t4651965, As usual, I agree with your points. I think one point that is missing from what I've read so far is this: The reason this act was committed was to exploit the feelings of guilt currently experienced by whites with regard to their historical treatment of blacks. This has been a very successful strategy of groups like the NAACP and other self-interested race-based organizations attempting to capitalize on white guilt and use it for their political or financial gain. What is becoming increasingly evident is that this strategy is no longer the sure-fire winner that it used to be. Whites are realizing that there is a limit to how much apologizing and concessions one has to make before it becomes incumbent upon the historical 'victims' to walk without crutches. Additionally, I view hate crime legislation as inherently unfair. Implicit in hate crime legislation is the assumption that a crime committed against a minority should be punished more severely than a crime committed against a member of the majority. This is a ridiculous double standard, and one that was the result of legislators acting on the emotional feelings of the moment. In time, level heads will prevail, and this legislation will be reversed.
tnumber, Don't give me this crap about venturing out of bball talk, as some means to say you are smart and correct, and I'm wrong. What you are confusing is the student body's reaction to the act and the punishment. We blacks cry "Hate Crime" they have every right to pull that back and call "Hoax." You are confusing a real court indictment with media outrage, or white outrage. You are the one not reading up. There is nothing that says this was more than a hoax. You have zero proof that this was not a pure hoax to rile...black on black. What??? Do you actually think they were trying to rile Whites or get Whites expelled, falsely accused, etc. No...that is all just your editorial. btw: the editorialist is wrong. This did make national news. And the aftermath has as well. here's the student newspaper account. http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2002/12/14/3dfadccdef8d6 <blockquote><hr> Three black freshmen students confessed to writing the Nov. 6 racial slurs in Kincannon Hall, a prank that drew national scrutiny as Ole Miss celebrated 40 years of desegregation. The University Police Deparment has been investigating the incidents and announced their findings Wednesday. Five charges, including flagrant disrespect of a member of the university community, harassment and disorderly conduct, vandalism, disregard for university authority and abuse of the university judicial system, have been pressed against each student. While the charges are criminal misdemeanors, the university customarily does not involve law enforcement authorities when a student commits such acts unless a police officers witnesses it taking place or a victim presses charges. The students responsible for Nov. 6 acts want to write The Daily Mississippian a letter to the editor, expressing a public apology, said University Communications Director Jeff Alford Thursday, adding that the charged students "are very remorseful, they are scared and embarrassed and ashamed. They realize clearly what kind of harm they've caused, and they're upset about it." When regular classes resume in January, the University Judicial Board will convene to hear testimony in the cases of the three students and decide whether to assign verbal reprimand, community service, restitution, suspension or expulsion to the students.The Judicial Board is composed of eight faculty members and eight students, advised by Dean of Students Sparky Reardon. "It makes the university look bad unjustly, and it sours the hard work that the administration, the faculty and the students have made to making this more and more of a unified campus," Associated Student Body President Drew Snyder said. "If they find them guilty, my hope is that the punishment is extremely harsh." The intangible damages wrought materialized in the number of students, faculty and staff attending meetings that gathered in the incident's wake, including an update gathering in Paris-Yates Chapel and a rally in front of the Student Union since the investigation began last month. "This incident caused a great deal of hurt and anger and fear among many members of the university community, black and white," Alford said. "We can learn a lot about each other. We can learn about not making assumptions, and we can learn how hurtful our words can be." There is speculation that a fourth student drew vulgar images and words, but investigators have not linked him to the racially insensitive actions of the other three. Two black freshmen students awoke Nov. 6 to discover "F----- N-----," "F----- Hoe N-----," a tree and a noose on their residence hall doors along with images and references to genitalia scrawled in blue window chalk on the elevator, wall and doors of three other students. The physical damages spanned the residence hall's fourth, fifth and sixth floors, amounting to roughly $600, Alford said. When they were initially discovered, the racial slurs lured national and statewide media attention in the midst of Ole Miss' observation of 40 years of desegregation. The three students charged in the incident will be responsible for paying the costs of repair. An irritated Chancellor Robert Khayat said the entire situation was "regrettable," but it taught the university community that no members "should engage in abusive behavior" and "before we jump to conclusions and start to condemning groups of people, we should know what happened." <hr></blockquote>
From "The Clarion-Ledger" Black students allegedly behind racist graffiti By Andy Kanengiser Three African-American students at the University of Mississippi have been accused of writing racist graffiti on doors outside rooms of two other black students in the Kincannon residence hall on the Oxford campus. The students, all freshmen, wrote vulgar and obscene messages at three other locations in the dorm. They will face a University Judicial Council hearing when classes resume in January, Ole Miss officials said Wednesday. If they are found guilty, their punishments could be reprimands, community service, suspension or expulsion. They can appeal. A fourth African-American student also is being investigated in connection with the incident, Ole Miss Communications Director Jeff Alford said. Ole Miss officials refused to release names of the students, citing privacy laws. Each freshman was charged with five violations of the student code of conduct in connection with the Nov. 6 incident, Ole Miss officials said. The students told school officials they were playing a prank on acquaintances. "It was thoughtless on their part,'' Ole Miss Chancellor Robert Khayat said. "We don't condone abusive behavior of any kind. They should apologize.'' The fact that the students are African Americans "doesn't excuse their behavior,'' Khayat said. The incident received statewide and national publicity and came at a time when the university was commemorating the admittance of its first black student, James Meredith, in 1962. Ole Miss received "a lot of unjust criticism,'' said student body President Drew Snyder, 21, of Madison. Snyder said he hopes the Judicial Council will "punish the students to the fullest extent, regardless of race." "It is harassment, plain and simple.'' The students were charged with flagrant disrespect of a member of the university community, harassment/disorderly conduct, vandalism, disregard for university authority and abuse of the university judicial system. The last two charges were related to the students allegedly making false and misleading statements to investigators. Ole Miss will not pursue criminal charges, Khayat said. The students caused $600 damage to the dorm, including cleaning costs and repair of doors.
I find it amusing that this has you "speechless" and the editorial says this is "one of the outrageous race scandals of the 21st century". What a crock. What's outrageous is how many people like yourself and robbie over here climb out of the woodwork to whine and cry woe is me about something like this yet can't be found to explain the rampant racism towards minorities in this country. A black man burning a cross has no meaning. In order for you to prove a hate crime you have to show a bias towards that particular race, religion, gender, or whatever. So unless you can prove that these black kids have a bias towards blacks then there is no hate crime. It's just a couple of kids acting like morons. They should be prosecuted for vandalism and thrown out of school. The FBI defines a hate crime to be "a criminal offense committed against a person, property or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientatio, or ethnicity/national origin."
As usual, you're completely clueless. Hate crimes have nothing to do with majorities or minorities, they're crimes based on bias. If a white man is murdered because he's white, that's a hate crime.
like Timing pointed out, a double standard my exist in presuming it was whites, but that exists with a hoax as well. A double standard in punishment would only exist in the description of the crime. This is not a hate crime, because it was black on black. <blockquote><hr><b>two black freshmen students awoke Nov. 6 to discover</b> "F----- N-----," "F----- Hoe N-----," a tree and a noose <b>on their residence hall doors</b> along with images and references to genitalia scrawled in blue window chalk on the elevator, wall and doors of three other students. <hr></blockquote> The words and images were placed on two black student doors. There is no double standard in that this must be called a hate crime, or they are getting off light for it not being a hate crime. <b>It is an outragious hoax that could bet them expelled.</b> That is enough. Don't try so hard to hunt down double standards in the justice system or PC....that doesn't exist here.
Timing, you know as well as I do that it is *highly* unlikely for a crime committed by against a white to be prosecuted as a hate crime. Perhaps you missed the point of this entire thread -- the outrageous double standard that exists. The article must not have conveyed this point to you as it did to the rest of us. Read a little closer next time, amigo.
Here is why I don't like hate crime legislation...take the following hypo... 1) A vandalism is committed. 2) Vandalism comes with a sentence of 6 months. 3) It turns out to be committed upon a member of another race. 4) The penalty is 3 years. What are the additional 30 months for? It's for the hate. Hate IS THOUGHT. Therefore...the additional jail time is for the thought. It isn't against the law to be a bigotted jackass...the First Amendment protects that thought. It's reprehensible...but we're talking about legalities here. You punish the ACT...but not the THOUGHT. It is frightening when we start advocating that the government punishes thought...even the most reprehensible kind of thought.
I'd like two things from you T_J. 1. Show me an example of someone who had a crime committed against them because they were white, yet it wasn't prosecuted that way. 2. Give me another example of this, since this wonderful author didn't feel she needed to in order to get you, tnumber, and others all riled up: Thanks.
Conversely...do you have any examples of blacks who WERE prosecuted under hate crimes legislation for crimes committed where a white man was the victim? That type of question necessarily cuts both ways.
No, it's not my burden to. I haven't claimed that there have been any. I'm not the one claiming that it happens though. You can't spout off and say something happens all the time with no proof at all that it happens.
True enough. How about this...it is my perception that the hate crime legislation is rarely invoked when the defendant is black and the victim is white.
Because you NEVER hear about it happening. It is always the other way around. And I'm not talking about just the news either. My perception is also based upon friends of mine in the criminal defense Bar.
Hate crime legislation is stupid because it really isn't worse if you kill someone because you don't like their skin color, or because someone paid you, or because they cut you off in traffic, or because you want to steal their sneakers. Murder is murder, assault is assault, vandalism is vandalism, etc. Why should the penalty change when the end result is the same.
That's the only argument that <B>doesn't</B> work with me, Hydra. People get different penalties for murdering different people all the time. If you kill a cop or a little girl, you're more likely to get a worse penalty than if you murder a gang member. Refman, I'd love to talk to a Federal prosecuter about this. If they are more likely to take cases of hate crimes against blacks than whites, I have a <B>huge</B> problem with that.
Hate crime legislation is stupid because it really isn't worse if you kill someone because you don't like their skin color, or because someone paid you, or because they cut you off in traffic, or because you want to steal their sneakers. Murder is murder, assault is assault, vandalism is vandalism, etc. Why should the penalty change when the end result is the same. I don't agree with hate crime legislation, but your reasoning makes no sense. We have all sorts of degrees of "killing someone" - First through third degree murder, manslaughter (voluntary & involuntary), etc. The penalties are different depending on premeditation, intent, etc. The end result was a dead person in every case - do you think all of these should be rolled up into one standard "murder" conviction?
First off, I'm not your amigo. Second of all, according to the FBI there were 1,511 hate crime offenses against whites in 1995. Is it your contention that none of those were prosecuted? Stick to what you know, rookie. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hatecm.htm
Let me preface any comments with the assertion that I am under absolutely no obligation to provide you with anything RM95. You provide this BBS with less facts and support than any other member, judging by your words per post average. It's pretty hard to squeeze any support into your typical 1-line, 1-sentence posts, emoticon filled posts. Sigh. But...since I am in a gracious mood, I will respond. The fact that it would be hard for me to come up with an *explicit* example of this is evidence that my theory is correct. A crime committed against a white person is less likely to receive the fanfare or racial overtones that a crime committed against a black person would (Haitian broomstick incident in NYC, James Byrd, Rodney King, etc). Which incident got more publicity -- Rodney King's beating or Reginald Denny's beating? You can't tell me there wasn't a double standard -- and Denny wasn't even guilty of a crime, to boot. It is unfortunate that white guilt allows this double standard to exist. Articles such as the one that t4651965 brought to our attention will ultimately help to end these feelings.
