'Neo-Nazi' Stabbed in Colorado, After Being Judged by His Haircut (1 Viewer)

[Mr Person]

The perpetrator saw a white man, automatically assumed 'Nazi', which gave him the right to attack. The racial situation in this country is getting to be absurd.

The guy who was stabbed has a totally normal haircut, known as the undercut, which stretches back to the Edwardian era. It came back in style several years ago, and many male celebrities have styled their hair this way.

Strange how I didn't see a single thread complaining about supposed "racial" hatred against nazis (which isn't a race) or, as here, against a suspected nazi, until a nazi happened to kill multiple people and injure quite a lot more at a rally.

Now they're popping up everywhere as if......

...what...

....there's some kind of equivalence people want to draw between nazis and everyone else; that they're people too or somesuch?




Obviously, nobody should go around stabbing anyone else. I think we all know that, so the purpose of the thread cannot be to make that obvious point.

So what is the point, eh? Is it the predictable "the left is just as bad" type nonsense?

 

[VanceMack]

I mentioned that specifically, because it was you who posited the theory it was more likely Muslim's themselves seeking attention than a hate group.

ANd based on the history of idiot ****ing leftists falsifying hate crimes, I mentioned that with good cause. Its pathetic how many of those ****ing morons have been faking hate crimes. Tragic, really, when idiot leftists cry wolf and make the actions of all hate crimes suspect. However I also absolutely declared that it should be FULLY investigated and whoever was found to have done it should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Didnt I.

How did that turn out BTW? Cuz...I notice other than banging on it a s a cause you havent said **** all about it. OBVIOUSLY its something you care deeply about.

 

[HowardBThiname]

You see, you're slippery, I like that about you. But you didn't answer the question. I'm asking for your opinion of the events, not how the trial turned out, this isn't about stand your ground laws. It's about people who dismiss unarmed minorities being attacked using various methods, and one of those methods in my opinion is using the results of the biased system as proof nothing racist happened. In your opinion, did Zimmerman see a black man, immediately assume he was up to no good, stalk him, and then force a confrontation resulting in said black man dying? Do you think he was justified in ignoring the 911 dispatcher who told him not to pursue?

I think Trayvon's death was a series of unfortunate mistakes, none of which rose to a legal definition of a crime having been committed. Zimmerman might have thought he was up to no good simply because he was black, but no one could ever prove that. It might have ended much differently had Zimmerman not ignored the dispatcher, but the fact is, ignoring the dispatcher was not a crime. Following a person you suspect of wrong doing (even if you're incorrect) is not a crime. The actual crime began when Trayvon hit Zimmerman. Had he just stood there and talked to Zimmerman, or kept running away, or even called 911 himself, the outcome would have been different. I'm not placing any fault on Trayvon, but, legally, shooting him did not rise to being a crime in the eyes of the jury.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

So your one of those huh. Take quotes out of context. I was discussing the legality with another poster. I was not dismissing the LE violating the woman's rights. Did you not see the part where I said it was disgusting and they should be fired?



Again, out of context. Here is the OP for that (leaving dead people? how many died), and the ridiculous options. You tell me if the OP was serious.

Given the doubling down on the whole "America isn't racist!" rhetoric the day after a bunch of white nationalist nazi's march through America with torches leaving a few dead people in their wake(in 2017!!), I was curious, what would actually change your mind and make you go 'hmmm, you know what, there might actually be something to this racism thing'.

A few more dead black kids
Lots more dead black kids
A hell of a lot more black kids getting held at gunpoint, that's for sure
1 more nazi march
Like maybe a few more nazi marches would do it
President wearing a swastika
A doubling to the difference in median net worth (see post)
Black infant mortality rate increasing even more compared to whites.

But yeah, I don't buy into the white privilege thing. So that makes me responsible for Nazi's?



No, no you don't.

Lol, none of those are out of context, and I stopped after finding two examples on page 1 of your history. The fact is your pretty dismissive of the race angle. Plenty of evidence for it.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

I think Trayvon's death was a series of unfortunate mistakes, none of which rose to a legal definition of a crime having been committed. Zimmerman might have thought he was up to no good simply because he was black, but no one could ever prove that. It might have ended much differently had Zimmerman not ignored the dispatcher, but the fact is, ignoring the dispatcher was not a crime. Following a person you suspect of wrong doing (even if you're incorrect) is not a crime. The actual crime began when Trayvon hit Zimmerman. Had he just stood there and talked to Zimmerman, or kept running away, or even called 911 himself, the outcome would have been different. I'm not placing any fault on Trayvon, but, legally, shooting him did not rise to being a crime in the eyes of the jury.

That was soecifically for xfactor, because of his past comments on the case. Fact is all we have to go on, is zimmermans word. All you legal begals that use burden of proof as an excuse to dismiss a man stalking another man, and then shooting him, are quick to mention the law. But hardly ready to comment on your personal opinion of whether Trayvon deserved to die. You're justification for a man losing his life is that based on the word of his killer, no law was broken. That's very dismissive of a mans life. And no worse than anything I've said. Which is my overall point.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

ANd based on the history of idiot ****ing leftists falsifying hate crimes, I mentioned that with good cause. Its pathetic how many of those ****ing morons have been faking hate crimes. Tragic, really, when idiot leftists cry wolf and make the actions of all hate crimes suspect. However I also absolutely declared that it should be FULLY investigated and whoever was found to have done it should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Didnt I.

How did that turn out BTW? Cuz...I notice other than banging on it a s a cause you havent said **** all about it. OBVIOUSLY its something you care deeply about.

If morons have been faking hate crimes, how do we know this guy in the op wasn't just stabbed by a random hobo and is using that as an excuse to blame a lefty? Based on the all the cases you've seen of fake hate crimes shouldn't that be where you first leap here?

I've seen maybe ten cases of hate crimes being faked, in the last ten years, with evidence that they were. And maybe a dozen more with those like you ready to dismiss any unsolved hate crimes as most likely faked to. You're ready and willing to say prosecute anyone, while at the same time it's probably fake with zero evidence of it actually being fake, but that isn't condemning hate crime. It's dismissing it, while leaving yourself an out. Something you like to do with just about anything involving a racial element where a white person isn't the victim.

No worse than anything I've said in this thread.

 

[X Factor]

You see, you're slippery, I like that about you. But you didn't answer the question. I'm asking for your opinion of the events, not how the trial turned out, this isn't about stand your ground laws. It's about people who dismiss unarmed minorities being attacked using various methods, and one of those methods in my opinion is using the results of the biased system as proof nothing racist happened. In your opinion, did Zimmerman see a black man, immediately assume he was up to no good, stalk him, and then force a confrontation resulting in said black man dying? Do you think he was justified in ignoring the 911 dispatcher who told him not to pursue?

I'm not talking about "stand your ground" either, but rather simple self defense. I'm not happy that Trayvon Martin died or feel he just deserved it, but I'd have to disagree with you that fault for that altercation lies only with Zimmerman. I've said for years that Zimmerman is a douche, but Martin did not have to engage either. You asked me if Zimmerman committed murder which is a legally defined crime and my answer is that, legally no, he did not.

 

[dirtpoorchris]

I think Trayvon's death was a series of unfortunate mistakes, none of which rose to a legal definition of a crime having been committed. Zimmerman might have thought he was up to no good simply because he was black, but no one could ever prove that. It might have ended much differently had Zimmerman not ignored the dispatcher, but the fact is, ignoring the dispatcher was not a crime. Following a person you suspect of wrong doing (even if you're incorrect) is not a crime. The actual crime began when Trayvon hit Zimmerman. Had he just stood there and talked to Zimmerman, or kept running away, or even called 911 himself, the outcome would have been different. I'm not placing any fault on Trayvon, but, legally, shooting him did not rise to being a crime in the eyes of the jury.

I dunno thats kinda of a "wish we woulda had a witness" scenario. Because if some dude is following/chasing you down the street at midnight continuously yelling at you in a hostile manner its arguable a person might just wanna sucker punch um and run away once they get to you. Its sometimes legal to hit someone first if they are coming at you belligerently.

 

[HowardBThiname]

That was soecifically for xfactor, because of his past comments on the case. Fact is all we have to go on, is zimmermans word. All you legal begals that use burden of proof as an excuse to dismiss a man stalking another man, and then shooting him, are quick to mention the law. But hardly ready to comment on your personal opinion of whether Trayvon deserved to die. You're justification for a man losing his life is that based on the word of his killer, no law was broken. That's very dismissive of a mans life. And no worse than anything I've said. Which is my overall point.

I don't think Trayvon deserved to die, it was just an unfortunate situation. That doesn't mean Zimmerman acted in an intelligent way, it just means no one could foresee the events unfolding as they did, and it's very likely that both parties involved would have changed their actions if they knew in advance what would happen. Problem is, none of us have a crystal ball, and sometimes we all make mistakes as those two did that fateful night. I don't want to re-litigate the case, going over, once again, whether Zimmerman should have waited for the police or Trayvon should have punched him -- none of that gets us anywhere. It happened. It was tragic. A jury did not find sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman. Let's just move on.

 

[HowardBThiname]

I dunno thats kinda of a "wish we woulda had a witness" scenario. Because if some dude is following/chasing you down the street at midnight continuously yelling at you in a hostile manner its arguable a person might just wanna sucker punch um and run away once they get to you. Its sometimes legal to hit someone first if they are coming at you belligerently.

Yes, it's always nice to have a witness, but in the absence of one -- the jury had to make a decision based on the information presented. Remember our system is "innocent before being proved guilty" and when there's not enough proof, the defendant walks. All we can ask, as citizens who never want to sit in the defendant's chair, is that the jury members make their decision based on the law -- not on emotions.

 

[VanceMack]

If morons have been faking hate crimes, how do we know this guy in the op wasn't just stabbed by a random hobo and is using that as an excuse to blame a lefty? Based on the all the cases you've seen of fake hate crimes shouldn't that be where you first leap here?

I've seen maybe ten cases of hate crimes being faked, in the last ten years, with evidence that they were. And maybe a dozen more with those like you ready to dismiss any unsolved hate crimes as most likely faked to. You're ready and willing to say prosecute anyone, while at the same time it's probably fake with zero evidence of it actually being fake, but that isn't condemning hate crime. It's dismissing it, while leaving yourself an out. Something you like to do with just about anything involving a racial element where a white person isn't the victim.

No worse than anything I've said in this thread.

REALLY...You have only 'seen' maybe 10 cases of faked hate crimes in the last 10 years eh?

https://www.reddit.com/r/StumpSheet/comments/6ec3z1/fake_hate_crimes_official/?sort=old

Methinks you 'see' what is convenient to see.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

REALLY...You have only 'seen' maybe 10 cases of faked hate crimes in the last 10 years eh?

https://www.reddit.com/r/StumpSheet/comments/6ec3z1/fake_hate_crimes_official/?sort=old

Methinks you 'see' what is convenient to see.

And yet with all of those, you're immediate thought on the mosque bombing was "probably fake" but here it is not. There was more evidence of the mosque bombing being a real bombing than there is this being a real hate crime. So what is the difference here for you? Hmm? My aim isn't to prove that all hate crimes are legite, it's to prove you're biased. You've just provided ample evidence that both liberals and conservatives fake hate crimes, yet I don't see you interjecting the "probably fake" in this scenario. Therefore, my initial judgement stands. You show indifference towards one group, and seek to bias the conversation from the beginning, whereas you do not with the other.

You are indeed one of the worst offenders of open bias. You have no grounds to criticize my indifference in this thread. Good Day.

 

[VanceMack]

And yet with all of those, you're immediate thought on the mosque bombing was "probably fake" but here it is not. There was more evidence of the mosque bombing being a real bombing than there is this being a real hate crime. So what is the difference here for you? Hmm? My aim isn't to prove that all hate crimes are legite, it's to prove you're biased. You've just provided ample evidence that both liberals and conservatives fake hate crimes, yet I don't see you interjecting the "probably fake" in this scenario. Therefore, my initial judgement stands. You show indifference towards one group, and seek to bias the conversation from the beginning, whereas you do not with the other.

You are indeed one of the worst offenders of open bias. You have no grounds to criticize my indifference in this thread. Good Day.

Yes...in a spate of about a dozen faked hate crimes in the span of a few months, I absolutely look to the possibility that it was a fake. However...I absolutely stated...investigate it and punish WHOEVER did it to the max. I give no quarter.

Your vapid comments are my 'grounds'. The fact that even with literally HUNDREDS of faked hate crimes evidenced and cited within the last 4 years, your admission that you ONLY know of MAYBE 10 in 10 yeas...well...

And I do not at all blame you for tucking your tail and running. Its actually prudent, all things considered.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

I'm not talking about "stand your ground" either, but rather simple self defense. I'm not happy that Trayvon Martin died or feel he just deserved it, but I'd have to disagree with you that fault for that altercation lies only with Zimmerman. I've said for years that Zimmerman is a douche, but Martin did not have to engage either. You asked me if Zimmerman committed murder which is a legally defined crime and my answer is that, legally no, he did not.

Martin is just as at fault for what happened, as the man with the haircut is for getting stabbed. Neither could control others perceptions of them. If the man who stabbed this person is apprehended and claims self defense. Would you believe him as you do Zimmerman. Would you give him the same benefits of doubt that you argue so passionately for? Even if the stabber initiated confrontation, as Zimmerman did, all he has to do to get off scott free is claim the Nazi scared him. You treat the accounts of Zimmerman as fact when you say that both were at fault. Who is to say that Zimmerman didn't just straight up murder this person. Is it ok with you, that a man can stalk and murder you, claim self defense out of fear of the person he was stalking, and get off scott free? That is justice to you? As long as a system with evident biases tells you it's not murder, you just go along with that?

That is indifference, as much as I've shown. You sir, are no better than I. At least I admit it.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

Yes...in a spate of about a dozen faked hate crimes in the span of a few months, I absolutely look to the possibility that it was a fake. However...I absolutely stated...investigate it and punish WHOEVER did it to the max. I give no quarter.

Your vapid comments are my 'grounds'. The fact that even with literally HUNDREDS of faked hate crimes evidenced and cited within the last 4 years, your admission that you ONLY know of MAYBE 10 in 10 yeas...well...

And I do not at all blame you for tucking your tail and running. Its actually prudent, all things considered.

Lol, you think my objective is to prove something is or isn't a faked hate crime? My objective is to expose your bias, which your failure to posit that this attack is also probably a fake does just that, in light of the evidence you provided. I'm not running from anything, I've completed my objective. Good day.

 

[VanceMack]

Lol, you think my objective is to prove something is or isn't a faked hate crime? My objective is to expose your bias, which your failure to posit that this attack is also probably a fake does just that, in light of the evidence you provided. I'm not running from anything, I've completed my objective. Good day.

Oh! You had an 'objective'. :lamo Nah...your only objective after your first post in this thread was to try to cloud just how stupid your first post in this thread was. Nothing more.

"Oh no, white people are being targeted for how they look, now they are like everyone else. The horror. Save the white people, pass some laws. It's so unfair they're being treated like minorities have been treated for the past 300 years."

Yeah...YOU posted that stupid comment.

 

[dobieg]

Tell us, do you think Trayvon Martin was murdered? Or do you think Zimmerman was completely justified...

I watched the complete trial and Zimmerman was justified.


If you come up with a different conclusion you either got your information from sound bites from the media or are being dishonest with yourself.

 

[Axis]

Oh. That sucks. Perhaps be more weary of your haircut in the location that he is OCCUPYING? May be? As of the person that violently and ferociously stabbed the "neonazi", what happened to him? Did he get away with it? Good for him; well done!

 

[Manc Skipper]

Haircut man lied. He stabbed himself. What a faithful little nazi he is. He'll be meeting more of them soon.

https://boingboing.net/2017/08/28/the-guy-who-said-a-black-man.html

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Haircut man lied. He stabbed himself. What a faithful little nazi he is. He'll be meeting more of them soon.

LOL.. Now there will be 10 pages of Trump Nazi sympathizers excusing and defending this Nazi and the poor picked on Nazis in general.

 

[Utility Man]

Is there a reason not to believe him?

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Fair enough, and the story was debunked recently. I had assumed that 9 times out of 10, people aren't willing to stab themselves to create a fake news story.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Fair enough, and the story was debunked recently. I had assumed that 9 times out of 10, people aren't willing to stab themselves to create a fake news story.

Seems he didn't even manage that! He bought the knife, and cut himself unwrapping it in his car outside the store! Then he had his genius idea....

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Seems he didn't even manage that! He bought the knife, and cut himself unwrapping it in his car outside the store! Then he had his genius idea....

That's one hell of an excuse right there.

 

[Ikari]

Fair enough, and the story was debunked recently. I had assumed that 9 times out of 10, people aren't willing to stab themselves to create a fake news story.

That means there's 32 million people willing to stab themselves in order to create a fake news story in the US.