Discussion in 'UK politics, current affairs and news' started by nicedream, May 11, 2014.
But this view and the law applies to non fascists also. So it’s quite important.
You’re going down a really weird route here
why not quote the proper post then?
It's called looking for a pointless row. It's his MO recently.
It’s true: we’re going down a weird route when some anti-social or criminal scumbags have a protected characteristic based on ethnicity or religion.
I did quote that post just not all of it. But it’s there if you want to read it.
If the Nation of Islam or whoever started banging on the doors of random white people calling them dirty white Christian pedophile scumbags, there's a reasonable chance they might get done for the same offence.
the people they targeted were INNOCENT
do you understand??
nearly as successful as the 'ra
But they're not even very good at that!
The wider point is also being discussed.
do you agree with post #637 by Yoss?
Are those protected characteristics and is there a legal precedent where where they’ve been aggravating factors in a case of harassment?
Even if it is, why should abusing some scumbag who is Christian be any worse than abusing an atheist one?
Yes, it is possible might tey have been charged with breach of the peace or some such, but as with some clown shouting abuse entirely through random letter boxes it is not likely they would have been jailed, much less as in this case for 9 months. There would be hundreds of thousands in jail if everyone was treated the same way.
And it is precisely because the sentencing overkill is self-evident that it becomes politically counter productive.
might have gone for it except the fuckwits went nowhere near anyone involved in the trial so conspiracy might have failed because they targeted people that had zero contact with the trial
stop twisting it for your own ends
if INNOCENT christians were being verbally attacked by muslims or other faiths because of their faith then it would be the same no
the people they abused were NOT scumbags, you might think so, but they were NOT, once again they were INNOCENT and targeted because of their faith
Pisspoor even for you.
Is having some nutter screaming through your letterbox for being Christian more traumatic than having them harass you for some other reason?
not saying it is but it's the fucking aggravating factor and why they did it isn't it
Won't somebody please think of the white people?
That reminds me what is the collective noun for strawmen?
A Magnus of straw men.
research shows that hate crime - i.e. being attacked for your race, religion, sexuality etc has a more damaging effect on the victim - because you are attacking something fundamental about their sense of self. it also acts as an attack on a wider community - in this case it sends a message of hate to all muslims. Thats why if a crime is classed as a "hate crime" it results in a more punitive sentence.
They could simply have had their collars felt for harassment. What has happened is they’ve had aggravating factors bolted on which plays right into their narrative of minorities getting special treatment which helps their organisations grow. All being cheered on by you.
You’re another far right recruitment agent.
That's not an accusation I take at all lightly and I invite you to withdraw it.
Not really. If they'd actually successfully targeted the defendants maybe. Instead of which they're just a laughing stock. Their conduct was definitely towards the upper end of harassment.
If they'd been animal rights types they'd have been properly fucked but then the pharmaceutical industry genuinely gets "special treatment "
no you prick, you think muslims are fair game
I think some people are fair game by virtue of their actions - their ethnicity or beliefs are irrelevant. You think their characteristics are relevant. What does that make you?
Separate names with a comma.