California Couple charged with a Hate Crime, for painting over Black Lives Matter street letters

[owknows]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/california...ry?id=71668864

[blah3]

They should have just torn down some statues

[mikezpen]

"Hate crimes laws" s/b abolished-period. They're weapons, not laws.

[owknows]

The Government will now choose a side, and mandate it's chosen speech to be the only acceptable position.

And if you don't accept this, you will be charged with a crime and imprisoned.

[owknows]

This is the kind of thing that makes me afraid that we're headed toward an actual war.

[BcRaven]

"Hate crimes laws" s/b abolished-period. They're weapons, not laws.

Ah Mike, I agree. "Hate Crimes" depends on if you're being hated and who's doing the hating. That depends on who's defining which side is which. In today's Politically Correct Era, we know who has the upper hand... Bc

[owknows]

Ah Mike, I agree. "Hate Crimes" depends on if you're being hated and who's doing the hating. That depends on who's defining which side is which. In today's Politically Correct Era, we know who has the upper hand... Bc

An action is either a crime, or it is not a crime.

The motivations of the actor are irrelevant.

[BustOfPallas]

It was definitely vandalism. Hate crime is a stretch. Especially when viewed in the context of the mass wave of vandalism of statuary going on in the country.

If they were smart they would have used a water soluble paint to make a point without creating more work for the powerwash/sandblast man.

[owknows]

It was vandalism (costing money to remove) to overpaint the BLM letters

But it was NOT vandalism to paint (and doesn't cost money to remove) the original BLM letters?

[BcRaven]

An action is either a crime, or it is not a crime.

The motivations of the actor are irrelevant.

ow, you'd think so, but not today. It depends on who defines "crime."

If "painting over Black Lives Matter street letters" is a Hate Crime, then what is tearing down a statue of George Washington? There are no perfect people, only those who accomplish something and those who do not. I guess we should forget that Christopher Columbus and his crew, sailed the Flat Earth in three wooden boats to explore the "New World", I guess we should forget that George Washington was the General leader of the army that won the American Revolution, I guess we should forget that Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, I guess we should forget that Abraham Lincoln ("Oh Captain, My Captain") kept the Union together while freeing the slaves, etc. I guess Diogenes should dust off his lamp to find the perfect man or woman. Alas, he will be disappointed in his quest... Bc

[BustOfPallas]

It was vandalism (costing money to remove) to overpaint the BLM letters

But it was NOT vandalism to paint (and doesn't cost money to remove) the original BLM letters?

I read they had "permission" to paint the BLM letters. There was some permit involved so it was sanctioned. I personally think it is a waste of resources and don't like that public taxpayer streets are being used for sloganeering for a group with marxist goals and tactics. But hey, they actually got permission to do it.

[owknows]

I read they had "permission" to paint the BLM letters. There was some permit involved so it was sanctioned. I personally think it is a waste of resources and don't like that public taxpayer streets are being used for sloganeering for a group with marxist goals and tactics. But hey, they actually got permission to do it.

And now we come to the point that I was pushing for.

Does the government have the right to approve the defacing of government property in order to advance a unilateral political message?

Or is that itself a violation of rights?