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.
maybe she's completely stable and was running her mouth. thats not out of the ordinary to happen when you run your mouth.
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.
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.
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.
law recognizes the ability of the individual to comprehend his/her own motivations/actions. which is why so many murderers plead insanity.
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.
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
however: there is cause and effect. and if you are of stable-sound mind you can learn the cause from the effect.
Originally posted by UnrelentingLurker
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.