Hopefully those 4 get life in prison with no chance of parole
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Hopefully those 4 get life in prison with no chance of parole
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
The victim in this case was targeted because he was "special", ie, an easy mark. His attackers weren't as special, but they're no prize specimens either.
If you could look into their juvenile records or interview former teachers and classmates off the record, the common denominator for perps and victim alike would be "druggies", both them and very likely their parental units. No, I don't have any inside knowledge, but Mrs. Maxx has been dealing with kids just like that long enough to spot it immediately.
While there were racist slurs tossed around, I put that down to the perpetrators not being bright enough or coherent enough to come up with anything more creative. Calling it a hate crime is too easy and misses the mark. On the other hand, if an enhanced sentence means they're off the street longer, I'm with you on that. There is no fixing this lot. Their wiring is too scrambled. You know its bad when none of the parties is labeled an "honor student" by the liberal media. At least keep them out of circulation long enough that they don't reproduce and further pollute the gene pool.
To the media's credit, they did have a brief clip of someone's mama crying and screaming "She's a good girl, she wouldn't do this". A story of this nature isn't complete without that.
For those of you in favor of legalization.... this is what you get when you damage your DNA then spread it around.
Last edited by Maxx; 06-Jan-2017 at 13:33.
Its a pretty rapid period of change in anyone's life. I would advocate 10-20, parole possible pending pysch eval after 10
If the only motive, or primary motive, was hatred, then it should be considered a hate crime. If the law doesn't reflect that then the law needs to be changed.
DISCLAIMER: This egregious crime happened only two days ago and I have not followed it since I read about it yesterday. I have not watched footage of the attack, either, nor am I an expert on US law.
Have the authorities handling this case established the suspect's motivations? That's what's gonna decide how this case will be tried. Last I heard, Chicago PD are calling it a hate crime, so they must consider that the perpetrators were motivated by some kind of bias.
It's dangerous to immediately declare something as a hate crime, because that's a serious accusation. Hate crimes are categorized seperately because their victims are not random. Dylan Roof and Omar Mateen both targeted specific groups because of their biases against those groups. Their actions were hate crimes. Did the group of four assualt their victim specifically because of his race or disability? If so, then it's probably a hate crime, too.
I don't know how we should deal with these people. I don't believe they should be incarcerated indefinitely, but how can we rehabilitate them, if that is possible? They should recieve help but what should that look like?
Crimes like this one test our collective patience, because our response to them, both as individuals and as a society, says much about what we value.
I'm shocked and worried that they said 'fuck white people,' as I would have been if they had said 'fuck women,' or 'fuck black people.' If these guys were thinking along the lines of eye-for-an-eye, then they're plain wrong. That guy didn't do anything to them. Their assualt won't make America's social and racial problems any better.
Last edited by africat; 06-Jan-2017 at 20:22.
Sure, but only if we assume change is impossible. Prejudice like yours is why people are understandably pissed off. Why can't these young people change, is it because they're 'too black' or 'too poor,' 'too ghetto' to ever be considered good? Is their crime too heinous? Who are you to judge them?Originally Posted by Maxx:1420329
Keep them out of circulation long enough that they don't reproduce and further pollute the gene pool. This is an exaggeration, right? Honestly, how does that sound to you?Originally Posted by Maxx:1420329
She dindu nuffin, she was a good girl! Got it, I've heard that before. I put that down to you not being bright enough or coherent enough to come up with anything more creative.Originally Posted by Maxx:1420329
The sad thing is the system seem's to make some offender's worse.
Come out more criminal's .
I have been around disabled persons some are just like younger kids and could not comprehend being attacked some are loving persons .I feel for him I have been attacked and still Carrie the scares . I hope he heal's fast.
I feel every one lost sad there is so much hate him this hate them that .
Cant we learn to care for one another.
Mabey 300 years we will.
Last edited by foxkits; 07-Jan-2017 at 07:51.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/26/ma...bout-hate.html. I wouldn't be surprised if you hadn't read it yourself, being an interested party who has been around the block a few times.
If you haven't or for those who aren't inclined, the tl;dr (a rotten thing to do on such an involved piece of writing) is that free societies are going to have hate in them. The creation of classes protected from hate erodes that freedom and in effect infantilizes the classes it endeavors to protect. I'm mindful of what you have to say and it pulls at me but I think ultimately everyone is better served by striving for an unbiased system.
There are so many aspects to this story that I want to go over and discuss.
First off, there's the question as to whether this counts as a hate crime. From what I've read, it certainly appears to qualify as a hate crime based both on race as well as disability, though I honestly am against special classifications of hate crimes. I know this is one of the rare times I stray away from the liberal consensus. I've read what Starrunner said about them, and while I get what he's saying and generally agree with him most of the time, I just can't get behind hate crimes. Primarily because I just can't get behind judging a person's motive for a crime. I honestly don't care why you murdered someone, or raped them, or beat them. Yes, I care about intent to a certain extent. I do see a difference between a drunk driver who killed someone because they got drunk, were negligent, and killed someone that way, versus someone who killed someone in cold blood. But as long as the intent was "I know what I'm doing. I intend to do this crime, and I'm going to do it", that's all I care about. It's not so much about the hate crimes (Trust me, I have as much rage against them and people who commit these crimes. This isn't about give them weaker sentences) as much as it is me seeing it as a way for those who kill, rape, etc in cold blood, fully intending what crimes they committed, to turn around and say "Hey. I may have raped and killed that poor girl, but I didn't do it for racist reasons. I may be a murderer, but I'm not a bigot. Give me a shorter sentence than the guy who did the same crime, only while screaming the N word and "WHITE POWER!" as he shot her. I don't agree with giving the first guy a shorter sentence because it wasn't a hate crime and he didn't do it out of reasons of bigotry. He still committed the crime and deserves the maximum amount of prison time, racist or not.
Second of all, I'm glad that this story is getting the attention that it's getting. But it's certainly not unique. I know there was a story today about how a group of teenagers who committed very similar crimes to this, aren't going to face any jail time whatsoever.
Here's a link to the full story, but here's the gist if you want to click. http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/idah...h-wire-hanger/
A group of white teenagers in Idaho lured a mentally disabled black teen into a locker and then proceeded to rape the teen with a coat hanger as they all chanted racist stuff at the teenager while doing the act. One of the teens then allegedly kicked the coat hanger several times, lodging it deep into the victim's rectum.
This event took place in October 2015. The reason it was in the news a couple weeks ago is because the teens just had their trial. What was originally supposed to be life in prison, and a $50,000 fine, has been reduced to probation and community service, all so that these teens can "maintain their innocence".
The main reason I bring this crime up is because not only is it fairly similar to the original crime that this topic was created to respond to (Both were a group of teenagers, luring in, and assaulting a disabled teenager while screaming racist stuff at him), as well as compare just how the two cases have been received.
The Chicago case is being blasted all over the news. I'm hearing about this hate crime pretty much everywhere. I can't think of a place that hasn't covered it, and everyone has condemned this horrible crime, as they should. This is a vile, sick, disgusting crime and the four sick bastards that did it deserve to be locked up for a long time.
But everyone rightly outraged by the attack in Chicago should be just as outraged about what happened in Idaho. It amazes me that the judge tried to "maintain the innocence" of a group of teens who raped a disabled teen with a coat hanger, and feeling sympathy for them. Are you fucking kidding me!? Could you imagine how people would react if these 4 teenagers who assaulted the white teen in Chicago weren't given any jail time because the judge wanted to "maintain their innocence"? You would never hear the end of it (as you shouldn't because that'd be outrageous and injustice). And yet, that's exactly what happened in this very similar case. Only difference is that the races of the mentally disabled teen is swapped. Gee. I wonder if there's a problem with race in our court system?
We mainly want our prisons to be about punishment. Seeing as a means of revenge for the criminals who we lock up. Every time you hear about prisoners getting TV, or books, or eating food that isn't complete shit, people get angry. When people hear about the prisons in Norway and how they live, they lose it.
Yes, it can get frustrating to hear that the prisoners in Norway live in better conditions than many people (and that includes that terrorist who killed 77 kids, Anders Behring Breivik), but Norway focuses on rehabilitation. In prison, they mainly focus on what the person did wrong, and then work on how they can become a better person, and reintroduce them to society. And it works. Not only does Norway have far fewer people in prison compared to America (Norway has 72 per 100,000 imprisoned. America has 716 per 100,000 imprisoned).
And not only does Norway imprison far fewer people than America, but they stay out of prison. Norway has a recidivism rate of 20%, while America has a recidivism rate of 52%.
Another main reason our prison are like this is because we have private for-profit prisons. CoreCivic (formally the Corrections Corporation of America, and possibly the most evil company ever) owns the largest amount of private prisons in America. They have an occupancy guarantee in their contracts, stating that if their prisons aren't 90% full, then the government will have to take taxpayer money, and give it to CoreCivic solely because they're not making enough money because not enough people are breaking the law.
So lawmakers will come up with new laws so that more people wind up in jail so that they don't have to pay money to CoreCivic, primarily coming up with drug laws. Just make sure that they meet their quota of having enough people arrested, and given much harsher sentences than inmates in other countries. Then once in prison, they don't focus on rehabilitation, and most of the people arrested spend time around other criminals, which is basically Crime College. They get out, all they know now is crime, commit another crime, and sure enough, they're back in prison, and CoreCivic is making a profit off of it.