It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Libertygal
Originally posted by His Doodness
have you all lost your minds??
how is yanking a scarf off of someone considered assault?
Spitting on someone, or throwing a glass of water on someone is considered an assault, so why wouldn not physically yanking something off someones' person be, also?
What damages were done to the muslim woman? torn scarf? emotional damage?
For a Muslim woman, yes, it is considered a very personal thing to show their hair in public, and quite offensive to them to have to remove it themsleves, let alone to have it forcefully removed.
sounds like a civil suit to me, not a criminal suit.
Actually it is a Federal offense now. Considered to be a major felony.
lets say i was in that supermarket, and there was someone else there who hated me for whatever reason. so they walk up, say something hurtful, pull a hat off my head(or scarf or whatever, doesn't really matter), and throw it on the ground. should i call the police? would you?
If it was induced by hate that falls under the Hate Crimes legislation, yes, you can call the police. The burden of proof does not fall upon you to prove it was caused by hate, the burden of proof falls to the accused to provide proof it was not Hate ariented. Good luck with that, because in many cases, it could be impossible to prove a thought.
if you are a reasonable person you most likely would answer no. no crime was commited here. at most, the muslim woman should get a restraining order and sue for emotional distress.
Actually, the new Hate Crimes legislation allows for them to also pursue a civil suit, as well as to prosecute under Federal statues. She won't need a restraining order, as it is most likely this woman will be used as a tool to make a point to society. I will leave it up to you to decipher that point. A crime was committed here, the real question was, does it constitute being charged with a class 4 felony? Would seem so.
law enforcement had no business getting involved in this.
Not only did they have a right, they were required to by law.
am i the only one who sees it this way?
In some ways, believe it or not I agree with you. At most this should have been handled as a simple battery, but then, where were the people when this was signed into law October 29, 2009?
I will give you a clue. They were focused on gay rights if people were paying any attention, and for the ones not paying any attention, it was slipped in on the Defense Spending Bill.
I was attacked for pointing this out in another thread.
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by His Doodness
See my post above. De-scarfing the woman was akin to ripping the skirt off another woman. You exposed her modesty and dishonoured Allah by showing her uncovered head in Public.
I assume you would have the same attitude if someone slapped the skull cap off a Jew, just because he was Jewish?
Originally posted by blueorder
no, that is only part of the story, the other part is the ridiculous "hate crime" legislation which elevates certain victims
Originally posted by PC equals Newspeak
No. "Hate crimes" only apply to crimes commited against certain protected minority groups or members thereof. That's the perversity of such a silly legislation.
hate crimes are funny
if a white guy calls a black guy a #, #, or #....or calls a gay guy a #, #, or #, then punch them, they go to jail for a hate crime.
But call a white man a white blue-eyed devil, paddy-o, fay gray boy, honkey, cracka mother f'er and punch him the face. Nothing. Hell, they'd probably take the white guy to jail for simply thinking of a racist term in retaliation.
Another prime example of hypocrisy in our politically correct society.
Originally posted by EMPIRE
reply to post by His Doodness
I'm curious, do you have any experience in any field related to law or criminal justice?
Originally posted by MacDonagh
Wouldn't community service at a mosque be a more suitable punishment than jail time?
The attacker looks like she lacks irony in her diet. Perhaps she'll get some when she's forced to wear a hijab while she scrubs the floors?
Originally posted by Lilitu
Perhaps you should take the time to actually read the legislation.
" IN GENERAL- At the request of a State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency, the Attorney General may provide technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance in the criminal investigation or prosecution of any crime that
(A) constitutes a crime of violence;
(B) constitutes a felony under the State, local, or tribal laws; and
(C) is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of the State, local, or tribal hate crime laws."
Race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. That would seem to include EVERYONE.
Originally posted by TrueBrit
I have to point out that the reasoning behind the elevation of a race crime victim beyond that of a normal assault victim, is sound. It goes like this:
If you dont want the second world war again, crush fascist pigs underfoot by wieght of law, EVERY time they act on thier disgusting ideals. Allow NONE to behave in a way that interferes with a persons right to go about thier business in peace regardless of thier ethnicity.
The only way to do this, is to ensure that NO rascist action goes unpunished, and if Im honest , both the US and the UK need to step up to this stuff a hell of a lot more. Both my Grandfathers fought in WW2 to prevent the spread of xenophobic supremacy , I would be devastated if in my life time, that stuff returned. Either devastated or busy building explosives to burn Nazis with at any rate.