So are these two going to be charged with hate crimes?

[Derec]

Two Brooklyn women tired of 'white people moving into the area' force tenants out at gunpoint, then squat in apartment: police

Precious Parker, 30, and Sabrina James, 23, knocked on the door of an apartment building on Ocean Ave. near Newkirk Ave. in Flatbush at 9:30 p.m. on Thursday and held a 34-year-old man, a 37-year-old man, and a 25-year-old woman at gunpoint demanding they move out or be killed, police said.
[...]
The source added the trio may have been targeted because of their race, as one of the women said she didn't like “that white people were moving into the area,” the police source said.

Not holding my breath. Black criminals are rarely if ever charged with hate crimes in racially motivated crimes against whites. Neither do I think Eric Holder's DOJ will be investigating.

More likely would be Al Sharpton showing up yelling "No Justice No Peace" and demanding the women be given section 8 apartments in the building.

 

[ZiprHead]

I think they should find new quarters in the state penitentiary system for both the armed assault and, if can be proven, hate crimes.

 

[Underseer]

Two Brooklyn women tired of 'white people moving into the area' force tenants out at gunpoint, then squat in apartment: police

Precious Parker, 30, and Sabrina James, 23, knocked on the door of an apartment building on Ocean Ave. near Newkirk Ave. in Flatbush at 9:30 p.m. on Thursday and held a 34-year-old man, a 37-year-old man, and a 25-year-old woman at gunpoint demanding they move out or be killed, police said.
[...]
The source added the trio may have been targeted because of their race, as one of the women said she didn't like “that white people were moving into the area,” the police source said.

Not holding my breath. Black criminals are rarely if ever charged with hate crimes in racially motivated crimes against whites. Neither do I think Eric Holder's DOJ will be investigating.

More likely would be Al Sharpton showing up yelling "No Justice No Peace" and demanding the women be given section 8 apartments in the building.

You make it sound like African-Americans are never tried with hate crimes.

Don't you remember that weirdo who shot up a subway a few years back? He was charged with a hate crime, and if I remember correctly, was convicted of a hate crime.

I know you think hate crimes are unfair, but the reasoning behind them is pretty easy to understand. If I beat you up, I have committed assault and should be charged as such because I have harmed you. However, if I beat you up because you're left-handed because I want to "send a message" to all other left-handed people, then the number of people harmed by my assault is far more than just you.

If an African-American calls a white person "honky," that is not considered racist because there's no history of African-Americans abusing relatively powerless white people while using that term. However, the concept of a hate crime is applicable regardless of history and regardless of which group is more privileged than the other.

 

[laughing dog]

According to official FBI statistics for 2012:
Racial bias

In 2012, law enforcement agencies reported that 3,297 single-bias hate crime offenses were racially motivated. Of these offenses:

66.1 percent were motivated by anti-black bias.
22.4 percent stemmed from anti-white bias.
4.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
4.1 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.3 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias. (Based on Table 1.)

(source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2012/topic-pages/incidents-and-offenses/incidentsandoffenses_final)

And

In 2012, race was reported for 5,331 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

54.6 percent were white.
23.3 percent were black.
8.8 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (multiple races, group).
0.9 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander.
0.9 percent were American Indian/Alaskan Native.
11.5 percent were unknown. (Based on Table 9.)

(http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2012/topic-pages/offenders/offenders_final)

Seems that the OP claim about rarity reveals more about the bias of the poster than it does about reality.

 

[Terrell]

If this crime fits the definition of hate crime, which it seems to do, then they should be prosecuted accordingly. Even if it doesn't the things they're accused of are clearly crimes, and they should be prosecuted accordingly. If something is a hate crime, due to it's motivations, the law should be applied. It shouldn't matter which group the perpetrator or victim belong too. From what I'm reading of LD's link, it looks like the government is handling this issue, in general, fairly.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I don't know, but they should. Next question?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

The described event appears to meet enough of the criteria as far as I can see to be called a hate crime. I think the women should charged criminally and as having violated the three Victims civil rights.

 

[Arctish]

So are these two going to be charged with hate crimes?

My money's on "yes".

 

[Keith&Co.]

The source added the trio may have been targeted because of their race, as one of the women said she didn't like “that white people were moving into the area,” the police source said.

That quote seems incomplete.
Which is probably perfectly fine with Derec, it says what he wants them to say. Never mind completeness or context.

I just wonder if they're so clearly white haters, why did the spokesman hesitate to identify a hate crime? Why did he (she?) say that race MAY have been the basis for the crime?
Maybe there's a 'because' in the statement that's partially quoted and free of context? She didn't like white people moving into the area and 'playing Justin Bieber music.'

 

[untermensche]

Is a crime worse because it was done out of racial hatred?

Is the crime better if it wasn't?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Is a crime worse because it was done out of racial hatred?

Is the crime better if it wasn't?

In itself, I would say no. But if you put it on display to intimidate others of the same race, then that makes more sense to consider it worse. I don't know if that is how the hate crime laws work (since I don't deal with them) but I think that is how they should. And there should be a mens rea component of both aspects. You should have to intend to both do the crime and to intimidate others of the target group.

 

[Arctish]

Is a crime worse because it was done out of racial hatred?

Is the crime better if it wasn't?

In itself, I would say no. But if you put it on display to intimidate others of the same race, then that makes more sense to consider it worse. I don't know if that is how the hate crime laws work (since I don't deal with them) but I think that is how they should. And there should be a mens rea component of both aspects. You should have to intend to both do the crime and to intimidate others of the target group.

There's also the matter of premeditation to consider.

Advocating or contemplating violence against members of a community isn't the same thing as premeditated violence against an individual, but it could be a factor that leads to an attack. It changes assault into aggravated assault.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Is a crime worse because it was done out of racial hatred?

Is the crime better if it wasn't?

It's not a matter of the crime, but of the trigger.

How likely is the person to repeat their crime?
How likely is someone else to be deterred from committing a similar crime because of the punishment this guy received?

Lets consider two criminals:

A comes home and finds his wife in bed with three men, he shoots her.

B comes home and finds a black workman in the utility easement on his property and shoots him for desecrating his land by being black.

What's the repeat risk? Is A going to get another wife and find her in bed with three men again? Very unlikely. Is B going to find another black legitimately on his property? Probably.

Which is a greater risk to society?

That's why I favor harsher penalties for hate crimes.

 

[Sabine Grant]

I agree 100% with your reasoning ,Loren. You have pointed to the vast difference between a crime motivated by an ideology and a crime motivated by opportunity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I agree 100% with your reasoning ,Loren. You have pointed to the vast difference between a crime motivated by an ideology and a crime motivated by opportunity.

It's not just ideology vs opportunity. Note that both of my cases were ideology.

 

[Sabine Grant]

I agree 100% with your reasoning ,Loren. You have pointed to the vast difference between a crime motivated by an ideology and a crime motivated by opportunity.

It's not just ideology vs opportunity. Note that both of my cases were ideology.

A comes home and finds his wife in bed with three men, he shoots her.

If my using "opportunity" was not the correct term, crime motivated by an isolated circumstance or one-time circumstance. Further, I would certainly not call it "ideology" motivated. Call it a crime of "passion" if you will.

B comes home and finds a black workman in the utility easement on his property and shoots him for desecrating his land by being black.

Definitely ideology motivated. It would not apply of course if the shooter were to claim that he confused the presence of a man in his basement for an intruder who broke into his home.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Related to the history of the term "hate crime", an interesting read :

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's not just ideology vs opportunity. Note that both of my cases were ideology.

A comes home and finds his wife in bed with three men, he shoots her.

If my using "opportunity" was not the correct term, crime motivated by an isolated circumstance or one-time circumstance. Further, I would certainly not call it "ideology" motivated. Call it a crime of "passion" if you will.

I could accept that, although I see it sort of as ideology--she must be punished for cheating.

B comes home and finds a black workman in the utility easement on his property and shoots him for desecrating his land by being black.

Definitely ideology motivated. It would not apply of course if the shooter were to claim that he confused the presence of a man in his basement for an intruder who broke into his home.

B was specifically constructed to be as ideological as possible.