Politically Correct or a Hate Crime

Post Reply New Topic

Here in Kentucky, a statue of a Confederate statesman (I didn't recognize his name really) was vandalized- spray painted "Black Lives Matter." Then the mayor just says we need to re-look at out Confederate memorials.

If that had been a statue of Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. somehow painted white- would it have been a hate crime?

It was a hate crime as it is, and would have been a hate crime in the circumstance that you described.

So, "yes," and "yes."

It may have been motivated as political correctness, but as described, it certainly is a hate crime.
It was a crime (defacing public property), out of hate (strong disagreement with a politicians' opinion), so a hate-crime simply by definition.

I do see how it can be well-meaning, and i think i can agree with his point (athough i don't know the details), but spray-painting a statue is not the way to make your point

I don't see how this is a hate crime. It's just vandalism.

I agree. Just vandalism.

Yep, that's the good ol' double standard, for ya----and, it really ticks-me-off!

BOTH, are hate crimes----but, only ONE matters!!

All these memorials / flags / statues, etc. have been ignored, for many, MANY years, and no-one was boo-hooin' about them. Why is it, NOW, that when some radical person kills a bunch of people in SC, that we have to change everything?

In my state, at least, vandalism is a misdemeanor crime. As such, it may be prosecuted by a court as a hate crime under our state laws ( http://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapte ... 203.3.html ). Because vandalism isn't protected speech, there is no exemption from prosecution. The laws of your state or nation may vary.

If the situation were reversed and "White lives matter" was painted on a Black statue. I still wouldn't consider it a hate crime.

I wouldn't consider the reversed situation a hate crime, either. It says nothing negative about another race. It isn't threatening. It's only saying that they matter, too.

As Obama's pal Rahm Emanaul said "Never let a good crisis go to waste".
Much like any other shooting and hurricanes the liberals use this as an opportunity to further their agenda.
The battleflag stands for everything liberals hate, the South, country music, guns, rural lifestyles and fighting tyranny.
All many republican's do is come out of the closet as politically correct asking them to be torn down while NASCAR takes a p-ss on their fans and Wal-mart bans confederate cakes while making ISIS cakes.
As you can see America's liberal's are very good at manipulation tactics and would possibly gain the admiration of Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin.

I feel like black people's anger is warranted these days. Sure, it's not productive for them to be as angry as they are, and their anger won't help them politically, but I can certainly understand it. Racism is still a huge issue here in the US, especially with the recent rash of black churches being burned down, Dylann Roof's massacre, and the way that police officers keep killing black people unjustly. Plus, there's a lot of casual racism these days, in terms of the way that white people refuse to even try to understand what it's like to be black in this day and age, and refuse to admit that they're privileged in ways that black people aren't. As a white person myself, I really wish there were some way that I could do away with racism and make life easier for black people, but, unfortunately, that just isn't possible.

Ever wonder how this is all still going on when the races are so mixed now? We need to quit fighting over these things, and look at the bigger picture.

The actual crime (defacing the image of Jeff Davis -or whichever CSA statesman it was- with a popular political slogan) was vandalism.

The hypothetical "painting MLK's statue white"( or more plausibly painting "KKK" and or swastikas, on him) would also be vandalism.

The hypothetical crime against the image of MLK would also be a "hate crime" because it would be obvious that it was motivated out of hatred of a particular race, and meant to intimidate members of that race. That race being Black Americans.

The actual crime against the statue of Jeff Davis is not a hate crime. Its a political protest against certain public policies through what would have been free speech if it were not done via vandalism.

The reason the actual crime is not a 'hate crime' is obvious. It does not involve hatred. Hatred is light years away from it.

What group (racial? religious? ethnic? age group?) is being targeted for 'hatred'? What group is being targeted for intimidation?

None.

Certainly not White people. No hatred of White people is being expressed. And no intimidation of Whites (as Whites) was either intended, nor achieved.

Seriously. How is it a "hate crime"?

Spray painting the Chinese embassy with the slogan "Free Tibet" would be vandalism. But its not a 'hate crime'. Ditto spray painting a poster of the Ayatollah with "Stop Iranian Nukes"(to coin a slogan someone might want), or back in the Seventies spray painting the Russian embassy with "Save Soviet Jewry", are all examples of political protests. Free speech, but free speech done through vandalism. Maybe they are all are crimes. But none are "hate crimes". Same with writing "Black lives matter" on the face of Jeff Davis. Saying "Black lives matter" is no more a racial slur against all Whites (as Whites) than yelling "free Tibet" is a racial slur at all Han Chinese.

And why do you equate a Confederate politician with MLK anyway? How is there equivalency between say Jeff Davis, and Martin Luther King anyway?

Me three.

I guess you could argue it's attacking the inalienable right of people to take race into account when deciding whether someone else's life matters to them.

for Christ's sake! it is just as though the civil rights struggle of the 60s never happened! dumb-as-rocks racists are STILL spilling out of the woodwork left and right and making the worst kind of mischief. WHY???