• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

2 People Charged With Hate Crime After Vandalizing Black Lives Matter Mural in California

The statute is a California law which is pretty sloppy at best as it allows for "perception" to be a factor in determining if a crime was motivated by hate against a protected class or anyone's religion or race. Problem is that this act was at best vandalism on PUBLIC property. They did not deface a church or synagogue, they did not burn a cross out on the lawn of Black person, did not threaten anyone.

Just because California has a statute doesn't mean it will end up in a conviction. And even if it does it doesn't mean it won't be reversed on appeal.

California has a lot of wacky laws which have not yet been adequately vetted by judicial review. So yes, they could be charged, but it is very slim unless the people who painted over "words" (not adding any words) may have been also making threats against black people.

BTW, how is it that tearing down statues of white historical figures while chanting stuff against white people in general is then not a "hate crime" in California?

As far as I see it the BLM organization IS A HATE GROUP. So unless it is also a hate crime to paint over 'KKK' or Nazi flags, I see no difference in painting over a BLM slogan given the manner in which that slogan has been co-opted by a domestic hate group (BLM organization).

Just my opinion.

I think where they got them, though I'm still reading is PEN 422.56a:
“Association with a person or group with these actual or perceived characteristics” includes advocacy for, identification with, or being on the ground owned or rented by, or adjacent to, any of the following: a community center, educational facility, family, individual, office, meeting hall, place of worship, private institution, public agency, library, or other entity, group, or person that has, or is identified with people who have, one or more of those characteristics listed in the definition of “hate crime” under paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive, of subdivision (a) of Section 422.55.

The interesting thing is at least under 422.55, anyone tearing down statues purely due to race could also be charged with a hate crime on top of Malicious Mischief (the law states Race or ethnicity as just that: race, ancestry, color, or ethnicity). Also, slightly related but 422.56d is confusing, the bias doesn't have to be the main factor of the crime, but still a substantial factor, but I guess my brain can't brain why something could be a substantial factor but not the main factor?
 
Ok, bud...hehe...good chat. What I really admire right now is that even after completely ****ting the bed, you still have the balls to throw out disses... :thumbs: :lol:

still no argument as usual.
this isn't a hate crime.
 
still no argument as usual.
this isn't a hate crime.

Aww, look at you, still trying to save face... I could just pinch those widdle cheeks... :lamo

My dude, I do believe you responded to me. I wasn't even talking to you, so ... what "argument" are you waiting for? I was talking to someone else, you burst forth with a bunch of BS, and I set you straight. I don't usually argue with you, specifically because of the lack of intelligence and commitment to fact and honesty you've demonstrated herein, not to mention your lack of class, depending on insult to fill in the gaps in your logic. Every single moment talking to you in this conversation has been a waste of time, because not a single thing you said was true. There's no "argument" from me, because I sincerely doubt your ability to have that argument to where it includes any honesty. :shrug:

Basically, if you want to argue with me in the future, do me the courtesy of at least reading the damn articles you're posting about, and knowing what the hell you're talking about. Even just a little bit. The plus side for you, beyond the shred of respect it will earn you from me, is that you'll finally be able to deliver your patented insults to where they actually have some teeth, instead of further showing your ass.

Now, do you have anything else you'd like me to respond to, or are we done here?
 
Didn't you hear about the four charged with vandalism with the Jackson statue in Lafayette Park across from the WH?
Were they also charged with hate crimes like these two?

See, there you go, the Canada jokes make you funny again...like, actually funny, not the point and laugh kind of funny. :lol:
Thanks, lol.

I try to make sense of what Canucks are thinking because theyre an interesting set of people lol.

In the meantime, progress towards greater levels of human decency began in our infancy as a species, and have continued, despite the temporary setbacks of indecent people that you seem hung up on, all throughout history. It is a force that always wins, so while I'd rather convince you of the upside of decency, I lose no sleep when you rail against it, because in doing so you render yourself irrelevant and beneath worry. :shrug:

Riight, so whenever change happens you go with it? Okay, Im sure Putin's continued term of office is also fine, as is Orban's rise in power at Hungary, and the resilience of the Taliban, yes? ;)
 
Nah, they're simply unwilling combatants. BLM wouldn't exist if cops weren't disproportionately using violence against black folks. You don't like BLM, fix the reason for their existence. It's a much more worthwhile expenditure of your time than making silly claims about race wars - which is especially silly, given the fact that BLM is supported by folks of all races.

Hey, if you don't like abortion clinic bombings, fix the reason for their existence.
 
Things were getting better and better (for black people) before the riots started.

Tell George Floyd how great he had it.
 
Were they also charged with hate crimes like these two?

Thanks, lol.

I try to make sense of what Canucks are thinking because theyre an interesting set of people lol.



Riight, so whenever change happens you go with it? Okay, Im sure Putin's continued term of office is also fine, as is Orban's rise in power at Hungary, and the resilience of the Taliban, yes? ;)

No, of course not. Sometimes things change regressively, and I'm generally against that.

You know, I'd love to actually sit down to discuss philosophy with you one day, in a situation where I could take for granted that I'd get the nice PoS, not the douchey one. You're smarter than all your sarcasm suggests. Think we could ever just, you know, talk?
 
:lol:

I'm going to steel this. And yes I said steel.

Gotta give credit where credit is due. My favorite youtuber, Beau of the Fifth Column, released a line of merch, and included in there is a print that says YouBrand Pizza Cutters - All Edge, No Point. You should check him out, he's really good. :)
 
Hey, if you don't like abortion clinic bombings, fix the reason for their existence.

Speaking of all edge, no point...

Ah well, you haven't even hit 100 posts yet, I'll forgive you the lazy attempt at a pathetic equivalent.

See, DP, I can show mercy... :lol:
 
does anyone know if they have a defense fund online? this is obvious bull**** and I would like to help them beat this stupidity.

conservatives, if we are going to continue to be free, we need to start standing up for each other.
 
Were they also charged with hate crimes like these two?

To be fair, that was federal and not CA state. Under CA state law it can be argued they committed a hate crime, though I think it's an overcharge.
 
If BLM had a permit, then vandalism maybe. To charge a hate crime requires an expectation of a stacked jury. The are being charged for being white and politically incorrect. Martinez is gang country, mostly Sur Santos Pride - an off shoot of Surenos.

The video rhetoric could give the charge.
 
Tell George Floyd how great he had it.

Floyd should not have been killed. But we cannot forget the fact that Floyd was is all factual likelihood out committing a crime while high on narcotics. So let's not claim he was just being arbitrarily profiled by the police. It was a citizen who called the police for help because of Floyd and his companions. So no, he isn't exactly the poster child you might wish to claim he his.

Anyone--- of ANY RACE, who is out getting the attention of law enforcement does so at THEIR OWN risk. And being high on fentynal and methamphetamine doesn't exactly help the situation either.

This reported by liberal NPR:

"A full autopsy report on George Floyd, the man who died after being restrained by Minneapolis police last month, reveals that he was positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The 20-page report also indicates that Floyd had fentanyl and methamphetamine in his system at the time of his death, although the drugs are not listed as the cause."

Medical Examiner's Autopsy Reveals George Floyd Had Positive Test For Coronavirus : Live Updates: Protests For Racial Justice : NPR
 
Back
Top Bottom