat up a gay person saying " im trying to beat the gay out of him, it will help him"
its ok
nice
|
|
|
fucking sick.
why only 3 days of suspension?
why arent the other students charged? in germany its a crime to just look and not help.
fucking disgusting world
|
On October 28 2011 22:42 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 22:41 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:34 Derez wrote:On October 28 2011 22:27 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:18 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:15 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:14 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 22:12 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:04 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 21:59 marvellosity wrote:
[quote]
Don't be dumb. My point 1 directly addressed that anyone getting creamed at school is a bad thing and serious. The point is gays get proportionately massively more bullying than straight kids.
Is the same true of black kids or whatever? Yes, also awful. But the point in hand is that the kid is gay and gays get an extremely tough time of it in schools. you are saying more gay kids get beaten up like its even relevent, its not. more women get raped than men, but is raping a guy any better or worse? no its just rape, its all bad. by singling out the bully by saying "what you did was more bad because the victim was gay" we are supporting the notion that gay people are different to straight people, and that they need to be treated differently. we are agreeing with the bullys madness if not his method. Gay kids ARE different, because they get picked on disproportionately. Do we wish this wasn't the case? Yes. If, in a world that wasn't this one currently, gays don't get bullied all the time and in this instance the kid just HAPPENED to be gay, I'd completely agree with you. But we live in a world where gay kids do get picked on disproportionately, and it doesn't help to sweep it under the mat by saying "they want equality, this should be treated like nothing else", because gay kids DO get treated differently, all around the world. It isn't irrelevant that he's gay, because gay bullying is a specific and awful problem. Just take a look at any of the teen suicide rates. To all the gays who attempt/commit suicide because of their mistreatment by their peers, this is a very serious issue. Unless you're suggesting that vastly higher suicide rates aren't something we should be looking at, because gays are no different. Gays and straights get bullied alike, Punish the offense for what it is don't make special case for gay victim They get bullied alike, but gays suffer it 10x more. That's the difference. Of course I'm pulling 10x out of my arse, but it is massively, massively more. prove to me that a gay suffers any different to a fat/ginger/short/tall/skinny/white/black/latino kid. and even if they do, if you pinch my arm and i break down crying and having a fit, no one would be saying, hey that guy needs to go to jail, look at the reaction he caused in that straight white guy. now dont take my words out of context, im not saying people shouldnt feel bad or upset or hurt when they are attacked, what im saying is their reaction to getting attacked should have no baring on the punishment for the perpetrator. it just doesnt make sense You probably don't understand the law. There is an attribute in the law where intentions impact the severity of the case, mens rea. For example (and I can only speak of the US here) a premeditated intentional killing is capital, punishable by upto the death penalty. For the same crime of killing someone in a fit of passion, is 2nd degree and you can't get the death penalty for this. For doing so without any intent is manslaughter. They all have a varying level of punishment and for good reason. The law isn't just about retribution it is for protection of society. Someone who has shown they intentionally harm someone based on discriminatory intentions is worse than someone who does so because they lost control in a moment of anger. This is why hate crime legislation exist, because intent and action are both considered by the law. The intent to do harm to a segment of society makes the action worse That's because you're comparing cases that aren't equal to begin with. Mens rea considers IF the crime was pre-meditated, not what the pre-meditation consisted of. You should be comparing examples like this: - The pre-meditated murder of a woman by her husband for personal reasons with the pre-meditated murder of a gay person for homophobic reasons. I'm not willing to punish one of them more harshly then the other, because both come from thoughts that degrade the victim to a point where he/she isn't 'worthy' of life. Explain to me please why one is worse then the other please, and why a higher punishment in one of the cases is justified. You don't understand mens rea if you think it doesn't consider why the premeditation takes place. Euthanasia is a good example of why premeditation for different reasons incurs different charges. Other examples abound in law. Murder in the commission of a crime is felony murder. Murder for hire is capital murder. Murder of political victims is assignation. Murder to change political opinion is terrorism. Murder to stop the abuse of a child (premeditated) is manslaughter (and often actually not even that). Mens rea is about looking at intentions. Not just what the intent was but why it exists. This is why there is hate crime law - because premeditation (or even impulsive actions) combined with the intent to do so because of protected attributes is worse than doing so because of a personal vendetta. so if i beat up a gay person saying " im trying to beat the gay out of him, it will help him" its ok nice
Even though you are trying to be a sarcastic jerk, you are actually right. If the 'bully' was in fact not bullying and had a genuine belief that he was doing the right thing then it would be a lot different. In that case he should be committed to some psychology program that monitors him for such a pathology.
|
People are still narrow minded about sexual orientation? Evolve already people... it's fuckin 2011. Shit like this is retarded. Can't wait till humans overcome such nonsense. Lock that kid up.
|
I'm looking for the death penalty option
|
So I have first hand experience with a much, much milder form of what happened and I am not sure how best to handle that one. In this case I am okay with severe punishments.
Here is what happened to me.
A kid who was much smaller than me (I was 5'10 he was maybe 5'5) punched me in the back of the head unprovoked.
This did no meaningful damage. I did not need to even apply ice.
He did not follow it up. It was more like he punched me and then ran away.
I never hit him back. I did nothing to prompt the punch.
I went to the principal's office and reported it.
The principal asked a bunch of people what happened.
Everyone said the exact same thing except this kid himself who said I broke his chain.
No one else saw his me do this. I did not do it.
The principal suspended us both for 2 days for fighting.
My father was incensed and hired a lawyer.
Lawyer said to just serve the suspension and we would straighten it out next week.
Next week my lawyer shows up and asks for the police report.
Principal says there is none.
Lawyer points out that if minor (I was 15) reports assault to an authority such as a principal
it is a felony for the principal to fail to report it to the police within 48 hours.
The principal will definitely lose job, probably get criminal record and be unable to work in education again.
Principal ask's my dad and lawyer what they want.
They say my record is expunged and other kid gets 10 days detention.
Principal says fine.
Also my lawyer had interviewed like 20 kids at the school and believed there was a gang.
In order to enter the gang you had to punch a white kid who was bigger than you.
That is where this whole thing started.
I would say 10 days detention sounds slightly on high side, but in the realm of reasonability. Probably a week would be fairer.
Unfortunately, the school's rules also said if you miss more than 9 days in a semester you fail unless you have a good excuse.
Being suspended for fighting is not a good excuse so this guy actually failed freshman year because of the whole thing.
I thought that was too serious.
He later dropped out of school.
The thing is I knew the other kid for a while growing up. He was mostly a good kid.
He behaved well in class. He was a good sport playing sports.
He was never a great student or particularly responsible, and he was probably heading in the wrong direction with this "gang" he was joining, but I thought the punishment was a bit too severe.
|
Only 3 days suspended? A fight in my school of this nature would involve Police. :/
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 28 2011 22:42 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 22:41 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:34 Derez wrote:On October 28 2011 22:27 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:18 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:15 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:14 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 22:12 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:04 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 21:59 marvellosity wrote:
[quote]
Don't be dumb. My point 1 directly addressed that anyone getting creamed at school is a bad thing and serious. The point is gays get proportionately massively more bullying than straight kids.
Is the same true of black kids or whatever? Yes, also awful. But the point in hand is that the kid is gay and gays get an extremely tough time of it in schools. you are saying more gay kids get beaten up like its even relevent, its not. more women get raped than men, but is raping a guy any better or worse? no its just rape, its all bad. by singling out the bully by saying "what you did was more bad because the victim was gay" we are supporting the notion that gay people are different to straight people, and that they need to be treated differently. we are agreeing with the bullys madness if not his method. Gay kids ARE different, because they get picked on disproportionately. Do we wish this wasn't the case? Yes. If, in a world that wasn't this one currently, gays don't get bullied all the time and in this instance the kid just HAPPENED to be gay, I'd completely agree with you. But we live in a world where gay kids do get picked on disproportionately, and it doesn't help to sweep it under the mat by saying "they want equality, this should be treated like nothing else", because gay kids DO get treated differently, all around the world. It isn't irrelevant that he's gay, because gay bullying is a specific and awful problem. Just take a look at any of the teen suicide rates. To all the gays who attempt/commit suicide because of their mistreatment by their peers, this is a very serious issue. Unless you're suggesting that vastly higher suicide rates aren't something we should be looking at, because gays are no different. Gays and straights get bullied alike, Punish the offense for what it is don't make special case for gay victim They get bullied alike, but gays suffer it 10x more. That's the difference. Of course I'm pulling 10x out of my arse, but it is massively, massively more. prove to me that a gay suffers any different to a fat/ginger/short/tall/skinny/white/black/latino kid. and even if they do, if you pinch my arm and i break down crying and having a fit, no one would be saying, hey that guy needs to go to jail, look at the reaction he caused in that straight white guy. now dont take my words out of context, im not saying people shouldnt feel bad or upset or hurt when they are attacked, what im saying is their reaction to getting attacked should have no baring on the punishment for the perpetrator. it just doesnt make sense You probably don't understand the law. There is an attribute in the law where intentions impact the severity of the case, mens rea. For example (and I can only speak of the US here) a premeditated intentional killing is capital, punishable by upto the death penalty. For the same crime of killing someone in a fit of passion, is 2nd degree and you can't get the death penalty for this. For doing so without any intent is manslaughter. They all have a varying level of punishment and for good reason. The law isn't just about retribution it is for protection of society. Someone who has shown they intentionally harm someone based on discriminatory intentions is worse than someone who does so because they lost control in a moment of anger. This is why hate crime legislation exist, because intent and action are both considered by the law. The intent to do harm to a segment of society makes the action worse That's because you're comparing cases that aren't equal to begin with. Mens rea considers IF the crime was pre-meditated, not what the pre-meditation consisted of. You should be comparing examples like this: - The pre-meditated murder of a woman by her husband for personal reasons with the pre-meditated murder of a gay person for homophobic reasons. I'm not willing to punish one of them more harshly then the other, because both come from thoughts that degrade the victim to a point where he/she isn't 'worthy' of life. Explain to me please why one is worse then the other please, and why a higher punishment in one of the cases is justified. You don't understand mens rea if you think it doesn't consider why the premeditation takes place. Euthanasia is a good example of why premeditation for different reasons incurs different charges. Other examples abound in law. Murder in the commission of a crime is felony murder. Murder for hire is capital murder. Murder of political victims is assignation. Murder to change political opinion is terrorism. Murder to stop the abuse of a child (premeditated) is manslaughter (and often actually not even that). Mens rea is about looking at intentions. Not just what the intent was but why it exists. This is why there is hate crime law - because premeditation (or even impulsive actions) combined with the intent to do so because of protected attributes is worse than doing so because of a personal vendetta. so if i beat up a gay person saying " im trying to beat the gay out of him, it will help him" its ok nice
Only if you actually have a good reason for thinking it'll work, and trust me, it'll come out in court if you're just bullshitting. And you'll probably wind up in an asylum for using an argument like that for your defense.
|
On October 29 2011 00:09 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 22:42 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:41 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:34 Derez wrote:On October 28 2011 22:27 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:18 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:15 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:14 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 22:12 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:04 turdburgler wrote:
[quote]
you are saying more gay kids get beaten up like its even relevent, its not. more women get raped than men, but is raping a guy any better or worse? no its just rape, its all bad.
by singling out the bully by saying "what you did was more bad because the victim was gay" we are supporting the notion that gay people are different to straight people, and that they need to be treated differently. we are agreeing with the bullys madness if not his method.
Gay kids ARE different, because they get picked on disproportionately. Do we wish this wasn't the case? Yes. If, in a world that wasn't this one currently, gays don't get bullied all the time and in this instance the kid just HAPPENED to be gay, I'd completely agree with you. But we live in a world where gay kids do get picked on disproportionately, and it doesn't help to sweep it under the mat by saying "they want equality, this should be treated like nothing else", because gay kids DO get treated differently, all around the world. It isn't irrelevant that he's gay, because gay bullying is a specific and awful problem. Just take a look at any of the teen suicide rates. To all the gays who attempt/commit suicide because of their mistreatment by their peers, this is a very serious issue. Unless you're suggesting that vastly higher suicide rates aren't something we should be looking at, because gays are no different. Gays and straights get bullied alike, Punish the offense for what it is don't make special case for gay victim They get bullied alike, but gays suffer it 10x more. That's the difference. Of course I'm pulling 10x out of my arse, but it is massively, massively more. prove to me that a gay suffers any different to a fat/ginger/short/tall/skinny/white/black/latino kid. and even if they do, if you pinch my arm and i break down crying and having a fit, no one would be saying, hey that guy needs to go to jail, look at the reaction he caused in that straight white guy. now dont take my words out of context, im not saying people shouldnt feel bad or upset or hurt when they are attacked, what im saying is their reaction to getting attacked should have no baring on the punishment for the perpetrator. it just doesnt make sense You probably don't understand the law. There is an attribute in the law where intentions impact the severity of the case, mens rea. For example (and I can only speak of the US here) a premeditated intentional killing is capital, punishable by upto the death penalty. For the same crime of killing someone in a fit of passion, is 2nd degree and you can't get the death penalty for this. For doing so without any intent is manslaughter. They all have a varying level of punishment and for good reason. The law isn't just about retribution it is for protection of society. Someone who has shown they intentionally harm someone based on discriminatory intentions is worse than someone who does so because they lost control in a moment of anger. This is why hate crime legislation exist, because intent and action are both considered by the law. The intent to do harm to a segment of society makes the action worse That's because you're comparing cases that aren't equal to begin with. Mens rea considers IF the crime was pre-meditated, not what the pre-meditation consisted of. You should be comparing examples like this: - The pre-meditated murder of a woman by her husband for personal reasons with the pre-meditated murder of a gay person for homophobic reasons. I'm not willing to punish one of them more harshly then the other, because both come from thoughts that degrade the victim to a point where he/she isn't 'worthy' of life. Explain to me please why one is worse then the other please, and why a higher punishment in one of the cases is justified. You don't understand mens rea if you think it doesn't consider why the premeditation takes place. Euthanasia is a good example of why premeditation for different reasons incurs different charges. Other examples abound in law. Murder in the commission of a crime is felony murder. Murder for hire is capital murder. Murder of political victims is assignation. Murder to change political opinion is terrorism. Murder to stop the abuse of a child (premeditated) is manslaughter (and often actually not even that). Mens rea is about looking at intentions. Not just what the intent was but why it exists. This is why there is hate crime law - because premeditation (or even impulsive actions) combined with the intent to do so because of protected attributes is worse than doing so because of a personal vendetta. so if i beat up a gay person saying " im trying to beat the gay out of him, it will help him" its ok nice Only if you actually have a good reason for thinking it'll work, and trust me, it'll come out in court if you're just bullshitting.
LOL i can imagine that, funny image in my head
|
so much hate going around 
|
On October 28 2011 22:46 teddyoojo wrote:
fucking sick.
why only 3 days of suspension?
why arent the other students charged? in germany its a crime to just look and not help.
fucking disgusting world
Yep, pretty disgusting that its a crime to just look and not help.
|
On October 29 2011 00:09 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 22:42 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:41 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:34 Derez wrote:On October 28 2011 22:27 redviper wrote:On October 28 2011 22:18 turdburgler wrote:On October 28 2011 22:15 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:14 Blasterion wrote:On October 28 2011 22:12 marvellosity wrote:On October 28 2011 22:04 turdburgler wrote:
[quote]
you are saying more gay kids get beaten up like its even relevent, its not. more women get raped than men, but is raping a guy any better or worse? no its just rape, its all bad.
by singling out the bully by saying "what you did was more bad because the victim was gay" we are supporting the notion that gay people are different to straight people, and that they need to be treated differently. we are agreeing with the bullys madness if not his method.
Gay kids ARE different, because they get picked on disproportionately. Do we wish this wasn't the case? Yes. If, in a world that wasn't this one currently, gays don't get bullied all the time and in this instance the kid just HAPPENED to be gay, I'd completely agree with you. But we live in a world where gay kids do get picked on disproportionately, and it doesn't help to sweep it under the mat by saying "they want equality, this should be treated like nothing else", because gay kids DO get treated differently, all around the world. It isn't irrelevant that he's gay, because gay bullying is a specific and awful problem. Just take a look at any of the teen suicide rates. To all the gays who attempt/commit suicide because of their mistreatment by their peers, this is a very serious issue. Unless you're suggesting that vastly higher suicide rates aren't something we should be looking at, because gays are no different. Gays and straights get bullied alike, Punish the offense for what it is don't make special case for gay victim They get bullied alike, but gays suffer it 10x more. That's the difference. Of course I'm pulling 10x out of my arse, but it is massively, massively more. prove to me that a gay suffers any different to a fat/ginger/short/tall/skinny/white/black/latino kid. and even if they do, if you pinch my arm and i break down crying and having a fit, no one would be saying, hey that guy needs to go to jail, look at the reaction he caused in that straight white guy. now dont take my words out of context, im not saying people shouldnt feel bad or upset or hurt when they are attacked, what im saying is their reaction to getting attacked should have no baring on the punishment for the perpetrator. it just doesnt make sense You probably don't understand the law. There is an attribute in the law where intentions impact the severity of the case, mens rea. For example (and I can only speak of the US here) a premeditated intentional killing is capital, punishable by upto the death penalty. For the same crime of killing someone in a fit of passion, is 2nd degree and you can't get the death penalty for this. For doing so without any intent is manslaughter. They all have a varying level of punishment and for good reason. The law isn't just about retribution it is for protection of society. Someone who has shown they intentionally harm someone based on discriminatory intentions is worse than someone who does so because they lost control in a moment of anger. This is why hate crime legislation exist, because intent and action are both considered by the law. The intent to do harm to a segment of society makes the action worse That's because you're comparing cases that aren't equal to begin with. Mens rea considers IF the crime was pre-meditated, not what the pre-meditation consisted of. You should be comparing examples like this: - The pre-meditated murder of a woman by her husband for personal reasons with the pre-meditated murder of a gay person for homophobic reasons. I'm not willing to punish one of them more harshly then the other, because both come from thoughts that degrade the victim to a point where he/she isn't 'worthy' of life. Explain to me please why one is worse then the other please, and why a higher punishment in one of the cases is justified. You don't understand mens rea if you think it doesn't consider why the premeditation takes place. Euthanasia is a good example of why premeditation for different reasons incurs different charges. Other examples abound in law. Murder in the commission of a crime is felony murder. Murder for hire is capital murder. Murder of political victims is assignation. Murder to change political opinion is terrorism. Murder to stop the abuse of a child (premeditated) is manslaughter (and often actually not even that). Mens rea is about looking at intentions. Not just what the intent was but why it exists. This is why there is hate crime law - because premeditation (or even impulsive actions) combined with the intent to do so because of protected attributes is worse than doing so because of a personal vendetta. so if i beat up a gay person saying " im trying to beat the gay out of him, it will help him" its ok nice Only if you actually have a good reason for thinking it'll work, and trust me, it'll come out in court if you're just bullshitting. And you'll probably wind up in an asylum for using an argument like that for your defense.
Ending up in an asylum would be a better fate than a prison but that defense wouldn't get you off on insanity, fortunately ignorance and stupidity aren't considered a mental disorder.
|
|
|
The biggest problem with bullying is that people are too used to saying "typical kids" and brush off in a "boys will be boys" with a quirky smile, as if its okay.
People trying to learn and better themselves should never be exposed to even hints of threats, let alone actual beatdowns.
Yes we experienced it, and i mean we as in our generation. But just because we did, and our dads did does not mean our kids should have to. We should better ourselves and simply not accept this kind of crap. School/college should be the safest play for young people to be at
I dont give a crap about gay rights, womens rights, latino rights, jew rights etc. I only care about human rights, nobody should be exposed to this
|
This kid should be expelled AND charges should be filed. Hate crimes should not be tolerated. The other kids watching should receive detention as well and the one filming even more than that.
|
Heh.. Isn't this like the 8th Gay-thread we have had in 3 days?
Not to say that it's not an issue with the hate-crimes and stuff which I'm sure is a big problem in the US(They are not very common here), but isn't it going abit overboard?
It's a school, come on.. When I was in school, there was loads of fights, lots of them completely unjustified and some even "Lets beat up that guy, just because can".. Sometimes kids just do dumb shit that can seem very evil
Would this be interesting if this boy was straight?
|
Heh.. Isn't this like the 8th Gay-thread we have had in 3 days?
Gay people want to be treated like normal people. However, if anyone does anything to a gay person they should have much harsher punishments than if they did something to a non-gay person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
