The injuries are, in fact, more than just the physical injuries for some minorities. The demeaning nature of an attack can hurt worse and be more long lasting than any physical injury.Originally Posted by Dan Druff
If there had never been systematic intimidation against certain groups in this country, there never would have been anything called a "hate crime".
Lol @ demeaning nature.The injuries are, in fact, more than just the physical injuries for some minorities. The demeaning nature of an attack can hurt worse and be more long lasting than any physical injury.
If there had never been systematic intimidation against certain groups in this country, there never would have been anything called a "hate crime".
ya know, i agree....Druff's term, "unjustified assault" implies there are situations of "justified assault", really, the term justified assault for an ordinary citizen is an Oxymoron (that is, a term like "Military Intelligence" "Jumbo Shrimp" "Honest Politician" or "Fair Dealing Jewish Businessman")So if I beat the shit out of 85 year old woman or a 5 year old child, it is no different than if I struck a 30 year old 300 pound man in the arm? After all, in your opinion, assault is assault.
By the way, you don't even know what the fuck assault means. The crime is you are describing is called battery. Assault is a threat to commit a battery or a failed attempt thereof.
to most people. assault would normally be thought of as the use or attempt to use force in an offensive manner...and in the normal course of civil living, using offensive force, particularly deadly force, is to be left to law enforcement peace officers....citizens normally may use force legally only for defensive purposes...according to recognized expert Masaad Ayoob, "Deadly force is justified only when undertaken to prevent imminent and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent." At times, even use of mere fist may reach the level of deadly force, particularly when the combatants are mismatched as to size, age or fighting ability.
I would recommend Druff, and anyone, read material by Masaad Ayoob, (in particular his 1980 book "In the Gravest Extreme" & his follow up 2014 book "Deadly Force, Understanding Your Right to Self-Defense"). I invite anyone to post any other sources/authors of information on this topic
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
[x]race related story
[x]comments kinda racist (was to be expected).
[x]druff post with draconian views on the law
believability anyone is going to profit off any law suit from that story: 5/10
over all thread rating: solid 1/7
"Winning is the most important thing in my life, after breathing. Breathing first, winning next."
George Steinbrenner
Yea you are still saying that people shouldn't be penalized for attempted robbery. That's pretty much your entire argument and you've provided plenty of hilarious reasons for it.
But for arguments sake let's pick up simpler cases than someone getting punched in the face. Let's go with 3 simple cases of vandalism. Let's assume similar property damage and similar cleaning costs. On one night Harold the friendly neighborhood skinhead paints various things with red spray paint.
1) Harold starts with the door of a synagogue. Harold goes with the classics such as the heil-family, swastikas and a collection of demotivational slogans.
2) A shop door. Harold goes with his favorite slogan "Harold rules".
3) Your door. Harold goes with "die, Druff, die".
Are you saying the penalties for all 3 cases should be the same?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote