Arbery Case Outcome

[American123]

What they did to Arbury was a crime regardless of skin tone, but people have been convicted of hate crime of other minorities as well. All Im saying is hate and racism is egregrious enough its singled out as a crime, its caused a lot of harm in the world above and beyond usual motivations like greed, Im fine with them being tried for their hate.

I understand your viewpoint.

My viewpoint is that the term "hate crime" is moronic. It adds a superfluous label to crimes that are already illegal. I understand this label exists in the U.S. court of law regardless of my opinion.

I just chuckle at the notion. What if I hate everyone equally so I am not discriminating in my hate? Trying to assign additional charges based on race seems to ignore what the whole purpose of our justice system was designed for. To be as blind and impartial as possible and just examine the facts.

Facts: Man walks out of construction site who doesn't work on that site. Other men see this and get in their cars, bringing guns, chase him. Man runs, they pursue, man confronts them after being pursued multiple blocks, they shoot. Man dies.

Was the shooting in self defense? No
Was the shooting to stop the man from committing a violent felony? No
Even if the man had stolen something from the job site would they have lawfully been able to shoot the man over it? No

Seems like some form of murder or manslaughter depending on how it's argued.

Pretty clear cut case there unless there is a law in that state that says otherwise.

Where I see focusing on race being helpful is fanning the flames of racial prejudice, getting news media more viewers and sowing deeper seeds of racial division in this country. This has been happening in earnest since 2008 and we'll be lucky if it doesn't get worse because telling people they are oppressed and they can't do anything to help themselves and it's whitey's fault really only has a few outcomes and none of them pleasant.

 

[Koda]

But that shouldn't be. Those are emotions, and common sense, no matter how uncommon it actually is, reveals that you can't legislate morality.

It is okay to hate on racists. I am not a big fan, either. But I recognize I can't change what they think. No one can. The hate crime trend is going in the wrong direction in my opinion. It is just as bad to me as red flag laws. I get where the other side is coming from, but I totally disagree. Justice needs to be blind.

We cant change what people think but we can influence what they think. My guess is thats part of the motivation why hate crimes were codified. People arent born racists, they have to be taught and maybe somewhere out there is a young person being taught to hate others based on race and wondering why if its so right to think that way the rest of the world calls it a crime, hopefully they listen to the worlds influence. I realize there is a balance in all things so I understand and respect others opinions such as yours, but hate crimes like racism isn't something Im going to argue against, that's just me.

 

[Xaevian]

We cant change what people think but we can influence what they think. My guess is thats part of the motivation why hate crimes were codified. People arent born racists, they have to be taught and maybe somewhere out there is a young person being taught to hate others based on race and wondering why if its so right to think that way the rest of the world calls it a crime, hopefully they listen to the worlds influence. I realize there is a balance in all things so I understand and respect others opinions such as yours, but hate crimes like racism isn't something Im going to argue against, that's just me.

No worries, my friend. I respect your opinion, as I do @Kruel J's. I embrace diversity, the world needs all kinds. You'd still be welcome to share venison at my table, as long as you don't mind it served Asian style.

 

[Cavedweller]

Im all for the federal trial, clearly there was a racial element to this case and justice needs to be served on that regardless of their state issued life sentences.

Hogwash. They can't serve more time than life plus X years without the possiblilty of parole. Another trial is a waste of public money and resources that could better be used elsewhere. This is just political theater.

We cant change what people think but we can influence what they think. My guess is thats part of the motivation why hate crimes were codified.

Wrong. So called "hate crime" legislation was established so that the federal government could step in and prosecute in cases where the feds thought that local and/or state governments failed in their duty to administer justice or in which their was a miscarriage of justice. That certainly does not apply in this case. Justice has been done. Any further court proceedings are a waste of public resources.

ETA: The creation of "hate crimes" allowed the federal government to prosecute where local jurisdictions failed to get a conviction or imposed what the feds considered too lenient a penalty without violating the constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy.

 

[American123]

We cant change what people think but we can influence what they think. My guess is thats part of the motivation why hate crimes were codified. People arent born racists, they have to be taught and maybe somewhere out there is a young person being taught to hate others based on race and wondering why if its so right to think that way the rest of the world calls it a crime, hopefully they listen to the worlds influence. I realize there is a balance in all things so I understand and respect others opinions such as yours, but hate crimes like racism isn't something Im going to argue against, that's just me.

Morality and the law really have nothing to do with each other though. The law is simply a code by which a society operates and that code is often derived by a mutually agreed upon series of expectations by those in society.

Morality - what is right and wrong and how that is determined is different. There are many different opinions on what is moral behavior. This country can't agree on a lot of it. There are laws on the books today trying to codify what is "right" and what is "wrong" and there are millions of people on either side of that that believe their version is either upheld or attacked.

This is where I see it as highly problematic for the government to try and legislate morality through court action. Because if the court can legislate morality they can legislate pretty much anything they want.

Like force people to give up their religious beliefs if they are a cake decorator or a florist - oh wait, that already happened.

 

[Koda]

Morality and the law really have nothing to do with each other though. The law is simply a code by which a society operates and that code is often derived by a mutually agreed upon series of expectations by those in society.

well it appears hate is egregious enough society decided to make it a crime. I understand where your coming from so hopefully its the only moral being legislated, or attempted to... we cant really legislate morals in a persons heart.... I just don't have much sympathy for those convicted of hate crimes is all. We can debate the merits of this but its not anything I'm going to worry about repealing.

 

[American123]

well it appears hate is egregious enough society decided to make it a crime. I understand where your coming from so hopefully its the only moral being legislated, or attempted to... we cant really legislate morals in a persons heart.... I just don't have much sympathy for those convicted of hate crimes is all. We can debate the merits of this but its not anything I'm going to worry about repealing.

My disdain for Hate Crime laws is more about my loathing of subjective application of laws in general. Regardless, good chat.

 

[GWS]

Hard not to see a racial motivation but I do not see the point of a hate crime trial for a couple of dudes who are serving life without parole - if convicted do their corpses get 10 years in federal prison? I get the performative nature of it all but that's about it.

Moved to a smaller cell without a view. And no fish on Fridays.

Good question. These guys deserved, AT LEAST, the sentences they got. But going after a hate crime now? Makes me think of the Trump impeachment(s) witch-hunt. TWICE!

Its for the spectacle. So a variety of pundits and politicians can get face time on television decrying these guys and showing how morally superior and woke they are.
Its all a show, for the theater

 

[Mikej]

Sorry to say, but racism, religious persecution, gender discrimination have been deeply embedded in the human race since the beginning of time. It will never be totally eliminated. And it is comes from all sides and from all of the groups of people, not just from one. However, it seems that today, some are trying to fan the flames and are wiping out years of progress made for political or ideological reasons. Sad.

This. ^^ I've been saying something similar for a long time. You can't incarcerate, beat or torture racism out of a persons soul. Being? mentality?

Dammit! I spend a few days working my arse off for The Man and I miss all the troll bannination of FartJeff fun. This is getting really old...

I was thrilled to catch the show from the beginning! Most times I don't catch it until there's anything but the heavy smoke left and the coals are cooling.

Some motivations are more egregious than others I'm fine with hate and racism being called out separately as a crime within itself.

Who gets to call out racism? Am I allowed to call out racism when I see it? How about Kamala Harris? Donald Trump? Chris Cuomo? Should the U.S. have a special investigators office that sends carefully picked, registered democrats/republicans? Independents? To determine when racism has occurred? Or should this board have people representing all races and political affiliations? Would ten members do? Five? Forty? People that earn less than $$$ a year, More than $$$ a year. Married people only? A mix of married and single people? Straight, gay, trans?

Who should be the people that can call out racism?

well it appears hate is egregious enough society decided to make it a crime.

I'm society. I didn't have anything to say about it? Was there a mailer and I missed it? Did you get it?

This is where my brain get twisted.

 

[bbbass]

This. ^^ I've been saying something similar for a long time. You can't incarcerate, beat or torture racism out of a persons soul. Being? mentality?

I was thrilled to catch the show from the beginning! Most times I don't catch it until there's anything but the heavy smoke left and the coals are cooling.


Who gets to call out racism? Am I allowed to call out racism when I see it? How about Kamala Harris? Donald Trump? Chris Cuomo? Should the U.S. have a special investigators office that sends carefully picked, registered democrats/republicans? Independents? To determine when racism has occurred? Or should this board have people representing all races and political affiliations? Would ten members do? Five? Forty? People that earn less than $$$ a year, More than $$$ a year. Married people only? A mix of married and single people? Straight, gay, trans?

Who should be the people that can call out racism?

I'm society. I didn't have anything to say about it? Was there a mailer and I missed it? Did you get it?

This is where my brain get twisted.

Yep, making emotions and thought a crime is obviously unworkable and extremely undesireable to any clear thinking person who loves freedom and liberty. Every country that has implemented such laws has been a totalitarian regime that uses it as an excuse to gulag people. Not good at all. We don't want to go there!!

Haven't we watched movies about this??? "Minority Report" comes to mind. Stalin comes to mind. Chairman Mao comes to mind. Those are NOT countries I want to live in.

 

[Hueco]

Moved to a smaller cell without a view. And no fish on Fridays.

Good question. These guys deserved, AT LEAST, the sentences they got. But going after a hate crime now? Makes me think of the Trump impeachment(s) witch-hunt. TWICE!

We use the nationally reported data to inform our opinions, don't we? If the FBI crime data shows zero race based crimes, wouldn't we call that damning evidence of a good year?

My opinion is that this was racially motivated. But, my opinion is not the fact and the only thing that matters as we move into tomorrow and look back on yesterday are the facts - and those facts need to be established, written, and stored for the future.

If the hate crime aspect of this doesn't go to trial, it effectively disappears. In 5 years, we'll be looking back at trend lines and making conclusions from data sets missing data. That's a problem.

 

[nobamaplease]

We use the nationally reported data to inform our opinions, don't we? If the FBI crime data shows zero race based crimes, wouldn't we call that damning evidence of a good year?

My opinion is that this was racially motivated. But, my opinion is not the fact and the only thing that matters as we move into tomorrow and look back on yesterday are the facts - and those facts need to be established, written, and stored for the future.

If the hate crime aspect of this doesn't go to trial, it effectively disappears. In 5 years, we'll be looking back at trend lines and making conclusions from data sets missing data. That's a problem.

History shows "Hate crime" is mostly persecuted against one race - whites, so that means only one race acts violently against all others, right?

People arent born racists, they have to be taught and maybe somewhere out there is a young person being taught to hate others based on race and wondering why if its so right to think that way the rest of the world calls it a crime, hopefully they listen to the worlds influence.

Teaching youngsters how to hate is done right here and now by our own gov, media, schools and the rest of the world.
The utopian society is a great idea, lots have tried, and it does start with youngsters, but we, as humans, are not there yet.

Another guilty verdict = more time in jail? and racism is live and well = more hate.

 

[Hueco]

History shows "Hate crime" is mostly persecuted against one race - whites, so that means only one race acts violently against all others, right?

Are you incapable of reading data, deductive reasoning, or simply trying to troll?

Because that comment, I'm going with…

 

[Mikej]

Are you incapable of reading data, deductive reasoning, or simply trying to troll?

When people of color commit crimes against Caucasians that's a "Hate Crime' isn't it? Who decides whether it is or isn't?


It might best that moderators don't get into some threads calling out members for being incapable reading and reasoning.

 

[Xaevian]

I'm still waiting for Jussie Smollett to be charged with a hate crime. He hired some body builders to assault a gay black man. Where are the federal charges in that case? Seems pretty slam dunk to me.

 

[RVTECH]

I'm still waiting for Jussie Smollett to be charged with a hate crime. He hired some body builders to assault a gay black man. Where are the federal charges in that case? Seems pretty slam dunk to me.

Ditto this! The fact he premeditated it should be unquestioned evidence of hate.

 

[nobamaplease]

Are you incapable of reading data, deductive reasoning, or simply trying to troll?

Because that comment, I'm going with…

A Crime is a crime, history of hate crime will show majority of those convicted of hate crime are whites against blacks. does that say, as you pointed out about history, whites are racist most of the time and not other races?
BTW, I'm in the oppressed class (not white).
I've been on this site for a long time, longer than most! No trolling here!

A second trial is not needed IMHO

 

[nobamaplease]

We use the nationally reported data to inform our opinions, don't we? If the FBI crime data shows zero race based crimes, wouldn't we call that damning evidence of a good year?

My opinion is that this was racially motivated. But, my opinion is not the fact and the only thing that matters as we move into tomorrow and look back on yesterday are the facts - and those facts need to be established, written, and stored for the future.

If the hate crime aspect of this doesn't go to trial, it effectively disappears. In 5 years, we'll be looking back at trend lines and making conclusions from data sets missing data. That's a problem.

The post I've made is all based on your remark about the "Trend Lines" which I think is not accurate.
Jessie Smollett is just one example of many

 

[bbbass]

IMO,

ALL murder is a "hate" crime. Adding race/ethnicity/gender/sexID/etc to a new definition of crime was a mistake that further polarizes peoples.

 

[mhayd93]

We use the nationally reported data to inform our opinions, don't we? If the FBI crime data shows zero race based crimes, wouldn't we call that damning evidence of a good year?

My opinion is that this was racially motivated. But, my opinion is not the fact and the only thing that matters as we move into tomorrow and look back on yesterday are the facts - and those facts need to be established, written, and stored for the future.

If the hate crime aspect of this doesn't go to trial, it effectively disappears. In 5 years, we'll be looking back at trend lines and making conclusions from data sets missing data. That's a problem.

If that data is relevant to the case, then it should come out/exist in that trial, not a separate one. The court system does not exist to create data sets and analytical talking points; this isn't Moneyball.

The purpose is to administer Justice.
That has already been done, so why double jeopardize these people and try them on their intent and feelings behind the actual crime?