Man charged for vandalizing bakery advertising child-friendly drag show

[notquiteright]

I hate it the drag show was cancelled but at least the guy charged with a crime got to make his point.

What??? The one on his head???

 

[VanceMack]

I dont condone the vandalizing of anything in the name of protest. Dood should go to jail. We have laws.

I DO find it very telling that leftists are so eager to target children with their demented, ****ed up agenda.

 

[notquiteright]

It's called grooming.

Thinking 'grooming' doesn't mean what you think it does...

 

[notquiteright]

I dont condone the vandalizing of anything in the name of protest. Dood should go to jail. We have laws.

I DO find it very telling that leftists are so eager to target children with their demented, ****ed up agenda.

I DO find it very telling the Rabid Right/MAGAs think everything from tellitubbies to parents bringing their children with them to child friendly shows is some great conspiracy to subvert GAWD fearin' 'Mericans and what they sit for...

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

We agree on that. And crimes which only harm the willing participant (eg drug crimes) shouldn't be prosecuted at all.

I would go so far as to say that investigating motive for a crime, is an illegal search. Just because someone is accused of a common crime, should not void their right to privacy of conscience. In other words, their motives remain their own business, unless they bring them up in a trial and advised by their defense. If they do that, they're open to cross-examination on their motives, just like testimony in general.

This is a fundemental misunderstanding of how our criminal justice system works.

There is no "right" to "privacy of conscience." The mental state of someone accused of a crime has always been relevant - in fact, it's a required element of nearly every crime.

A man who kills his wife in a fit of rage after discovering her in bed with a lover is legally less culpable than a man who plans and plots to kill his wife for an insurance payout.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Thinking 'grooming' doesn't mean what you think it does...

That depends on the type of function.

If the parents willingly take their children to such an event, knowing what is happening, then that's OK.

If others are pushing their agenda on other people's children that the parents do not approve of, that's grooming.

 

[notquiteright]

That depends on the type of function. If the parents willingly take their children to such an event, knowing what is happening, then that's OK. others are pushing their agenda on other people's children that the parents do not approve of, that's grooming.

Then Sir, no 'grooming' was involved in the child friendly drag shows. A strawman to say otherwise...

 

[Bodi]

No, I think it's pretty similar and at least, appeals to the scandal of not being sure of gender. If parents think that will broaden a child's mind, they can take their children. If they think the kid can't handle it at their stage of development, they can leave the kids with someone else. Or just not go at all.

YOU however seem to think drag shows are something like a strip tease. It makes me wonder if you've ever seen one.

I never even insinuated such a thing and yes, I have and have known a couple. Still not the same as a bearded lady.

 

[Grand Mal]

Man charged for vandalizing bakery advertising child-friendly drag show

Joseph I. Collins is charged in connection to an incident that happened just after midnight Saturday at the UpRising Bakery and Café.

nypost.com

An Illinois man is charged with a hate crime for allegedly vandalizing a bakery about an hour outside of Chicago, and a drag show planned at the damaged business has been canceled.

The local police department, meanwhile, has been fielding complaints for weeks about advertisements saying children were welcome at the drag performance, but investigators insisted that no nudity or sexually explicit content was expected during the show. Protests and counter-protests were planned.

Joseph I. Collins, 24, of Alsip, Illinois, is charged with two felony counts of a hate crime and criminal damage to property in connection to an incident that happened just after midnight Saturday at the UpRising Bakery and Café located in the 2100 block of W. Algonquin Road in Lake in the Hills, Illinois.
======================================================
Obviously he was upset. Just look at him.

Looks smarter than the average radical right whinger.

 

[Grand Mal]

A hate crime?

What would you guess motivated it?

 

[VySky]

What would you guess motivated it?

So a drag queen is not an act?

 

[Grand Mal]

So a drag queen is not an act?

The question, VySky, is what do you think motivated the vandalism.

 

[Ug make hammer]

I dont condone the vandalizing of anything in the name of protest. Dood should go to jail. We have laws.

I DO find it very telling that leftists are so eager to target children with their demented, ****ed up agenda.

I seriously can't believe you used the word "demented." Do you even know what it means?

No children are being "targetted." It's entirely up to their parents whether to take them to the show, and save on a babysitter.

 

[mrjurrs]

Vandalizing a bakery.

You can see the picture, there's no sign of fire. Apparently a window was broken and some "hateful" slogans spray painted.

How very myopic of you. Posting 'hateful' slogans dehumanizes the group, and 'condones' violence against them.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

It's called grooming.

Tell me you are a QAnon supporter without telling me you are a QAnon supporter.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

...or helping them in the bathroom.

Area man that supports a party whose former Speaker of the House is a convicted child molester, that has members being investigated for child sex trafficking, and whose last president openly perved on his own daughter.... Wants to preach to everyone else about drag queens supposedly "grooming" kids.

 

[Lisa]

It's called grooming.

It is medically impossible to groom someone to be LGBT. People are born LGBT or they are not. It is not a choice that can be made and it cannot be undone with therapy/medication.

 

[Ug make hammer]

How very myopic of you. Posting 'hateful' slogans dehumanizes the group, and 'condones' violence against them.

It's not myopic to distinguish between violent crimes and property crimes. And arson is relevant, because although the intent might only be a property crime, it negligently endangers lives.

What's with the soft quote marks? Are you struggling for words in your attempt to overstate the seriousness of the crimes the wet guy committed?

If you punch someone in the head in Illinois, you likely get a misdemeanor battery charge. But according to this, even a non-violent harassment can be elevated to a felony if it's deemed to be a Hate Crime.

That's ass-about in my opinion. Making someone feel insecure should NEVER be a more serious matter than actually assaulting them.

 

[bomberfox]

Really? White Americans are 61%, but 22% of those are less than 18. Then half again, for men as opposed to women. You're part of a 24% minority.



My reasoning is that criminals should be punished according to the harm they do to others, or the harm which could have resulted from negligent acts.

At one end of the scale you have littering, which does little harm to anyone. Then shoplifting which does only economic harm. And so on up to torturing and murdering someone (which does even more harm than just murdering them.)

Indiscriminate murder, is treated as terrorism. But I disagree with that. We got by fine without prosecuting (or declaring war) on terrorists, but then we got the daft idea that people watching the events at home were also harmed. This idea is poisonous to justice, because only some victims ever get that attention.

What a criminal's motive is, really shouldn't matter. Escalating charges for minor crimes (like vandalism) to hate crimes, because the criminal was reckless enough to give away their motive, only catches the dumb ones and thus never addresses "terror."

Let's suppose the criminal had not done any damage at all, but had exercised their freedom of speech by walking into the cafe while it was open and shouting about "groomers" and "perverts" and whatever else. It's a pretty minor crime, if it's a crime at all, because the law would correctly identify it as free speech ... providing the man left when told to. How do you put a minor crime of vandalism together with a non-crime of hate speech, and come up with something more serious?

White men are both the power majority and the majority.

 

[Ug make hammer]

White men are both the power majority and the majority.

White men aren't the majority even of white people.

Power majority maybe.

 

[mrjurrs]

It's not myopic to distinguish between violent crimes and property crimes. And arson is relevant, because although the intent might only be a property crime, it negligently endangers lives.

What's with the soft quote marks? Are you struggling for words in your attempt to overstate the seriousness of the crimes the wet guy committed?

If you punch someone in the head in Illinois, you likely get a misdemeanor battery charge. But according to this, even a non-violent harassment can be elevated to a felony if it's deemed to be a Hate Crime.

That's ass-about in my opinion. Making someone feel insecure should NEVER be a more serious matter than actually assaulting them.

I referred to a word that you "quoted". I was unsure of your meaning.