'beat whitey night.' in Des Moines

[The_Dude 1,142]

As someone who lives in an urban area, I will support that it's very hard NOT to be racist.

It's very difficult to see the same demographic of people doing the same stupid stuff over and over and over and not make a connection between their race and their penchant for criminal and/or stupid activities. I'm firmly convinced it's a cultural issue more than a racial one (Africans and non-urbanized blacks don't do criminal and/or stupid things at the same rate as their urban brothas & sistas) but I can see why folks who didn't know the diffrence would automatically assume it's a racial issue.

If you're not from "the hood" or don't have the "luxury" of seeing it on your local news every single night it's probably very easy to dismiss as "they're not all like that." Certainly, they're not. I'm not saying (and I don't think anyone would say) they are. But, the closer you are to the hood and the more you experience it, the harder and harder it is to not be racist.

Slim, I live in an urban area, one that is far, far bigger than Cincinnati, and I am not racist, and don't find it too hard to not be either.

[Fandango 1,440]

Then take it up with law enforcement. Maybe you can file an amicus brief to call BS.

I would love to, hehehee because I really don't think it's right. A rape is a rape, murder is murder....I think we shouldn't be quantifying some lives as 'more important' than others.

[The_Dude 1,142]

which are??

Sorry Smoke, I missed this post. To prove a crime was racially motivated, you need to essentially prove that the perpetrator would not have commited the violent crime if the victim were not of a certain race. To use the example of the OP, they would need to prove that the only reason the teens attacked the victim(s) was because they were white, had they come up on a black person, they would not have committed a violent act. In essence, you need to show mens rea (guilty mind) that their intent was racially motivated. Law enforcement don't apply this all the time because it can be hard to prove without eye witness' or physical proof of racism.

I would love to, hehehee because I really don't think it's right. A rape is a rape, murder is murder....I think we shouldn't be quantifying some lives as 'more important' than others.

Lisa, you are misunderstanding the purpose of the law. It does not value the life of one race over another. Law enforcement, and governments have deemed racism and racially based violence to be unacceptable. This is like punitive damages in a civil case, an additional penalty to curb socially unacceptable behavior.

[slim 1,533]

Slim, I live in an urban area, one that is far, far bigger than Cincinnati, and I am not racist, and don't find it too hard to not be either.

Living in an urban area is not the same as living "in the hood." If you find it easy NOT to be racist, I'd venture to guess you don't have daily interaction with folks outside of your own demographic. And no, I'm not talking about "Tryone in IT is a wonderful guy." I'm talking about when you're trying to drive down the street and the person illegally crossing in front of you does their best to direct traffic while taking their sweet-@$$ time.

I would love to, hehehee because I really don't think it's right. A rape is a rape, murder is murder....I think we shouldn't be quantifying some lives as 'more important' than others.

We don't. However, we've long quantified some crimes as being more serious than others and added punishment on top of them. Crack rock gets more time than powder. Use a bullet proof vest you get three more years. Racially motivated? Could add up to ten more, who knows.

Sorry Smoke, I missed this post. To prove a crime was racially motivated, you need to essentially prove that the perpetrator would not have commited the violent crime if the victim were not of a certain race. To use the example of the OP, they would need to prove that the only reason the teens attacked the victim(s) was because they were white, had they come up on a black person, they would not have committed a violent act. In essence, you need to show mens rea (guilty mind) that their intent was racially motivated. Law enforcement don't apply this all the time because it can be hard to prove without eye witness' or physical proof of racism.

Exactly.

Edited August 25, 2010 by slim

[The_Dude 1,142]

Living in an urban area is not the same as living "in the hood." If you find it easy NOT to be racist, I'd venture to guess you don't have daily interaction with folks outside of your own demographic. And no, I'm not talking about "Tryone in IT is a wonderful guy." I'm talking about when you're trying to drive down the street and the person illegally crossing in front of you does their best to direct traffic while taking their sweet-@$$ time.

Yes, I do interact with people outside my demographic, every single day, and especially in the city that I work in.

We don't. However, we've long quantified some crimes as being more serious than others and added punishment on top of them. Crack rock gets more time than powder. Use a bullet proof vest you get three more years. Racially motivated? Could add up to ten more, who knows.

Are those Ohio standards, or are you quoting the federal standard? In California, if you add hate crime onto a crime, it is 1-3 years additional time, depending upon the severity and frequency.

[IncorrectPolitics 26]

Sorry Smoke, I missed this post. To prove a crime was racially motivated, you need to essentially prove that the perpetrator would not have commited the violent crime if the victim were not of a certain race. To use the example of the OP, they would need to prove that the only reason the teens attacked the victim(s) was because they were white, had they come up on a black person, they would not have committed a violent act. In essence, you need to show mens rea (guilty mind) that their intent was racially motivated. Law enforcement don't apply this all the time because it can be hard to prove without eye witness' or physical proof of racism.

Be honest, have there been any crimes that you feel were racially motivated but you couldn't prove it? It has to have happened.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Be honest, have there been any crimes that you feel were racially motivated but you couldn't prove it? It has to have happened.

I'm not an officer, so I really couldn't tell you. There undoubtedly have been ones as it's impossible to say "never". But the ones that I have seen have by and large been very obvious.

[slim 1,533]

Yes, I do interact with people outside my demographic, every single day, and especially in the city that I work in.

So, please, share your secret with me of how to NOT be racist. How do you face an overwhelmingly one-colored group of people and not make the connection of their race having something to do wiht their behavior?

Are those Ohio standards, or are you quoting the federal standard? In California, if you add hate crime onto a crime, it is 1-3 years additional time, depending upon the severity and frequency.

I'd have to look it up but I thought hate crime alone could carry up to ten years in cases like murder, rape, assault, etc.

I'm too lazy to look it up so if you find it, please post.

[The_Dude 1,142]

So, please, share your secret with me of how to NOT be racist. How do you face an overwhelmingly one-colored group of people and not make the connection of their race having something to do wiht their behavior?

I treat each person as an individual. There are a lot of people I hate in this city, but I don't think that they drive like as$holes because of their race. They drive like as$holes because they are unskilled and inconsiderate.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Sorry Smoke, I missed this post. To prove a crime was racially motivated, you need to essentially prove that the perpetrator would not have commited the violent crime if the victim were not of a certain race. To use the example of the OP, they would need to prove that the only reason the teens attacked the victim(s) was because they were white, had they come up on a black person, they would not have committed a violent act. In essence, you need to show mens rea (guilty mind) that their intent was racially motivated. Law enforcement don't apply this all the time because it can be hard to prove without eye witness' or physical proof of racism.

thank you. i've never understood what makes a crime a 'hate crime'. whether its race, religion, sexual orientation..etc. it has to be a determining factor.

[slim 1,533]

I treat each person as an individual. There are a lot of people I hate in this city, but I don't think that they drive like as$holes because of their race. They drive like as$holes because they are unskilled and inconsiderate.

Drivers? What about all the poeple walking across the street, sitting on the stoop, grabassing by the side of the road? When there's a group of them, are they still individuals?

[The_Dude 1,142]

Drivers? What about all the poeple walking across the street, sitting on the stoop, grabassing by the side of the road? When there's a group of them, are they still individuals?

OK, you got me slim. I effing hate bicyclists, especially when the douches use the left turn lane. But that isn't racist, it's... ummmm vehicleist.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The police will apologize. Just like former governor Vilsac (Democrat) Blacks are not racist, they can't be.

[slim 1,533]

OK, you got me slim. I effing hate bicyclists, especially when the douches use the left turn lane. But that isn't racist, it's... ummmm vehicleist.

OOooooh, now you've done it. Just wait till MC sees this one!

Blacks are not racist, they can't be.

That's what the media says, anyway.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Trying to use irony as a disguise for a racist attitude, especially when you make the same type of comment over and over and over, adds nothing to the discussion, so please stop.