Woman accused of hate crime against Muslim

They won't be giving her jail time for pulling a scarf off of another persons head.

They will be giving her the jail time for what she was thinking.

That's the scary part.

community service at a mosque would only make her despise muslims more, which would make it counter-productive.

She's only just been charged, not convicted, not sentenced. When that time comes, (presuming she is found guilty) I suspect that she will get probation and service time. She won't see 3 years in prison...

reply to post by badgerprints


That's idiotic.

If I intentionally shoot someone, that is a different crime than if they get hit by my bullet on accident. What's the difference? The difference is what I am thinking. However, I somehow doubt that you would advocate the erasure of the differences between first degree murder and negligent manslaughter.

Once again, another person who only wants to abolish motive when that motive is bigotry.

reply to post by plumranch


This was an act of personal violence, which she chose to execute either from hatred or her own inability to control her emotions or most likely both. And you are blaming congress? ???? That's quite a leap. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Wonder what else this woman hates? Does she think she can go around attacking anyone even remotely associated with groups she doesn't like?

I'm not exactly thrilled with the way things are going either. But wrong is wrong. We can't permit unstable redneck women or anybody else going around attacking people in the market. You guys know that. We're better than that.


Edit to add: but this is something I probably would not have stumbled accross on my own, so thanks for posting it.

[edit on 11/18/0909 by ladyinwaiting]

reply to post by ladyinwaiting

And you are blaming congress? ????

Yep, any law that makes it a felony with jail time for removing a scarf no matter what the motive is wacko IMHO. I know a LOT of people would agree with me.

I'm not justifying what the lady did in any way. Stupid action, but the punishment is just as ridiculous esp in this case.

Since she pulled the scarf off a Muslim, why, of course she deserves to go to jail for a hate crime!!!

Major Hasan will get a $50 fine for loitering, tho. No hate crime committed by him!

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by Snarf

 

Not at all. If this chick had yanked the scarf off a white woman because it was a white woman, she would be facing the same charges. if the roles had been reversed and the motive the same, the charges would be the same.

I'm curious, Snarf. Why do so many people such as yourself believe that these are the only times that motive should not be a factor in sentencing? It's very strange that so many people have no problem with a criminal's motive being factored into the sentence they're given unless that motive happens to be bigotry. So, explain to me - why is it you think bigotry should be the only motive in a crime that gets no consideration?

You know that what you're saying is so stupid I don't even know where to begin. You're sentence:

"So If this chick had yanked the scarf off a white woman because it was a white woman, she would be facing the same charges. "

And what charge would that be? The assault charge for yanking off the scarf, okay, but what about the hate crime? How do you justify that? IF the other woman called the white woman "white trash" would that qualify as a hate crime? If you said yes, how do you know that she didn't mean the term "white trash" as a playful jab at the other person? The burden of proof is on you, the prosecutor - but to prove what?

The problem with justifying ANY hate crime is that one or more people are trying to judge what is in another person's heart & mind by their actions. Without a mind-reading device how do you do that? Ever hear of George Orwell's "1984" and the "Thought Police"? Doesn't the very existence of a "Hate Crimes" law strike you a bit as a large step toward one of the very things Orwell was trying to warn people about?

What are the clear-cut guidelines for determining whether someone is a hater or not? And they have to apply to EVERYONE, equally, in all circumstances in order to be enforced or else the high court would certainly strike them down.

reply to post by plumranch


You are deliberately minimizing what happened. Suppose someone came up to you, appeared angry, and knocked your hat off your head. You know darn well you would be angry, and feel assaulted, because you would have been! And to make it worse, what if it was a stranger in a public place? An angry stranger?

The muslim woman was assaulted. This was an assault. You don't aggressively touch a stranger, or snatch them, or their clothing. Oh, what am I saying? I know you know this!

What Valerie, or whoever, did was wrong and now she must accept the consequences. It's nobody's fault but her own.

The key word is ''COULD''.
Wich is the maximum penalty for this crime.

Originally posted by badgerprints
They won't be giving her jail time for pulling a scarf off of another persons head.

They will be giving her the jail time for what she was thinking.

That's the scary part.

Exactly.

Political Correctness is nothing more than a PC name for the thought police.

well and whats the next step?? will we thrown in prison for knocking of a baseballcap of someones head because he is of the opposite baseball team?
why do these religieous figures allways find them self more important then others.. stating your opinion about a religion is not a hate crime its a point of reference in a hotboiled discussion, but not a hate crime. even then the action of muslim terrorist act at ford Hood a some days before have to be taken in account because the person who pulled the scarf could have lost someone close to that someones heart.

I agree with everyone as I did that the sentence is too much
But i disagree with the fact that a hate crime is the same as a crime.

the thing with hate crime is that it must be controlled in a different fashion than normal crimes because IT can and will spread like wildfire.

Originally posted by badgerprints
They won't be giving her jail time for pulling a scarf off of another persons head.

They will be giving her the jail time for what she was thinking.
That's the scary part.

That can apply to anything
from a dissident throwing a molotov cocktail at riot police to someone bombing an abortion clinic.

reply to post by ladyinwaiting

This was an assault. You don't aggressively touch a stranger, or snatch them, or their clothing. Oh, what am I saying? I know you know this!

It is assault for a politically incorrect reason that resulted in no more than a statement (at a time when the entire country was pretty fired up), that COULD result in jail time and loss of voting rights and firearm ownership and who knows what all else. Any law that would cause all that needs to be reexamined because it makes no sense to an awfully lot of people!

reply to post by plumranch


What statement?
what she said before pulling the sarf?

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by plumranch

 

You are deliberately minimizing what happened. Suppose someone came up to you, appeared angry, and knocked your hat off your head. You know darn well you would be angry, and feel assaulted, because you would have been! And to make it worse, what if it was a stranger in a public place? An angry stranger?

And the point of this thread is that likely nothing would be done against the person knocking of his hat - because (I'm assuming) the person you're using in this example is not a muslim.

The muslim woman was assaulted. This was an assault. You don't aggressively touch a stranger, or snatch them, or their clothing. Oh, what am I saying? I know you know this!

We know the law says this, but we're talking about the politically correct way the law gets applied.

what about the equal protection clause?

What Valerie, or whoever, did was wrong and now she must accept the consequences. It's nobody's fault but her own.

I haven't seen one post arguing that what the woman did was not wrong and that it was not her own fault.

It's the harshness of the way the law is being applied because the victim is a muslim.

Last, how many posts have we seen on ATS defending muslims that do much worse than pulling off head scarfs and asking us all not to rush to judgement, etc.?

So, aren't a lot of members and even mods on this thread now rushing to judgement?

Deny hypocrisy.

I don't know why this is even an issue.
So a couple of women in a grocery store had a spat.
The white lady was a jerk.
The Muslim should just move on.. It is probably not the first time she has been the target of disparagement and it will not be the last.
By making an issue of it she makes it worse for herself and all other Muslims.
This incident will not play well with the masses.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


My point was that the punishment should be the same regardless of the religion of the victim.

So what is a fair punishment for pulling someone's head scarf?

It's not like the victim was punched kicked or set on fire. You also don't know if the accused actually said anything to the victim.

It's entirely possible that the scarf was inadvertently pulled.

Originally posted by Wildbob77


It's entirely possible that the scarf was inadvertently pulled.

And the muslim woman decided to try and make a big deal out of it because she saw the chance to make a news splash. Do we know all the details? Innocent until proven guilty?

The point of my previous post exactly.

Now, who's rushing to judgment???????

[edit on 11/18/2009 by centurion1211]

Yes there should be a hate crimes bill. And I'd be really surprised if this woman got the maximum allowable. These maximums are so you have the latitude to address more damaging actions.