And people wonder why some of us chose to carry.

[wakeadrian]

In Portland, being a gay man or women doesn't really make you a minority anyway... In fact, being gay is the new cool thing. When my wife was in school, it was the "cool" thing to be.

No joke. Guys being gay and girls being Bisexual was the fad.
:huh:

And as far as not knowing what it's like to be a minority? Being white, I was the minority in high school. A Hispanic girl actually approached me and tried to start a fight with me. Just because I happened to be standing there. I had never met her before, didn't know who she was by any means. But I was white and that was apparently a problem.:nuts:

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

In Portland, being a gay man or women doesn't really make you a minority anyway... In fact, being gay is the new cool thing. When my wife was in school, it was the "cool" thing to be.

That is easy to say, but try being gay then coming home, turning and turning on the TV and seeing legislators passing laws against you, TV preachers talking about how sinful you are, politicians accusing schools of "legitimizing" your sexuality as if it was a really bad thing that should not be accepted, and seeing protestors with anti-gay signs marching around adoption agencies. Then watch a movie and see how acceptable it is for tons of anti-gay slander to be thrown around right and left and watch all the violent acts against gays that is condoned by a big portion of the population. Then have your partner get in a car accident and have the hospital refuse to let you see them. Then try to say it is not a minority.

 

[tionico]

fact is the penalties are no more severe than normal. They just make sure that crimes based on hate do not get a pass by local bigoted law enforcement.


from the Penguin


Trouble is, Mr. Penguin, this shoe fits on the other foot.... and all too well. It is not hard to imagine the reverse scenario, which is, I rather expect, the case with the cousins mentioned above by another poster. Seems the whole concept of "hate crimes" is what turned an otherwise legal instance of self-defense into a "crime" that wasn't committed ON THE BASIS OF PERCEIVED RACIALLY BASED HATE by the jury. In this instance, as can easily happen in others, a politically biased jury found guilt (the "assault") purely on the basis of a specific word alledgedly spoken by one or both of the defendants. Speaking a certain word (insert relevant perceived prejudice here) in the progress of an incident seems to have suddenly turned an act of permissible self-defense into a crime. Absent the ""hate crimes" legislation, it could not have been raised as an issue at all.

I would not want to be in, say, East Oakland, CA, and get carjacked by a pair of black guys, pull my own handgun (legally carried) and fire to protect my own life. Without the legal clout to change the venue to somewhere else, say, Sacramento, no question in my mind I'd be sent up the river for a long time for "shooting a couple of black guys", when the reality is I shot to protect my own life, and would have had they been green, purple, winged, or ten feet tall.

What you, and other hate crimes proponents, fail to understand is that such laws can, and will, be used to prosecute, and heighten the penalties against, people that otherwise would not be charged at all. And what drives this? Precisely the same sort of corruption you described in the West Virginia lynching, only reversed. In many areas there is such a heightened sensitivity crimes will be prosecuted on the basis of local prejudices, and innocent people WILL spend time behind bars. And those who would normally spend, say, a month, will then be able to be sentenced for years. I've yet to examine any proposed hate crimes laws that would not easily lend themselves to such abuse. It seems, just as with the unconstitutional "affirmative action" policies, what was an abuse against one "class" is turned about and now is an equally egregious abuse against another.

What needs to happen is for each area to elect, or hire, prosecutors and judges who will be unbiased in their work, giving no one a pass, nor wilfully choosing a larger baseball bat to be applied against certain "classes".

Another aspect of hate crimes legislation I abhor is that the defined "classes" only include certain perceived high level tension scenarios. I have witnessed for the past several years how my own local community have banded together in an attempt to break a local businessman, owner of a family run pharmacy. They have chosen not to stock a drug which causes chemical abortions. They find the use of this product contrary to their own moral standards. They have never sought to impose that view on anyone else, they simply will not become the agent through which an already conceived baby will be killed. Fine.... anyone wanting that drug and finding it not on the shelves of this establishment can walk, in less than ten minutes, to at least half a dozen other vendors who DO carry it. The violent hatred, vandalism, picketing, boycotting, bashing in the local press, even our queen threatening the pharmacy board to change the rules to her liking or she will depose and replace the board members until she gets the ruling she wants, and now court action far up the legal ladders.... is beyond believeable. It is nothing less than what we observed during the Civil Rights movement days in the 1960's. Open hatred based on another's stated principles. Let a black man eat at your lunch counter in Birmingham, 1958, come back the next day and find your building burned to the ground. But what "hate crime" category will this man fall into?


What all the proposed hate crimes laws I've ever reviewed do is simply to replace perceived hatred of one class with hatred of another class..... and instill a high level of fear by "empowering" the erstwhile hated "class". Perhaps, in times and places, blacks have been horribly treated. Fine. Now, let's pass laws to make it a super crime to do so. Now we have blacks conducting themselves so as to set up a "hate crime" by injecting the "class' issue as the basis for prosecution. Baiting white guys into street fights, then turning the tables by invoking "racially motivated". Overkill in reverse. The formerly abused "class" now becomes the new abuser. (in the above, please feel free to replace "black" with any other "class label" specifically named in the legislation). THIS is the reality of the application of such laws, and the root of why I strongly oppose them. Most are being promoted by certain special interest groups working overtime at foisting their own specific preferences upon the mainstream of society, and whinging about how they are "persecuted, and this must stop", looking to overkill measures to "protect us" when in reality turning the perceived persecution into depriving others of their own liberty of thought and conviction. By demanding their "right" to do as they choose, and aggressively promoting that in every sphere of society, the freedom of conscience of many is now being restricted.... as per the example above of the family pharmacy business. I oppose abortion on moral grounds. Fine. You don't have to. But those who aggressively promote it as a right, good, proper thing are now making criminals out of someone who chooses not to supply the means to provide abortion. I include the FACT that, within days of taking office, our current chief executive decided, without due process of law, that some of MY money (taxes) will now be used to PAY FOR and promote abortion. As if this were something right and good and proper. They can say all they want, it will never change the FACT that abortion kills an innocent child, currently residing in what was created to be the safest and most secure place on the planet. Discrimination, indeed! As is the taking of MY money to fund it.

 

[chris61182]

That is easy to say, but try being gay then coming home, turning and turning on the TV and seeing legislators passing laws against you, TV preachers talking about how sinful you are, politicians accusing schools of "legitimizing" your sexuality as if it was a really bad thing that should not be accepted, and seeing protestors with anti-gay signs marching around adoption agencies.

I don't know, that isn't really all that far off the type of attack the gun community is constantly under.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Trouble is, Mr. Penguin, this shoe fits on the other foot.... and all too well. It is not hard to imagine the reverse scenario, which is, I rather expect, the case with the cousins mentioned above by another poster. Seems the whole concept of "hate crimes" is what turned an otherwise legal instance of self-defense into a "crime" that wasn't committed ON THE BASIS OF PERCEIVED RACIALLY BASED HATE by the jury.

And just what do you base that statement upon What about the bill changes an act of self defense from a legal act to an illegal act? The answer is it does not. You are extremely mistaken in your assumptions about the bill. And once again...all laws can be misused. that does not mean they should be discarded. if that is the only argument against hate crime legislation you need to find another one.

In the case mentioned before, the attackers were obviously found to not be defending themselves. They were found to be instigating an assault or sentencing would have never been a factor. Hate crime legislation deals ONLY with sentencing and jurisdiction.

I don't know, that isn't really all that far off the type of attack the gun community is constantly under.

You can choose not to carry a gun if it offends someone. See the difference?

 

[chris61182]

You can choose not to carry a gun if it offends someone. See the difference?

I can choose to not carry but that's just hiding my tastes, I can no more change the fact that I like guns or enjoy the shooting sports than someone can change their sexual orientation. Then every day I'm bombarded with others telling me it's or even myself evil and wrong.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

I can choose to not carry but that's just hiding my tastes, I can no more change the fact that I like guns or enjoy the shooting sports than someone can change their sexual orientation. Then every day I'm bombarded with others telling me it's or even myself evil and wrong.

The angry feeling a gun lover gets in their stomach when they watch antis spewing misinformation and hatred is similar to what it feels like to be discriminated against because of your sexuality, but it is to a lesser degree. One reason is gun lovers may face being looked down upon but the seldom if ever face the daily threat and fears of violence that gays face. being discriminated against because of your stance on firearms really only affects that portion of your life. Being discriminated against because of your sexuality is an attack on nearly everything you do in your life.

So there are some similarities between the two situations...but it kind of like saying the Clackamas river and the Mississippi are the same.

 

[Trlsmn]

That is easy to say, but try being gay then coming home, turning and turning on the TV and seeing legislators passing laws against you, TV preachers talking about how sinful you are, politicians accusing schools of "legitimizing" your sexuality as if it was a really bad thing that should not be accepted, and seeing protestors with anti-gay signs marching around adoption agencies. Then watch a movie and see how acceptable it is for tons of anti-gay slander to be thrown around right and left and watch all the violent acts against gays that is condoned by a big portion of the population. Then have your partner get in a car accident and have the hospital refuse to let you see them. Then try to say it is not a minority.

Do we really need to start a gay thread here? It's not really fair to discuss one avenue of the politics of homosexuality and not be able to discuss all here.

Can I discuss the Sam Adams debacle or the recall effort? Likely not It would get shut down promptly as it is not a gun topic, well neither is this turning out to be!

I don't want to sound like a homophobe and I think that even Playboypenguin might back me up on the fact that I have discussed this with him in PM in a joking non hateful manner.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Do we really need to start a gay thread here? It's not really fair to discuss one avenue of the politics of homosexuality and not be able to discuss all here.

Can I discuss the Sam Adams debacle or the recall effort? Likely not It would get shut down promptly as it is not a gun topic, well neither is this turning out to be!

I don't want to sound like a homophobe and I think that even Playboypenguin might back me up on the fact that I have discussed this with him in PM in a joking non hateful manner.

I would never accuse you of being a homophobe...many other things...but not a homophobe. if anything I would think you have been flirting with me for quite some time now.

I almost never discuss sexuality on any forum but in this rare case it was actually relative to the topic. Self defense lead to hate crime legislation and it's effect on self defense cases ...which lead to the validity of hate crime legislation...which lead to knowing what it is like to be discriminated against...which lead to comparing the feeling of being discriminated against for owning firearms to being discriminated against for other physical traits.

 

[Trlsmn]

I would never accuse you of being a homophobe...many other things...but not a homophobe. if anything I would think you have been flirting with me for quite some time now.

Haha

I almost never discuss sexuality on any forum but in this rare case it was actually relative to the topic. Self defense lead to hate crime legislation and it's effect on self defense cases ...which lead to the validity of hate crime legislation...which lead to knowing what it is like to be discriminated against...which lead to comparing the feeling of being discriminated against for owning firearms to being discriminated against for other physical traits.

I'm realize that you too probably feel that the rules are too restrictive in the ability to discuss modern issues. It's just hard to separate some issues and on the other hand it's tough for some to deal with other issues in an Adult manner regardless of which side ones views are, so we have the situation we have here.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Haha



I'm realize that you too probably feel that the rules are too restrictive in the ability to discuss modern issues. It's just hard to separate some issues and on the other hand it's tough for some to deal with other issues in an Adult manner regardless of which side ones views are, so we have the situation we have here.

True, but in this case we are not discussing the merits of sexuality. We are merely discussing the bigotry that is present in the world regarding the topic and how it is similar to the bigotry gun owners face.

 

[Trlsmn]

True, but in this case we are not discussing the merits of sexuality. We are merely discussing the bigotry that is present in the world regarding the topic and how it is similar to the bigotry gun owners face.

I personally feel that everyone and every "group" has racism, bigotry and predjudice in them and that most are in denial.

 

[Trlsmn]

See the difference between this forum and my home forum is I am already getting a rash of humorous crap over these last few posts at my home forum and am answering them back in a humorous fashion and it is hilarious but I don't feel it would be appropriate with the rules here.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

I personally feel that everyone and every "group" has racism, bigotry and predjudice in them and that most are in denial.

True. I was raised in the southern culture of blatant and extreme prejudice and racism. I have to struggle with that quite often. The biggest difference these days is when you belong to a group that it is still okay to openly bash. That is one thing gun owners and gays both face. You cannot go on TV and say blatant discriminatory things about blacks, women, asians, hispanics or other groups but you can call gun owners and gays any heinous thing you choose.

 

[Trlsmn]

True. I was raised in the southern culture of blatant and extreme prejudice and racism. I have to struggle with that quite often. The biggest difference these days is when you belong to a group that it is still okay to openly bash. That is one thing gun owners and gays both face. You cannot go on TV and say blatant discriminatory things about blacks, women, asians, hispanics or other groups but you can call gun owners, gays and conservatives any heinous thing you choose.

Fixed!

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Fixed!

Conservative kind of deserve the backlash they are now getting for allowing neo-cons to corrupt the name...and let's not pretend that "liberal" has not been turned into a dirty word (synonymous with leftist) by the right wing talking heads for years.

 

[gunnoob75]

Conservative kind of deserve the backlash they are now getting for allowing neo-cons to corrupt the name...and let's not pretend that "liberal" has not been turned into a dirty word (synonymous with leftist) by the right wing talking heads for years.

Yeah, Republicans suck.

Democrats are much better.