It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Three Men Assault Mentally Handicapped Woman

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker
 


Take a look at what you said.


maybe she's completely stable and was running her mouth. thats not out of the ordinary to happen when you run your mouth.


Can you really not get why people are getting confused at your words and that everyone is thinking you are trying to justify these two mens actions?

Come on, you are intelligent. Surely you can get the confusion of your words....




posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker
 


Ahhh I think I understand your point now. Perhaps I was just not getting it but I thought you were implying that because the woman was mentally handicapped, she would have a higher propensity to mouth of and therefore deserved what she got.


That is certainly how it came across.

It came across as them trying to justify the actions of these men.

Glad this person was not doing that.



That said,yep. I find it morally disgusting,what these men did. Legally, it has nothing to do with her gender.... morally,everything.

But like I said, they are right. I would make a horrible judge. I let morals and common sense get in the way of my judging.

edit on 13-10-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


i was toaght never to hit a woman. theres an obvious physical difference between each.

but my personal beliefs are irrelevant when put up against the law of the land.

i adamantly believe that the law should be fair in cases of man vs man, man vs woman, and woman vs woman.



Assault is illegal and it is not some how more illegal if the assault is committed on a woman.



correct. however it IS more illegal if that individual is mentally handicapped.

again, i am arguing law, not morality.

law recognizes the ability of the individual to comprehend his/her own motivations/actions. which is why so many murderers plead insanity.

this is not a difficult thing to recognize.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker

correct. however it IS more illegal if that individual is mentally handicapped.

again, i am arguing law, not morality.

law recognizes the ability of the individual to comprehend his/her own motivations/actions. which is why so many murderers plead insanity.

this is not a difficult thing to recognize.


Untill you can show me the law that states it is more illegal to assault a mentally handicapped person than anyone else... You are talking out your ass.

You are right. law does examine a persons ability to understand... But the mental capacity of the victim does not make it more or less illegal. But, the plaintiff would not be making an insanity plea...

So, you talking about making insanity pleas has nothing to do with anything.
edit on 13-10-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker
 





law recognizes the ability of the individual to comprehend his/her own motivations/actions. which is why so many murderers plead insanity.


They actually don't and the percentage of people who use the insanity plea is less than 1%. Of that one percent only 26% are successful.

Source



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


in a court of law the womans handicap will most certainly differentiate between regular assault charges or hate crime.

her gender will make no difference.

my original statement that made you so emotionally charged was regarding the CRIME (regular assault/hate crime)

not personal morality.

you'd make a horrible judge. and prosecutor for that matter.
edit on 13-10-2011 by UnrelentingLurker because: (no reason given)


Yeah, you are right. I would make a horrible Judge. I have morals and use common sense, unlike politicians and the justice system as a whole.


Thanks for that compliment.


Your original statement was that she may have been running her mouth and that it is not uncommon to be get assaulted for running your mouth. If you can't see where people are getting that you are trying to justify what these two men did... Then maybe you should go back and re read your own words a few times.

A woman was assaulted and you posted.... Well, she may have been running her mouth...

Come one... You are intelligent. Surely you can see why people are thinking you were trying to justify it!

As for hate crimes... You are contradicting yourself. So if a person is attacked for being handicapped it is a hate crime...

Well, what is it, if a person is attacked or killed just because of their gender?

You can't have it both ways. Either they are both hate crimes or they are both not....

You choose.



for the 900th time the LAW recognizes the assault of mentally handicapped as a hate crime.

the LAW does not recognize an assault against a particular gender as a hate crime.

my "choice" has no bearing on the outcome of the future judgement of this case.

here's an example: a person with turrets-syndrome yells out an explitive, vs a regular old mentally stable jerk yelling the same explitive.

one has control over their actions, the other does not. the 2 motives will be recognized completely different in a court of law.

likewise on the morality issue: if a person with turrets-sydrome called me an as$hole, id likely react differently than some jerk deliberately trying to pick a fight with me.

neither justify my reaction. but im sure the random jerk will understand te outcome (teeth knocked out) a lot more easily than the person with mentally disabled individual.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
well according to wiki i stand corrected. gender can be classed as a hate crime along with disability.

however, based on the interpretation of the news report, i believe the focus is on the disability.



it would be more clear if we could actually hear what these guys are saying.

and if it were up to me id throw in extra charges for them filming the crime...something about that doesnt sit right with me. its serves as kind of like a "trophy" or souvenir of the event, which shows they are proud of it.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker
 


however: there is cause and effect. and if you are of stable-sound mind you can learn the cause from the effect.
do try to remember, both the cause and effect are usually floating between the ears of the criminal ... cause ~ i wanna beat someone's arse ... effect ~ you're available >>>>> which often translates to ... just plain sickening



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker

for the 900th time the LAW recognizes the assault of mentally handicapped as a hate crime.


Depends on the case, now doesn't it? Not every assault on a person is a hate crime. Right? So, they have to examine the case in full to determine if it was a hate crime or not. Not every assault on a mentally handicapped person is a hate crime

Example... A mentally handicapped person assault a mentally handicapped person....




the LAW does not recognize an assault against a particular gender as a hate crime.


So, if I hate women and I decide to go kill a woman, just for being a woman... It can't ever be classified as a hate crime? Hmm...



my "choice" has no bearing on the outcome of the future judgement of this case.


Very true. You still contradict yourself... if a person assaults a person because they hate them for being mentally handicapped it is a hate crime..But if they hate women and assault some one for being a woman it's not a hate crime...

Makes no sense. You can't have it both ways... If it is a hate crime to assault some one because you hate them... Then it is illegal to assault some one because you hate them.




here's an example: a person with turrets-syndrome yells out an explitive, vs a regular old mentally stable jerk yelling the same explitive.

one has control over their actions, the other does not. the 2 motives will be recognized completely different in a court of law.


The victim has no motive! The victim is not on trial. The person who committed the assault is.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker
well according to wiki i stand corrected. gender can be classed as a hate crime along with disability.

however, based on the interpretation of the news report, i believe the focus is on the disability.


The news report focuses on her having or not having a disability. This does not mean the court case will or will not.

Thanks for being man or woman enough to admit your mistake. A lot of people don't do that around here. So major respect points for you. For what that is worth.




it would be more clear if we could actually hear what these guys are saying.


True. All we can hear is them laughing as if it is funny. Gross huh?


and if it were up to me id throw in extra charges for them filming the crime...something about that doesnt sit right with me. its serves as kind of like a "trophy" or souvenir of the event, which shows they are proud of it.


hey, you would make as good of a judge as me! You use morals and common sense too! That's a compliment



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


I can't stomach stuff like this so I won't watch the video but I have a comment. If the woman was handicapped and they are assaulting her BECAUSE she is handicapped can this be considered a hate crime? Are the handicapped a protected minority? They should be and penalties for beating up on this woman might be much more severe in that case.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   

In crime and law, hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, social status or political affiliation.[1]

A hate crime is a legal category used to described bias-motivated violence: "assault, injury, and murder on the basis of certain personal characteristics: different appearance, different color, different nationality, different language, different religion."[2]

"Hate crime" generally refers to criminal acts that are seen to have been motivated by bias against one or more of the types above, or of their derivatives. Incidents may involve physical assault, damage to property, bullying, harassment, verbal abuse or insults, or offensive graffiti or letters (hate mail).[3]

A hate crime law is a law intended to prevent bias-motivated violence. Hate crime laws are distinct from laws against hate speech in that hate crime laws enhance the penalties associated with conduct that is already criminal under other laws, while hate speech laws criminalize speech.


to clarify, simply assaulting a woman would not be classified as a hate crime. you would have to have clear intentions that the cause of the assault were due to her gender.

likewise with disability. however its a lot easier to prove in court if the assaulter were aware of the disability before the assault (depending on the disability) which could be strongly suggested as motive.
edit on 13-10-2011 by UnrelentingLurker because: or/of



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker


to clarify, simply assaulting a woman would not be classified as a hate crime. you would have to have clear intentions that the cause or the assault were due to her gender.

likewise with disability. however its a lot easier to prove in court if the assaulter were aware of the disability before the assault (depending on the disability) which could be strongly suggested as motive.


Which is what I have been saying. You can have a hate crime against women. If I hate women and I assault a woman because I hate women, that would be a hate crime. Intent.

Same with disablities. If you hate people with disabilities and you assault a person with a disability because of your hatred, it is a hate crime.

Just assaulting some one because they are handicapped does not automatically make it a hate crime.There has to be intention. You have to have assaulted them because of the fact they are handicapped... You know?



I think you and I actually agree with each other. We just have different ways of saying the same thing, which has caused some confusion
edit on 13-10-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


i think you may be right.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker
 


Well, in that case, sorry for the confusion.

I understand exactly what you are saying as I can see you understand me as well...and I agree.

So that said.

This may be the first debate between two people who agree with each other.





edit on 13-10-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   
I'm not even going to watch the video. That kind of thing is so disgusting to me. I can't stand watching cowards do horrible things to innocent, defenseless people.

Matthew 24:10-12(KJV)
10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Yes, apparently the handicapped are protected under hate crime laws. While I generally don't agree with hate crime laws, I do think certain people should have more protections. That would include the elderly, children and mentally handicapped.

My Dad always said a society should be judged by the way they treat their weakest members. I agree.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Yes, apparently the handicapped are protected under hate crime laws. While I generally don't agree with hate crime laws, I do think certain people should have more protections. That would include the elderly, children and mentally handicapped.

My Dad always said a society should be judged by the way they treat their weakest members. I agree.


I agree also. Your dad was pretty smart. Many people do not consider that and it is an indication of the civility of the society or conversely how barbaric the society might be. Trouble is we compare ourselves to apes and are thrilled when we do not repeat their behavior. I think we should compare ourselves to something more civilized and better than we are. Maybe how we imagine God to be. Then this behavior...well I don't think it would even be considered.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


Hate crime?

I only saw a white lady get hit..

You can't be racist towards white people?



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


I have never heard of a hate crime law successfully brought against someone assaulting a white person. Rather unfortunate if you look at statistics. I guess whites just aren't as infallible as other races...

I was hoping to steer the topic away from race. I don't think color matters a whole lot here. Just a couple of punks that have never been stood up to in my opinion. Almost want to offer them plane tickets to come visit me and my friends. We weren't brought up to think 'I better not get involved'.
edit on 14-10-2011 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join