Are hate crime enhancements fair?

[odeon]

Ah, yes, Pasolini was a prime example of someone who would thrive in an anarchy. They guy would probably not have reached his teens.

[TheoK]

Why? 

[Beardy McFuckface]

If it was obvious that the motive of the crime was out of actual hatred, then possibly enhancements could be fair.

Take race for example. How do we consider what the person done is out of racial hatred or just saying words like "nigger" etc. without thinking? It's hard to consider their internal motives like that unless they put up grafitti stating "i hate black people" or something like that.

This also brings me to another thing, again using the same race example - some people will use the race card against someone. A white man assaults a black man, but the black man could easily use the race card to say the reason behind the assault was racially motivated, when in reality it probably wasn't.

[odeon]

Why? 

I'm assuming that the guy who killed him would not have waited for that long, nor would others pissed off by his antics. Most people do have some respect for laws and such if they are enforced.

Hell, *i* would have considered offing him.

[odeon]

If it was obvious that the motive of the crime was out of actual hatred, then possibly enhancements could be fair.

Take race for example. How do we consider what the person done is out of racial hatred or just saying words like "nigger" etc. without thinking? It's hard to consider their internal motives like that unless they put up grafitti stating "i hate black people" or something like that.

This also brings me to another thing, again using the same race example - some people will use the race card against someone. A white man assaults a black man, but the black man could easily use the race card to say the reason behind the assault was racially motivated, when in reality it probably wasn't.

How do you know?

[TheoK]

Why? 

I'm assuming that the guy who killed him would not have waited for that long, nor would others pissed off by his antics. Most people do have some respect for laws and such if they are enforced.

Hell, *i* would have considered offing him.

It was a setup. The guy who was convicted might not have been the real murderer, he wasn't alone, at least.

I don't see why you think people would be helpless in an anarchy. In an anarchy there isn't any state monopoly on violence, so you can arm yourself better than in Vermont.

And I don't understand why you would like to kill a great artist, even he was a Bolshevik 

[TheoK]

If it was obvious that the motive of the crime was out of actual hatred, then possibly enhancements could be fair.

Take race for example. How do we consider what the person done is out of racial hatred or just saying words like "nigger" etc. without thinking? It's hard to consider their internal motives like that unless they put up grafitti stating "i hate black people" or something like that.

This also brings me to another thing, again using the same race example - some people will use the race card against someone. A white man assaults a black man, but the black man could easily use the race card to say the reason behind the assault was racially motivated, when in reality it probably wasn't.

How do you know?

Because many of those who can play the victim card do.

[odeon]

Why? 

I'm assuming that the guy who killed him would not have waited for that long, nor would others pissed off by his antics. Most people do have some respect for laws and such if they are enforced.

Hell, *i* would have considered offing him.

It was a setup. The guy who was convicted might not have been the real murderer, he wasn't alone, at least.

I don't see why you think people would be helpless in an anarchy. In an anarchy there isn't any state monopoly on violence, so you can arm yourself better than in Vermont.

And I don't understand why you would like to kill a great artist, even he was a Bolshevik 

Not everyone would be helpless, only the weaker ones. The young, the old, the sick, the handicapped, the weirdos never meeting your eye or focussing on their collections instead on what you were saying... Or the ones with less ammo or a malfunctioning gun or...

You get the idea.

As for the great artist, I never liked his films. I know he was appreciated by some but my view of him is that what he lacked in talent he gained in shock value.

Ugly, sometimes amateurish photo, especially in his early work, and poor overall technical quality did not help.

[odeon]

If it was obvious that the motive of the crime was out of actual hatred, then possibly enhancements could be fair.

Take race for example. How do we consider what the person done is out of racial hatred or just saying words like "nigger" etc. without thinking? It's hard to consider their internal motives like that unless they put up grafitti stating "i hate black people" or something like that.

This also brings me to another thing, again using the same race example - some people will use the race card against someone. A white man assaults a black man, but the black man could easily use the race card to say the reason behind the assault was racially motivated, when in reality it probably wasn't.

How do you know?

Because many of those who can play the victim card do.

They show the card before they are jumped on?

[TheoK]

You don't really believe that the state defense the weak, do you? Well, there is social security and such, but it isn't like the state is very interested in defending the average citizen.

You know very well, that if you kill a burglar who is about to rape your wife or daughter in their own bedroom 2 o'clock in the morning, you risk jail. How could this even be possible, if the state wants justice? How can you not have a carte blanche to kill someone who is attacking your family in your own home? It barely even exists in America nowadays.

Since people are stupid, you need to shock them like Pasolini did.

[TheoK]

If it was obvious that the motive of the crime was out of actual hatred, then possibly enhancements could be fair.

Take race for example. How do we consider what the person done is out of racial hatred or just saying words like "nigger" etc. without thinking? It's hard to consider their internal motives like that unless they put up grafitti stating "i hate black people" or something like that.

This also brings me to another thing, again using the same race example - some people will use the race card against someone. A white man assaults a black man, but the black man could easily use the race card to say the reason behind the assault was racially motivated, when in reality it probably wasn't.

How do you know?

Because many of those who can play the victim card do.

They show the card before they are jumped on?

Well, women, immigrants and gay people who actually are jumped on but not for being women, immigrants or gay, often like to pretend that it was a hate crime

[odeon]

You don't really believe that the state defense the weak, do you? Well, there is social security and such, but it isn't like the state is very interested in defending the average citizen.

I believe that the threat of punishment will deter some of the morons that wouldn't stop to think twice without it.

You know very well, that if you kill a burglar who is about to rape your wife or daughter in their own bedroom 2 o'clock in the morning, you risk jail. How could this even be possible, if the state wants justice? How can you not have a carte blanche to kill someone who is attacking your family in your own home? It barely even exists in America nowadays.

Since people are stupid, you need to shock them like Pasolini did.

OTOH, the burglar might just as easily kill you in your sleep, THEN rape your loved ones and kill them. So easy to do when you don't risk anything more than weak and sleepy people.

I'd do what I must to protect my family and then worry about the aftermath. I have far greater faith in the system than you do, at least in part because my personal experience tells me the system works. It's nowhere near perfect but it is preferable to a world where the strongest man and the biggest gun will always prevail, no matter what the issue.

And yeah, that worked really well for Pasolini.

[odeon]

If it was obvious that the motive of the crime was out of actual hatred, then possibly enhancements could be fair.

Take race for example. How do we consider what the person done is out of racial hatred or just saying words like "nigger" etc. without thinking? It's hard to consider their internal motives like that unless they put up grafitti stating "i hate black people" or something like that.

This also brings me to another thing, again using the same race example - some people will use the race card against someone. A white man assaults a black man, but the black man could easily use the race card to say the reason behind the assault was racially motivated, when in reality it probably wasn't.

How do you know?

Because many of those who can play the victim card do.

They show the card before they are jumped on?

Well, women, immigrants and gay people who actually are jumped on but not for being women, immigrants or gay, often like to pretend that it was a hate crime

And this you know because you saw their victim cards?

[TheoK]

I believe that the threat of punishment will deter some of the morons that wouldn't stop to think twice without it.

OTOH, the burglar might just as easily kill you in your sleep, THEN rape your loved ones and kill them. So easy to do when you don't risk anything more than weak and sleepy people.

Who says that he doesn't risk anything in an anarchy? The victims can still have relatives and friends, who might get even on him.

I'd do what I must to protect my family and then worry about the aftermath. I have far greater faith in the system than you do, at least in part because my personal experience tells me the system works. It's nowhere near perfect but it is preferable to a world where the strongest man and the biggest gun will always prevail, no matter what the issue.

You don't find it sick to the bone that you even have to consider going to jail for defending your loved ones from an unprovoked attack in your own home?

And yeah, that worked really well for Pasolini.

Well, he got attention at least. He was 

[bodie]

Since people are stupid, you need to shock them like Pasolini did.

What? all people are stupid??  speak for yourself