Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 51
  1. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Pasadena, MD
    Posts
    12,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Frye's Moustache View Post
    Regardless, how does lack of a permit escalate to a hate crime?

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Because you, wait for it, hate... Bureaucracy. ;)

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk





  2. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Pasadena, MD
    Posts
    12,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by owknows View Post
    We know that many have, and have been denied (or simply ignored) even after permits were granted to BLM (see above links).

    Do you see no problem with state resources being made available to promote overtly political messages?

    You don't see a slippery slope here?
    Do you see a problem with assuming motives were none are present?

    All I'm saying is that one group had a permit (making it legal), and the other didn't (making it illegal). I agree with Greg that they would have a better shot if they wanted their own message elsewhere. I also don't really think that political messages should be posted on public streets, but that was not the point of contention

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk





  3. #39

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ortizer View Post
    In this case no, but in other cases motive determines the degree of crime. Take the various degrees of murder.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk
    OK... I was hoping not to have to do it.. but let's try a specific example.

    CASE A.

    White man (A) kills a black man while yelling a racial epithet.

    White man (A) should be charged with murder.


    CASE B.

    White man (B) kills white man (B) while yelling nothing.

    White man (B) should be charged with murder


    How is white man (A) any more a criminal than white man (B)?

    How is the black murder vitcim's life worthy of greater protection under the law than the white murder victim?

    If it is not, then how can we justify "hate crime" laws which offer greater criminal penalties to criminals, and greater defensive protections to victims, based on the criminal's motivation?

    I'd like an honest answer.





  4. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Carroll County
    Posts
    6,324
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Maybe the couple should have requested a permit to paint next or near to it; BLM = Marxism or All Lives Matter and if they were denied, take them to court.





  5. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates
    Posts
    13,611

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

    Quote Originally Posted by owknows View Post
    And this has nothing to do with the question under discussion.

    You seem unable to grasp the point being made, so we'll leave it at that.
    I grasp fine.

    You posted this:

    Guilt is not determined by the motivations of the actor.
    I disagreed with you and said why. That it isn't the main thrust of the thread is immaterial. It was a sidetrack but a valid one IMO. I assumed you agreed since you engaged the point.

    You seem to not be getting the idea that the city is government by choosing to allow ANYONE to deface public property by painting the street is incurring a taxpayer burden (the ultimate removal of the painted message which will cost money). I effect it is forcing taxpayers to pay for the promotion of a political message.
    I get it. I did post this.

    I am not approving of the BLM message but you just don't start painting over stuff on public property without permission. It is akin to tearing down a statue you don't like without permission.

    Note I am NOT APPROVING of the BLM message. Perhaps I should have clarified and said "I don't approve of the city allowing the BLM message."

    That said, this is akin to a statue which when erected sends a message. It is in a sense endorsing or at minimum noting a person's contribution too our society. Naming the DC airport after Reagan or a school after Obama is also the same kind of thing and that is always political. I don't know if it is a wise thing to do.

    However, once done and the message or acknowledgement of the person is there on public property a citizen doesn't have the right to just go ahead and deface or dismantle it.

    What these people did painting over the approved message on public property is the same thing as tearing down a statue you don't like.

    To be clear, I generally do not take issue with statues being put up and have a severe issue with that BLM message on the street, especially in this climate, but you just can't go defacing it on your own no more than you can tear down statues on your own.





  6. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates
    Posts
    13,611

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Frye's Moustache View Post
    Regardless, how does lack of a permit escalate to a hate crime?

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    It isn't, but hate crimes are stupid and anti-American and unconstitutional. Basically they are a violation of the first amendment. People are allowed to believe and state what they want and that should NEVER be criminalized. Actions should be criminalized, not beliefs.





  7. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates
    Posts
    13,611

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ortizer View Post
    In this case no, but in other cases motive determines the degree of crime. Take the various degrees of murder.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk
    That's not quite right. It isn't motive that is the difference between first and second degree murder, but premeditation. Did you do it with forethought or as an emotional reaction not planned ahead of time.

    That some motives might spur you on to an emotional reaction or premeditation is true, but it isn't the motive that is the difference but the forethought.





  8. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Pasadena, MD
    Posts
    12,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by owknows View Post
    OK... I was hoping not to have to do it.. but let's try a specific example.

    CASE A.

    White man (A) kills a black man while yelling a racial epithet.

    White man (A) should be charged with murder.


    CASE B.

    White man (B) kills white man (B) while yelling nothing.

    White man (B) should be charged with murder


    How is white man (A) any more a criminal than white man (B)?

    How is the black murder vitcim's life worthy of greater protection under the law than the white murder victim?

    If it is not, then how can we justify "hate crime" laws which offer greater criminal penalties to criminals, and greater defensive protections to victims, based on the criminal's motivation?

    I'd like an honest answer.
    Okay. So we're limiting the scope of the discussion on motive to hate crimes? I do not have any particular defense for those specifically. I was more just making the point that motive is considered in what crime is being committed... And is a prime cause of people being overcharged and then acquitted.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk





  9. #45

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ortizer View Post
    Okay. So we're limiting the scope of the discussion on motive to hate crimes?
    Yes. That was the original premise, and the entire purpose behind the discussion.





  10. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Pasadena, MD
    Posts
    12,183

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    That's not quite right. It isn't motive that is the difference between first and second degree murder, but premeditation. Did you do it with forethought or as an emotional reaction not planned ahead of time.

    That some motives might spur you on to an emotional reaction or premeditation is true, but it isn't the motive that is the difference but the forethought.
    Fair. They just generally have to prove a motive to prove it was planned I suppose.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk





  11. #47

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

    It was bound to come to this, and I've been waiting to see how the hypocritical react. You can not support (whether overtly or implicitly) the tearing down or desecration of statues and monuments of those you disagree with (Columbus, Confederates, etc) and then express outrage when someone does the same to the view you support (BLM). Or any other statue/monument. If it's a valid expression of protest for some, it is a valid form of protest for all.





  12. #48

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BPF2 View Post
    It was bound to come to this, and I've been waiting to see how the hypocritical react. You can not support (whether overtly or implicitly) the tearing down or desecration of statues and monuments of those you disagree with (Columbus, Confederates, etc) and then express outrage when someone does the same to the view you support (BLM). Or any other statue/monument. If it's a valid expression of protest for some, it is a valid form of protest for all.
    You do see the difference between being charged with vandalism and being charged with a hate crime right?





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->