How can "attempting to break a law" be illegal? - Page 2

RMNIXON · 10-10-2006, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

not necessarily...if it's a crime on a minority then it's a hate crime. If I kick a black guy it's a hate crime. If I kick a jew it's a hate crime. If I kick a gay it's a hate crime. Interesting thing is they can kick me all they want and never get charged.

It's like the law is one way...kind of a downhill thing...like it's only a hate crime if the recipient is a "lesser" minority. I wonder what would happen if a straight black jew kicked another gay black jew and screamed "FAG!" when doing it...would it be a hate crime?

You are not writing fiction! Some years ago a guy got mugged and beaten here in Los Angeles. Turns out he was Gay and had left a Gay establishment minutes before. So they start investigating a "Hate Crime." Well they picked up three young black men who were questioned seperately and confessed. They just wanted to beat up a rich white guy and take his money. The "Hate Crime" investigation was queitly dropped by the police and got a small mention in the press. If it was another hit on a Gay man it would have been front page on the LA Times!

7960 · 10-11-2006, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

You are not writing fiction!

Why do people think I'm always making this shit up?

OF COURSE it's not fiction. It happens too often. A guy gets beaten up and he happens to be gay. The prosecutor can get 2 feathers with one trial if he charges it as a hate crime, even if the people who beat him up didn't know he was gay. A black guy is an asshole and gets in a fight. A white guy beats him severely. The prosecutor can get 2 feathers with one trial if he charges it as a hate crime, even though the white guy didn't give a shit that the other guy was black. A jewish guy is a prick and gets in a fight. A black guy beats him severely. The prosecutor can get 2 feathers with one trial if he charges it as a hate crime, even though the black guy didn't give a shit that the other guy was jewish.

It's bullshit.

Thorgrim · 10-11-2006, 01:20 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

Why do people think I'm always making this shit up?

OF COURSE it's not fiction. It happens too often. A guy gets beaten up and he happens to be gay. The prosecutor can get 2 feathers with one trial if he charges it as a hate crime, even if the people who beat him up didn't know he was gay. A black guy is an asshole and gets in a fight. A white guy beats him severely. The prosecutor can get 2 feathers with one trial if he charges it as a hate crime, even though the white guy didn't give a shit that the other guy was black. A jewish guy is a prick and gets in a fight. A black guy beats him severely. The prosecutor can get 2 feathers with one trial if he charges it as a hate crime, even though the black guy didn't give a shit that the other guy was jewish.

It's bullshit.

You know, with how angry you seem about how unfair the system treats whites who beat up on gay people, by adding some months to their sentence, you'd think you'd have a little concern about the horrible prison system they put in...and for that small bar fight they spend every day getting raped for years...oddly enough I don't see you ranting about that

7960 · 10-11-2006, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

You know, with how angry you seem about how unfair the system treats whites who beat up on gay people, by adding some months to their sentence, you'd think you'd have a little concern about the horrible prison system they put in...and for that small bar fight they spend every day getting raped for years...oddly enough I don't see you ranting about that

i had "a guy" beating up "a gay guy" ... was "a guy" white? Let's continue on to see my next post where:

i had a "white" guy beating up a black guy
.......a "black" guy beating up a jewish guy

sounds pretty equal opportunity to me.

But if you were talking about my first post (even though you quoted the 2nd) what I said was "It's like the law is one way...kind of a downhill thing...like it's only a hate crime if the recipient is a 'lesser' minority." I don't remember writing anything about the state of our prisons, but that was a nice attempt (not) to derail the converstation about attempting to break a law and hate crime

My question basically came down to this... if I kick a black guy and yell nigger then it's a hate crime. If a black guy kicks me and yells cracka then it's not a hate crime. Why?

If you want to discuss the state of prisons today I suggest you start a thread about it. Otherwise cut the shit with your extremely poor attempt to turn this back on me and get off the topic.

Thorgrim · 10-11-2006, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

i had "a guy" beating up "a gay guy" ... was "a guy" white? Let's continue on to see my next post where:

i had a "white" guy beating up a black guy
.......a "black" guy beating up a jewish guy

sounds pretty equal opportunity to me.

But if you were talking about my first post (even though you quoted the 2nd) what I said was "It's like the law is one way...kind of a downhill thing...like it's only a hate crime if the recipient is a 'lesser' minority." I don't remember writing anything about the state of our prisons, but that was a nice attempt (not) to derail the converstation about attempting to break a law and hate crime

My question basically came down to this... if I kick a black guy and yell nigger then it's a hate crime. If a black guy kicks me and yells cracka then it's not a hate crime. Why?

If you want to discuss the state of prisons today I suggest you start a thread about it. Otherwise cut the shit with your extremely poor attempt to turn this back on me and get off the topic.

This thread is talking about breaking a law without actually breaking a law...there are hate crime laws, everyone knows that, thats derailing the thread

thomez · 10-11-2006, 12:08 PM

I've always wondered that too. But then if someone just plans to do something, like bomb a building, and you find out and arrest them, what else would you charge them with?

7960 · 10-11-2006, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

This thread is talking about breaking a law without actually breaking a law...there are hate crime laws, everyone knows that, thats derailing the thread

I answered someone else's post about hate crimes and that certainly applies. The thread is about intent, and determining if I kicked someone because I hate him or if I kicked him because he's black applies directly to that.

But then you tip your troll hand with this shit...

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

you don't, you send them to cuba and torture and rape them

Really............nevermind.

JaJae · 10-11-2006, 02:34 PM

Let's keep this on focus here. Thorgrim, knock it off please.

lew · 10-11-2006, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

I've always wondered that too. But then if someone just plans to do something, like bomb a building, and you find out and arrest them, what else would you charge them with?

I don't know.

It just seems sort of "thought police" to me if people are arrested for not breaking any crime. I understand that legally, attempting to break a law is a crime, but I'm wondering why? If I'm driving to a building, with bombing equipment, and plans to blow up the building, but get pulled over, I shouldn't be arrested for attempting to blow up the building. I should be given a ticket for whatever I was doing that resulted in me being pulled over.

thomez · 10-11-2006, 04:00 PM

so I can point a gun at someone from my yard, but it wouldn't be a crime til I pulled the trigger?

this doesn't bode well for crime prevention... at all

I dunno bout this one lew

lew · 10-11-2006, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

so I can point a gun at someone from my yard, but it wouldn't be a crime til I pulled the trigger?

this doesn't bode well for crime prevention... at all

I dunno bout this one lew

That's not a crime now, is it? I can point a gun at someone from my property I believe. But dunno. But if it's illegal, why should it be?

thomez · 10-11-2006, 04:10 PM

I dunno if it is or isn't illegal, but I know it would get you shot by the police

you have to have a means to procecute foiled plots and planned illegality IMO...

the "wait til they do it then arrest them for breaking the law" approach simply cannot be the only way to procecute crime...

it's a fuzzy grey area

lew · 10-11-2006, 04:13 PM

So, if we see Mexicans coming towards the border, should we arrest them? Even if they haven't crossed the border yet? Because, you know, it looked like they were going to break a law.

thomez · 10-11-2006, 04:21 PM

I think it really depends on the crime going to be committed. Are you suggesting, for example, we could not have arrested the 9/11 terrorists if we figured it all out on 9/10? Sounds pretty ridiculous.

Some crimes will need an ability to arrest for prevention, some crimes will use the punishment after it is committed to deter it from being committed at all.

lew · 10-11-2006, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

I think it really depends on the crime going to be committed. Are you suggesting, for example, we could not have arrested the 9/11 terrorists if we figured it all out on 9/10? Sounds pretty ridiculous.

Some crimes will need an ability to arrest for prevention, some crimes will use the punishment after it is committed to deter it from being committed at all.

I don't know.

If they hadn't actually had committed any crime, what could they have been arrested for?

7960 · 10-11-2006, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by lew

So, if we see Mexicans coming towards the border, should we arrest them? Even if they haven't crossed the border yet? Because, you know, it looked like they were going to break a law.

it is not illegal to approach the border from the mexican side, it is illegal to cross it

it is not illegal to own a gun, it is illegal to point it at someone after indicating you mean to do them harm

it it not illegal to own a bat, it is illegal to swing it at someone with the intent to hit them

it is not illegal to own a car, it is illegal to drive it in such a way that you mean to hurt someone

............ are these descriptions really necessary?

7960 · 10-11-2006, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by lew

I don't know.

If they hadn't actually had committed any crime, what could they have been arrested for?

if they hadn't died in the act what would they have been charged with?

add "attempting to..." to the front of that. That's what they'd be charged with. This question is asinine and the fact that it's even being asked is high on the list of reasons why libertarians aren't taken seriously.

Phantom · 10-11-2006, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by lew

I don't know.

If they hadn't actually had committed any crime, what could they have been arrested for?

Conspiracy to commit murder is the crime

If we stop a group of hijackers at the airport with guns, I think it's a good idea that we arrest them for the harm they intended to committ rather than let them go and try again tomorrow.

lew · 10-11-2006, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

if they hadn't died in the act what would they have been charged with?

add "attempting to..." to the front of that. That's what they'd be charged with. This question is asinine and the fact that it's even being asked is high on the list of reasons why libertarians aren't taken seriously.

What does any of this have to do with my own beliefs or libertarian beliefs in general?

I'm merely pondering something philosophically, not realistically.

If you don't want to discuss this, get the fuck out of my thread.