this is NOT a hate crime???

[elder999]

The police and the media have two different objectives. The police are interested in maintaining order, so they're not likely to cater to everyone's sense of outrage to achieve parity. The media are interested in stirring **** up in order to sell their product, and the fastest way to do that, at least in the case of white-on-black crime, is to play up the hate crime angle. Keep in mind that the media could also be downplaying the hate crime angle in the case of black-on-white crime for the same reason - to create outrage among those who resent the double-standard.

More to the point, the DA is only interested in what he can obtain a conviction for-no more or less, and that's what....colors his decision about whether or not to press for a "hate crime" enhancement: whether or not he thinks he can get a conviction.

 

[punisher73]

The 'double standard' is in the media. Yawn and so what? What can anyone do about that?

And again - blacks get longer prison sentences than whites for the same crimes on average - where is your outrage over that?

Or is it just double-standards against whites that offends you?

I would REALLY like to see the FULL data on that one. Usually, when that is shown they don't show the criminal history of the two people in question. If it could be shown that 2 people with ZERO juvenile or adult background had that large a disparity between sentences (especially in Michigan where there are sentencing guidelines for a plug in formula) than there should be an outcry.

 

[punisher73]

In Michigan here is what the law says about a situation like this.

THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 328 of 1931

750.147b Ethnic intimidation.

Sec. 147b.
(1) A person is guilty of ethnic intimidation if that person maliciously, and with specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of that person's race, color, religion, gender, or national origin, does any of the following:
(a) Causes physical contact with another person.
(b) Damages, destroys, or defaces any real or personal property of another person.
(c) Threatens, by word or act, to do an act described in subdivision (a) or (b), if there is reasonable cause to believe that an act described in subdivision (a) or (b) will occur.
(2) Ethnic intimidation is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or by a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.
(3) Regardless of the existence or outcome of any criminal prosecution, a person who suffers injury to his or her person or damage to his or her property as a result of ethnic intimidation may bring a civil cause of action against the person who commits the offense to secure an injunction, actual damages, including damages for emotional distress, or other appropriate relief. A plaintiff who prevails in a civil action brought pursuant to this section may recover both of the following:
(a) Damages in the amount of 3 times the actual damages described in this subsection or $2,000.00, whichever is greater.
(b) Reasonable attorney fees and costs.

History: Add. 1988, Act 371, Eff. Mar. 30, 1989
Popular Name: Ethnic Intimidation
Popular Name: Hate Crimes

I am not sure about other states and their laws, but in Michigan what happens fits right into that law and is considered a felony vs. a misdemeanor assault if it just happened to be two parties arguing and it evolved into a fight.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Ohio is a shall-issue state.

The scumbags are fortunate in their accidental choice of neighborhood in which to pull this little tantrum of theirs.

I do not think a second, similar tantrum will be afforded such leniency.

 

[Archangel M]

But the world isn't white and black.

The problem is that many people do indeed think it IS.

 

[Twin Fist]

The 'double standard' is in the media. Yawn and so what? What can anyone do about that?

And again - blacks get longer prison sentences than whites for the same crimes on average - where is your outrage over that?

tell the WHOLE truth Bill

they get longer sentences, but on aveerage, have much more extensive criminal backgrounds

that effects sentencing too Zippy

 

[Archangel M]

tell the WHOLE truth Bill

they get longer sentences, but on aveerage, have much more extensive criminal backgrounds

that effects sentencing too Zippy

http://www.kernel.uky.edu/1995/fall/0927/v1.html

 

[Bill Mattocks]

tell the WHOLE truth Bill

they get longer sentences, but on aveerage, have much more extensive criminal backgrounds

that effects sentencing too Zippy

Gotta cite, there, stud? No, didn't think so.

You're full of it. Again. As usual.

Gotta get to the dojo, will check in later. Have a nice hate.

 

[jks9199]

if it was the other way around would they wait?

Yes.

The politics behind labeling crimes is mind-boggling sometime. Add in legitimate police investigative reasons for not labeling a particular offense, and it's even more complicated.

 

[Twin Fist]

Eat this, Bill

http://www.kernel.uky.edu/1995/fall/0927/v1.html

want some more?

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-04-02hm.html

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Eat this, Bill



want some more?

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-04-02hm.html

Neither of your links address my statement. Try again.

 

[Archangel M]

Ahhh..lets be fair here Bill. We are all in agreement on the study that shows Blacks get longer sentences and/or are arrested more often. Why dont YOU cite some sources that prove that its unfair? Or that its due to unfair treatment by the police or the justice system?

People spout those studies off as proof of some sort of bias in and of themselves but I dont think its that easy. Those links address many issues...they may not cite any proofs, but your implication that these sentences are due to some sort of bias isnt showing any citations either.

 

[Twin Fist]

here is some dessert Bill

http://araceagainsttime.blogspot.com/2009/06/attorney-general-holder-whites-not.html

In light of the brutality of the crimes committed that night, the sentences handed down were extremely lenient. The man who threw the brick at Kaufmann's car and instigated the attack, 17-year-old Deonte J. Williams, was sentenced to only 19 months in prison.

teah, the system is skewed against blacks

my *** it is

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Ahhh..lets be fair here Bill. We are all in agreement on the study that shows Blacks get longer sentences and/or are arrested more often. Why dont YOU cite some sources that prove that its unfair? Or that its due to unfair treatment by the police or the justice system?

People spout those studies off as proof of some sort of bias in and of themselves but I dont think its that easy. Those links address many issues...they may not cite any proofs, but your implication that these sentences are due to some sort of bias isnt showing any citations either.

The problem with proving bias is that it is impossible to prove or to disprove. If one points out that blacks receive, in general, harsher sentences for the same offenses also committed by whites (which I did), then others say well, the blacks more often have prior criminal records. But then you can say well, WHY do the blacks more often have prior criminal records? Is it because they often live in low-income areas which are prone to crime? Is it because they often turn to drugs because they cannot find work? Is it because they are inferior to whites, or prone to lawlessness in general? Do the police tend to arrest blacks more often than white, thus beginning their lifetimes of criminal history, which will later be used in sentencing? In other words, even if one were to somehow prove that the disparity in sentencing is not racist in and of itself, then one has to turn to the reasons for crime in the first place and whether or not any of them are racist.

One set of studies that have definitively put the racist label on sentencing laws is recent, and involves crack cocaine versus cocaine itself. Until recently, laws for possession and sale of crack were much higher than those for cocaine - but crack is cocaine, just cooked into a different chemical form. Why is this racist? Because crack cocaine is the drug of choice amongst the poorest members of our society, whilst cocaine itself remains a drug that can only be afforded by the relatively wealthy.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/crackreform.aspx

Since the majority of the poor in America are black, the disparity in sentencing laws meant that the result was effectively racist, even if it was not targeted at blacks in hatred.

However, let's get back to the point. The statements made expressed outrage that a violent attack on whites by blacks was not trumpeted in the news as a hate crime. The OP expressed resentment that whites-as-victims-of-blacks are not treated the same way as blacks-as-victims-of-whites when it comes to being considered a racist crime.

My response was that the media may well slant it that way - I can't disagree - but that the media does not bring charges. Furthermore, as you said, it is a known fact that blacks convicted of violent crimes such as assault are more likely to receive longer sentences than whites convicted of the same crime - regardless of the reason, this is a true statement.

Since both could generate outrage over the potential 'racism' inherent in them, my question to the OP and sympathizers was: where is your outrage over the OTHER side of the question?

The response to date has been to pretend it doesn't happen the other way. Whites are the victims, blacks are not. Period.

There are people who believe such things, and there is a word that describes them.

 

[geezer]

...Since both could generate outrage over the potential 'racism' inherent in them, my question to the OP and sympathizers was: where is your outrage over the OTHER side of the question?

Another nice post, Bill. Ever consider a sideline career as an editorial writer?

Anyway, I supposed that by now, it's occurred to you that folks either get your point, whether they agree or not, or they are utterly hopeless cases. It's not like you can expect total agreement or anything. But it would be nice to have people at least acknowledge what you've said. But they get up on that soapbox and just rant on and on, saying more of same old stuff. You can let it annoy you, or you can just let it go. ...Peace, Bro.

 

[theletch1]

Attention all members:

This is an official reminder to all posting to read the Study rules. Especially the part about attacking the message and not the messenger. Personal attacks, name calling or other rude, childish behavior has no place on this web site. If you simply cannot debate with another member without resorting to less than adult comments then use the ignore feature for that member.

-Jeff Letchford
-MT super moderator

 

[jks9199]

Crack cocaine sentencing is frequently pointed out as an example of inherent racism in the justice system -- but that ignores the legislative history and what was going on when the harsher sanctions for crack cocaine were enacted.

In the mid to late 80s, when crack first made a major appearance, it led to some serious wars and lots of violence between drug dealers. Crack was cheaper than powder (you can make a lot crack from a little powder...), and moved cocaine use into a lower income bracket. We're talking drive-bys and gang violence... Innocent folks getting killed led to knee-jerk reactions from legislators... like harsh sentences.

You can see the same relationship in carjacking laws and sentencing. After all, carjacking is just robbery in the specific form of taking a car...

 

[Ray]

The only problem with justice is that it's not really what most of us are after; we're after revenge. And if we can classify ourselves into a group that has been "offended" then we can speak as though WE were the offended party. No, the white people in American (in general) were not diminished by these actions...Yes, in America's past blacks (in general) have been diminished by actions that took place...we continue to classify and separate ourselves by the most useless means (like skin color) and continue to strive against each other even there is no real gain to be had in the strife.

Without any evidence, without any documentation, I'm guessing that the offenders in this incident were looking for trouble...any kind of trouble they could get into. They shaped their actions to the opportunity that was available...I believe they would have shaped their actions to a completely different opportunity to beat someone had it presented itself.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Bill is actually right about the income gap. It appears that even Hispanics do better!!

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104552.html

The only problem with justice is that it's not really what most of us are after; we're after revenge.

Good point. If everyone were out for justice then everyone would be treated equally in all situations good or bad.

 

[Archangel M]

Crack cocaine sentencing is frequently pointed out as an example of inherent racism in the justice system -- but that ignores the legislative history and what was going on when the harsher sanctions for crack cocaine were enacted.

In the mid to late 80s, when crack first made a major appearance, it led to some serious wars and lots of violence between drug dealers. Crack was cheaper than powder (you can make a lot crack from a little powder...), and moved cocaine use into a lower income bracket. We're talking drive-bys and gang violence... Innocent folks getting killed led to knee-jerk reactions from legislators... like harsh sentences.

You can see the same relationship in carjacking laws and sentencing. After all, carjacking is just robbery in the specific form of taking a car...

Ya beat me to it. Most powder sales in the US don't come with the drive-by shootings, home invasions and "rolling" of purchasers that crack cocaine does. And what demographic do you think was leading the charge to "do something" about the crack fueled violence on the inner city streets? Probably the people who lived there.

It's the same "all to easy..lets blame racism for the problem" approach.

At the bottom of the piggy pile is the ugly question of, sentencing aside, are these offenders actually committing the crimes they are accused of? The issue of poverty,limited choices and what else are factors in why, but people are committing crimes of violence and victimizing others (predominantly of the same race..I wonder if the victims find issue with sentencing) right now and that has to be dealt with.

Of course, most offenders only serve a fraction of the issued sentence anyway so most of this debate is academic.