Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
KNOCK OUT ASSHOLE
#21
I see what your saying, apparently you have to say your targeting an individual based on their membership in whatever protected group they are in.
Unless your a white guy driving around capping colored folks, then the media gets to decide what your guilty of.
If your a minority and driving around capping white folks, as long as you don't say "Die Honkey Die, then your just misunderstood, disadvantaged and its not your fault.
Reply
#22
If your post above is supposed reflect what you got me to be saying, I don't think you got what I was saying at all, Six.

I'm talking about evidence, and your ignoring that key factor, IMO.

Were the black knock out artists so generous as Barrett in handing over what could translate into a taped hate crime confession to authorities? Any records in evidence of any of them saying, "I'm going to knock out a white person?" Any confessions to an officer by any of the black suspects that they were specifically out to get whitey? Any witnesses coming forward to say that the black suspects talked about or planned knocking out white people specifically. If there are, I haven't seen/heard of them.

If I haven't seen/heard of any such evidence because it doesn't in fact exist, it's apples to oranges to compare their criminal charges with Barrett's criminal charges. Even if people, including prosecutors, think that some of the black suspects probably targeted white people specifically, without the kind of evidence that they have against Barrett specifically targeting a black man, there's no probable cause to charge the black suspects with hate crimes.

I, btw, don't disagree that there are inequities between how crimes are handled based on race; by the courts and the media sometimes. But, thus far in this thread, I've been focused on the Barrett case. If your research uncovers any of that evidence I mentioned against the black suspects who knocked out white people, then I too will want to know why the hell only Barrett, the white man, got charged with a hate crime when the others did not. At present, I don't find the difference in the charges against Barrett as compared to the others surprising, confusing, or discriminatory towards the white suspect - based on known evidence.

Doesn't matter if you don't want to look at it from the legal perspective, Six. I sense that it's more a personal issue for you and I respect that. Just clarifying that what you said you got from me in no way reflects a re-iteration or reworded statement of my thoughts or words on the subject.
Reply
#23
No HOTD, I didn't misunderstand you, I do understand the legalities, I was being a smartass about what I actually see happening.
If your white and do something stupid to a black person you are automatically accused of being racist regardless of your stated motives.
The same is not the same if your black
I don't know if the expectations from the public at large are different or what, its just what I see.
Legally I understand that the white guy is an asshole and needs to go away for a long time.
All the vids I have seen are black kids assaulting white people, IMO it doesn't make them any less an asshole than the white guy.
The difference is the legal evidence, maybe its there maybe not, but I would be surprised if its not.
Reply
#24
(12-31-2013, 04:11 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: No HOTD, I didn't misunderstand you, I do understand the legalities, I was being a smartass about what I actually see happening.

Sorry, Six. Smiley_emoticons_bussi Sometimes I miss nuances.

All of these knock out perps are assholes to the nth degree, regardless of color. I agree.

Based on your posts in reference to different races and race relations and such since I've been at Mock, I rarely ever share your views on the subject in general or in specific cases.

But, I usually do at least understand where you're coming from most of the time; this is one of them.

Will be interesting to hear more about the evidence in the Barrett case in future hearings and at trial.

Hope you have a great New Year's celebration, Six.
Reply
#25
(12-31-2013, 01:55 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: If your a minority and driving around capping white folks, as long as you don't say "Die Honkey Die, then your just misunderstood, disadvantaged and its not your fault.

Nobody is saying that you fucking mong.

Jesus Christ.

If a black guy filmed himself saying “I'm going out and I'm deliberately going to knock out a fucking old cracker white bread motherfucker”. Guess what? He would be done for a hate crime! Its not rocket science.
We need to punish the French, ignore the Germans and forgive the Russians - Condoleezza Rice.
Reply
#26
Barrett's lawyer to challenge "hate crime" constitutionality; seeks to have client charged at the state level

George Parnham, a lawyer for Barrett, said in an interview that he planned to challenge the constitutionality of the hate crimes statute. He said it was "absolutely" inappropriate for the feds to get involved in this case, and that this type of alleged assault should have been charged under existing Texas law. His client could face up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 if convicted on the federal level.
=============================================

Did some quick research; Texas did pass state "hate crime" laws in 2001, but only 10 defendants have been charged with a hate crime in over a decade in Texas, and only one case has gone to jury. Other states have prosecuted many more under state hate crime laws, but still it's uncommon.

Determining that a crime was committed based on bias or hate towards the victim-type is very difficult without tangible proof (few defendants record statements like Barrett did or like Neo-nazis have in the past).

I get the feeling Texas LE would have charged Barrett with "assault" without the "hate crime" designation at the local level, but the feds intervened and kicked it up. JMO on that.

Ref: http://www.statesman.com/news/news/speci...ect/nRjsf/
Reply
#27
Maybe, but it seems to me it would have been easy enough to make the case for hate that they would use it, if nothing else than to use it as leverage for sentencing.
Reply
#28
Caption this time..............

[Image: eric_holder-300x30034.jpg]
You couldn't get a clue during the clue mating season in a field full of horny clues if you smeared your body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance.
Reply
#29
I found this article today, pretty much makes the point that Black on Black crime doesn't matter, black on white crime doesn't matter, but let one ignorant ass white asshole assault a black man and then brag about it....


Anyway, here is the article

http://guardianlv.com/2013/12/hate-crime...ut-racism/

Hate Crime Charge For Texas Man Who Proves a Theory About Racism [Correction]
Added by Graham Noble on December 27, 2013.

Is the knockout game a hate crime or is it not?

CORRECTION: The Texas man involved in this incident was 27 years old. Although the article states this fact, the man was wrongly described throughout as a “teen.” The word has now been taken out with apologies from the writer. The point of the editorial, however, remains unchanged. The original article, with the correction, appears below.

A Texas man decided to prove a theory about the infamous “knockout game” and is now facing a hate crime charge. The brave mainstream media – in its unrelenting quest to ignore the truth – has said almost nothing about the game that has now caught on in many areas of the country. The game involves one or, usually, more youths attacking a random victim with the objective of knocking them out with one punch.

The media has largely declined to report on the game for one simple reason; in almost every case, the perpetrators have been black and the victims white or Hispanic – and, in one or two cases, orthodox Jews. This, of course, does not fit the narrative of the liberal media. So long as the nation continues to have to tolerate a biracial President posing as a black man, the media groupies have to keep stoking the idea that racism is a major problem in this country so that they can continue to accuse anyone who criticizes this President of being racist.

Suddenly, a white Texas man hits a black man and the story is one of the biggest of the day; suddenly, we are hearing about hate crime; suddenly we are hearing about long prison sentences. This “game” has been played numerous times, across the country; more than one death has been attributed to it. Now, however, the media is acting as if this is the first incident.

Suddenly, the knockout game is important. When whites where being targeted by blacks, no-one cared, but now that the table has turned, the world is about to come to an end. The man from Texas, 27-year-old Conrad Alvin Barnett, knew this. It appears he was trying to prove a theory about racism and he succeeded. The Houston man recorded words on a cell phone, prior to the attack; he allegedly said “The plan is to see if I were to hit a black person, would this be nationally televised?”

White-on-black crime in the United States – although a very small percentage of all crime committed – is spotlighted far more than any other crime; When George Zimmerman, a Hispanic dubbed “white” by the media, shot and killed black teenager Trayvon Martin in a clear case of self-defense, as determined in a court of law, the nation briefly went up in flames. Had Zimmerman been black or had Martin been white, no-one outside the immediate families would have ever heard the names of either of these men. There was much talk of the shooting being a hate crime, which demonstrates how sick American society has become.

At the same time, hundreds of black youths, including very young children, were being gunned down on an almost daily basis on the streets of gun-free Chicago. They, however, were all killed by other blacks, so their deaths were simply not important or newsworthy.

Every crime is a hate crime. Skin color is irrelevant. Only in a truly sick and dying society would people choose to judge the severity of a crime by the race of those involved.

Barnett was clearly trying to make a point – and he made it. The way he chose to make the point is disturbing and speaks to a certain level of intelligence. Barnett has no legitimate moral defense for his actions and most rational people would argue that he deserves to be punished for an unprovoked physical assault on an innocent person. The case needs to be put into perspective, however; one would think that Barnett had committed mass murder when one looks at the amount of coverage this case is getting. He certainly should be punished, but only to the same level that anyone other person, black or white, would be, for the same crime.

The Justice Department, lead by known liar, racist and criminal Eric Holder, has jumped in with federal charges against Barnett. The same Justice Department that declined to bring charges against members of the New Black Panthers after they were filmed outside a polling station brandishing weapons; the same Justice Department that ran illegal guns to Mexican organized crime – headed by the same Attorney General who lied to Congress; the same Justice Department that has, thus far, chosen to ignore the knockout game.

There are several other questions surrounding this case; is Barnett actually a racist? If he is, there is actually no law against it. Is Barnett having mental issues? He is allegedly bipolar, which in no way excuses his behavior.

The real question all Americans – and particularly the cowards in the mainstream media – should be asking themselves, however, is this: Is there no longer equal justice for all? Is a crime now considered more or less serious, depending upon the race of the perpetrators and their victims? There is no question about whether or not Barnett should be punished for his actions; there is a question about why this young man is facing a more severe punishment purely because of the color of his skin. It appears that this Texas man has proven a theory about racism in America.

Editorial by Graham J Noble
Reply
#30
(01-02-2014, 01:04 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: Maybe, but it seems to me it would have been easy enough to make the case for hate that they would use it, if nothing else than to use it as leverage for sentencing.

I'm hoping we learn more about how the feds got involved as Parnham outlines his case for unconstitutional federal charges.

IMO, there's probable cause to charge a "hate crime" at the state or fed level; that's why it stands after prosecutors presented a judge with only enough of the evidence to legally secure the charge.

BUT, whether that's actually the appropriate classification for this crime in terms of Barrett's motivation and proving it in a court of law depends on circumstance and other evidence that we likely haven't seen/heard yet.

Prosecutors in Texas seem to prefer to stay away from the "hate crime" statute altogether and go for the max on the criminal offense charge itself, even when a crime could also fall under the "hate" classification. A hate crime is so much harder to prove if there's any ambiguity at all in terms of motive.

We'll see.

P.s. the "editorial" you posted is opinion and propaganda, though I don't doubt it reflects the true views of Mr. Noble and that of a large like-minded group - heard it all before many, many times.
Reply
#31
I agree with you HOTD and Yes the article was propaganda, not much different than most print media IMHO, just the other direction
I also just quit on my "Research" on this thing.
Spent the last hour or so searching and I have not found 1 single instance of white on black knockout type of assaults, I readily found 12 separate videos or video accounts of black on white knockout assaults.
When I did a google search for "Black man charged with hate crime" I got 4 pages of referenced to the Texas case.
Not scientific research by any stretch, but it sure backs my opinion of justice in america
My point that the legal system just plain does not want to admit that the blacks are every bit as racist as the white folks ever thought about stands.
I just they don't have the stomach to pursue it.
Reply
#32
(01-02-2014, 01:47 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: blacks are every bit as racist as the white folks


Oh hell yeah!
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
#33
Racism exists amongst almost all ethnic groups, everywhere in the world. Still, from my observations only, acceptance and tolerance of diversity continues to increase overall and there is less blatant discrimination than there was in the past (at least here in the US).

On the other end of the spectrum, again from my observations only, there are too many cases where people are quickly labeled "racists" for certain acts and expressions of thought when those doing the labeling would have no way of knowing that, in such limited context.
Reply
#34
Well Put, I agree
Reply
#35
(12-30-2013, 10:47 AM)ramseycat Wrote: 10 years is not nearly enough.

People like you are why our prisons are over crowded. He punched a guy. If the man died, that would be a totally different story but 10 years for sucker punching someone? Get real.i heard recently that the US has more people incarcerated than any other country. The guy should do time but we should save space for the real criminals and set the damn pot violators go for chrissake.

I wish somebody would try to sucker punch my husband. All these years of karate and boxing and I have yet to see him get the opportunity to really beat the shit out of somebody like the good ole days. 52
Commando Cunt Queen
Reply
#36
Yes let the pot people go. Violent racist assholes need to be in prison.
Devil Money Stealing Aunt Smiley_emoticons_fies
Reply
#37
This guy coulda sucker punched anybody, user. He chose a 79 year-old man, not a fit middle aged dude or someone he could expect to just bounce back or put up any kind of defense. He preyed on the most vulnerable. The victim Barrett chose coulda died from a punch so hard that it broke his jaw in two places, given the victim's age.

People who abuse the elderly disgust me and I don't put much past them if left to their own devices. I'd like to see Barrett get 10 years because I think he deserves it.

However, if the "hate crime" classification won't stand up and a simple assault charge is more appropriate, a few years behind bars (if that's the max for the assault) will be better than probation or an acquittal and will have to do.

I do agree with you that too many people are put away for too long in the US. It's good to therefore see that mandatory drug sentences for limited possession have been lowered to citations in several states, long sentences for drugs and non-violent offenses are being reduced and many early releases have recently been granted, etc... Reduce the incarceration of the non-violent to make room for the violent, IMO - Barrett is violent and not a stupid kid. He's a 27-year-old man.
Reply
#38
(01-02-2014, 04:23 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: This guy coulda sucker punched anybody, user. He chose a 79 year-old man, not a fit middle aged dude or someone he could expect to just bounce back or put up any kind of defense. He preyed on the most vulnerable. The victim Barrett chose coulda died from a punch so hard that it broke his jaw in two places, given the victim's age.

People who abuse the elderly disgust me and I don't put much past them if left to their own devices. I'd like to see Barrett get 10 years because I think he deserves it.

However, if the "hate crime" classification won't stand up and a simple assault charge is more appropriate, a few years behind bars (if that's the max for the assault) will be better than probation or an acquittal and will have to do.

I do agree with you that too many people are put away for too long in the US. It's good to therefore see that mandatory drug sentences for limited possession have been lowered to citations in several states, long sentences for drugs and non-violent offenses are being reduced and many early releases have recently been granted, etc... Reduce the incarceration of the non-violent to make room for the violent, IMO - Barrett is violent and not a stupid kid. He's a 27-year-old man.

That was my point. He had to punch an elderly black man to get his point across, really? The guy is a fucking asshole, lock him up for good for all I care. Had he knocked out some 6'4 300 pound nigger than his theory might be a bit more respectable.
Reply
#39
I agree. He's a stupid, cowardly asshole for picking on an elderly man. Still, I don't know that the law should try to discriminate by age. What if he'd been a 185lb, relatively fit retard like MS? Should he get a harsher sentence because MS is a retard? I dunno...let a bunch of seniors run him over with their scooters and beat him with canes and then lock him up for some reasonable amount of time for the crime.

A 90+ y/o shot the hell out of a much younger intruder around here. Heh-heh.

I'm very glad the old guy he hit didn't die.
Commando Cunt Queen
Reply
#40
(01-04-2014, 04:12 PM)username Wrote: What if he'd been a 185lb, relatively fit retard like MS? Should he get a harsher sentence because MS is a retard?

Just for the record, I am NOT 185lbs, NOR relatively fit.

You can really sling some hurtful words, User.

And to think, I WAS going to meet up with you when I come to SF.

Your loss is HotD's gain.
Reply