NYC Muslim Charged with Hate Crime for Forceably Cutting Sikh Boy's Hair

NYC Muslim Charged with Hate Crime for Forceably Cutting Sikh's Hair

www.iht.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.nypost.c om

[edit on 5/26/2007 by djohnsto77]

[edit on 26-5-2007 by UM_Gazz]

Another fine example of tolerance from the religion of peace I guess.

I've had some Sikh friends before and I know they're very sensitive about their hair. It's against their religion to have it cut, so I think this truly is a hate crime.

www.iht.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

You know how kids are, they will do things that upset other people without really taking it seriously. If the older teenager wasn't religious he probably thought it was quite stupid that the sikh kid was so sensitive about his hair.

I don't think the older kid really would have meant it as a hate-crime but more as just something funny, you know in schools the least fortunate or most sensitive kid always gets picked on. Well maybe this is just the same, but gone a bit too far.


See, I disagree.

Who knows though, maybe the kid really did have something against sikh?



[edit on 26/5/2007 by malganis]

This has nothing to do with the fact that hes muslim, its school, stuff like this happens.

Well I don't know what he was thinking.

But the facts are he's being charged with a hate crime and could face up to seven years in prison for cutting his hair.

I doubt he'd be in anywhere near as much trouble if it wasn't against the victim's religion to have his hair cut.

Yeah probably
The whole thing is confusing thou, people saying different things. Its hard to know what it was about.

[edit on 26-5-2007 by _Phoenix_]

It might be a stretch to prove the act was based on a hatred for the victim's religion. Maybe Ahmed just really didn't like the kid's long hair and the religious aspect was of no consequence to him. Like if a white guy steals a black guy's wallet... is that a hate crime? Or did the white guy just want the wallet no matter what color his target was?

And remind me never to date a Sikh woman.

Not all Sikh's are overly religious, like any other. I work with a Sikh and his hair is short, can't imagine it got that way without cutting it. Others though are and not cutting their hair is part of their faith. I know this, many, maybe most, do. If so, it IS an affront to this kids religion.

The one thing I do wonder though is, if this had been anyone other than a Muslim that had done this, would we be discussing this?

Good question, somehow I doubt it. Is this a hate crime? That would be hard to say. What I do know is seven years in prison is a very long time for a 17 year old. If he isn't an accomplished criminal now he certainly will be when he gets out. Sounds to me like a DA is shooting for some publicity trying to make a name for himself. Should the kid have cut the hair; no of course not but kids do stupid things that's why they are kids. Certainly there should be some consequences but calling this a hate crime is taking it way too far.

I'm generally against special "hate crime" legislation, but in this case, I do think it does make sense.

If this was just some prank, it'd probably be simple assault. But, if it can be proven the attacker did this because of the victim's religion, and since it is far more damaging to the victim because of his religion, it seems much more serious and should be treated as such to me.

WHY? Because the perp is Muslim?

Sorry dj but this post is contradictory. IF is a BIG word. But you already posted that this "hate crime" makes sense. Seems like your mind is already made up. I hope that the courts in the US don't also run in this manner.

Not picking on you, just what I noticed.

The question is how do you prove beyond a reasonable doubt what was going through the kid's mind? I don't believe that we can. He's 17 and 17 year old kids do stupid things. I'm sorry I don't believe that this would have even made the news if the perpetrator hadn't been Muslim. What he did was wrong but should he be used by the DA's office to further some agenda?

In my opinion this has been blown way out of proportion by a DA looking to score some political points.

I think if it can be shown that the perpetrator chose to cut his hair because he knew that would be particularly harmful to the victim because of his religion, I can see a need for a more harsh punishment. The laws and precedent for stuff like this is probably to handle boys being childish by cutting off a girl's a pony tail behind her back. Obviously, this is a more serious crime since it might be based on religious hatred -- I'm sure there are plenty of witnesses who can make it clear if that is the case or not.

This is the crux though. Witnesses can NOT prove "intent". Intent is in a persons mind. Unless this guy came out and said he did this for X reason. I ask again. If this had been a Christian that did this, would we be discussing it? Or would have it been chalked up as a childhood prank?

I would be just as upset if a Christian or anyone else had done this to this Sikh boy. But I guess I do understand clearly that if this had been a Christian who dragged a Muslim into a bathroom and force-fed him pork, I'm sure most ATS-ers would chalk it up to a childhood prank. Right?

I sure as hell would hope not.

Would it be reported, maybe. Would it be discussed, possibly. But the article took it the extra step of pointing out that it was a muslim that commited the act. This adds a spin to the story of "see how evil muslims are" or "this muslim disrespects Sikh, bet he hates your religion too".

This of course enforces the idea that Islam teaches hate and intolerance. In other words the spin is used to promote the story. Was it a hate crime? Only if the boy knew that the cutting the hair was against religious doctrine. Easy enough to prove if the other boy regularly explained his belief system to his peers. However for it to truely be a hate crime he would have to be charged as an adult. Meaning that his status of a minor does not exempt him from federal/state hate crime legislation. That may or may not be harder to prove than intent.

As for the action itself, I could easiler see this done by any bully. I think the fact that he is muslim is trivia more than anything and is being used by the author of the article as promotional spin for attention for the story. First rule of successful journalism these day seems to be sensationalism over the five W's.

I think the problem with this is we need to prove whether he cut the Sikh's hair based on religion or cut it just to be a prankster.

I think further investigation is needed. Well I don't know if any more can be found out.

But to be fair, djohnsto77, while I may have problems with Islam, using this to demonize all Muslims is unfair.

With as much separation of church and state that I hear. Especially when it comes to students and there beliefs in schools, how can they say this as a hate crime without sounding Hippocratical? Mean, malicious, wrong and stupid, yes but a hate crime between students? I think the kid that got tea bagged had it worse.

just my .02 worth.

Yes and to prove this point they should make the Muslim kid eat pork while urinating on the Koran.