A couple of weeks ago I told you about a hideous crime that occurred in Brooklyn. A large group of black, future penitentiary inmates beat up a small group of white girls while shouting “black power” and “white crackers.” For insane reasons, I’m sure, the cops decided not to charge the thugs-in-training with a “bias” crime.
The title of the post, Sorry, Whites Not Protected Under ‘Hate’ Crime Law, was intentionally provocative. I wanted to provoke your anger toward the blatant bias in the reporting of so-called hate crimes. I think the very concept “hate crime” is absurd, but since these ridiculous laws are on the books, they must be applied fairly. City prosecutors in Brooklyn agreed:
Cops locked up five of the alleged attackers — all juveniles — but did not charge them with a bias crime.The city’s Corporation Counsel Office, which prosecutes cases in Family Court, raised the charges against the assailants….Sources said the initial report did not include the comments allegedly made by the suspects. “It should have been a hate crime from day one,” fumed one parent.
The attack took place on March 30 in Marine Park as six 15-year-old Catholic schoolgirls were shooting hoops on Fillmore Avenue and Marine Parkway at about 3 p.m….Police sources said six to eight black girls from Marine Park JHS marched into the middle of the white girls’ three-on-three basketball game and demanded the court.
Some adults intervened and the alleged assailants walked away only to return three or four times with a progressively larger gang, the victims said….Finally, a posse of 20 to 30 girls set upon the victims with kicks and punches, while shouting, “White crackers,” “Black power,” and, curiously, “Martin Luther King.”
One parent said she and the other parents are planning to obtain a lawyer and take legal action — though she couldn’t specify exactly what action would be taken. (Source)
In the previous post, I neglected to mention that the group consisted of girl thugs, too. In fact, it seems to have been mostly girls. Up to thirty cowards against six girls.
We are witnesses to the beginning of a life in the criminal justice system for most of these black teenagers. Today they’re tried in Family Court; tomorrow, criminal court. A few won’t stop at beating people. They’ll escalate to murdering people, and sadly, for the most ignorant of reasons. This is life in the amoral jungle, and unless someone or something intervenes, their lives will follow a predictable pattern of criminality. I hope each one is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law with the most harshest sentence allowed.
It won’t rehabilitate them, I suspect, but at least there will be a few less timebombs roaming the streets.
Update: I knew it! Black college student was fake-hating because she wanted to go home. There are plenty of hoaxes where this comes from, people, so don’t be fooled by “hate” stories. (Hat tip: Michelle Malkin)
“I hope each one is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law with the most harshest sentence allowed.”
I agree. We have seen how our society’s idea of “babying” some of our criminals due to the possible “circumstances” they have grown up in, has NOT changed any behavior on the part of many criminals.
Comment by Renee — 04.26.05 @ 7:14 am
Renee! Welcome back.
Comment by La Shawn — 04.26.05 @ 7:16 am
Good to be able to post again (I think the filter was blocking me a few times plus I am doubled up on courses this semester (but I read your blog everyday :))
Comment by Renee — 04.26.05 @ 7:19 am
Have you ever heard of hate crime described as “bias crime” before? Are we trying not to be too judgemental?!
Comment by Mike — 04.26.05 @ 7:33 am
Worst of all, these stupid girls will probably have children and regenerate this pathological waste of life.
Comment by Nardo — 04.26.05 @ 8:21 am
Not necessarily, Nardo. Intervention through prayer, good role models, etc., could do wonders for the offspring of these girls and even the girls themselves. I know my post makes the case sound hopeless, but hope is always there.
Comment by La Shawn — 04.26.05 @ 8:45 am
I’ll bet those thuggish teenagerss would be surprised to learn that their behavior comes not from some so-called “authentic” black culture, but, rather, from England by way of the American southern white culture of centuries past. Be sure to check out (you’ve probably already read an advance copy?) Thomas Sowell’s op ed at Opinion Journal today on themes developed in his new book, Black Rednecks and White Liberals.
I’ve blogged about it here: Calling a black redneck a black redneck
Comment by Sissy Willis — 04.26.05 @ 9:00 am
Sissy W.
Oh I see. An in depth study of how blacks are not responsible for their actions and in fact should blame long dead white people. How original!
Comment by pajamazon — 04.26.05 @ 9:20 am
Dr Sowell, as usual, has produced an insightful piece. The history of the subject, as Dr. Sowell lays it out, is eye-opening.
I’m still confused, though. Even if folks don’t know that history, why are a few clinging to a way of life that is so clearly negative? Does it take a history lesson to see that thuggery is a dead-end street?
Someone will probably chastise me for being ignorant, as happened recently when an acquaintance ended a conversation by reciting the tired old canard, “You can’t possibly understand; it’s a black thing.” Well, yes I can understand. I understand what my parents meant when they said I shouldn’t run with the wrong crowd, when they forced me to study, when they punished me severely after a minor run-in with the local gendarmes, when they insisted that I not dress like a hoodlum, and when they insisted I say Sir, Ma’am, please and thank you.
Comment by RedBeard — 04.26.05 @ 9:29 am
La Shawn,
You’re right. I’ve got two nieces, one a college grad the other a young lawyer, but their mother is now with husband #4, a drug addled moron. People can uproot themselves and move ahead, but this is the great exception and it is painful. How I would dearly love to see a revival of devotion to the raising of beloved well-disciplined children.
Comment by Nardo — 04.26.05 @ 9:30 am
The group nature of this attack illustrates another flaw in hate-crimes legislation. It’s unlikely that all of the 20 or 30 attackers shouted racial comments during the attack. It’s also improbable that there was any prearrangement among the attackers to make racial comments. What is far more likely is that one or two or some small number of the attackers shouted out such comments during the melee and some others joined in. While I suppose it’s possible that the victims might be able to identify which of the 20 to 30 attackers made these remarks, that’s really strectching it.
Charging each arrested attacker with a bias crime obscures the fact that she might very well not have said anything racially related during the attack and may not have expected any of her fellow attackers to do so. She might well have expected the event to have been nothing more than an “ordinary” attack, so to speak. And note that this isn’t just a one-time controversy, as a significant percentage of bias crimes involve multiple offenders.
Comment by Peter — 04.26.05 @ 9:32 am
Pajamazon, although I understand your meaning and agree with you about excuse-making, I think you’ve taken Dr. Sowell’s piece in the wrong way. He’s not making excuses at all, at least not the way I read it. He’s puncturing the myth that thuggery is somehow a cultural inheritance of race that should be preserved, when in fact it is the negative result of association and bad choices, and has nothing to do with race.
Comment by RedBeard — 04.26.05 @ 9:39 am
Thanks for clarifying the incident. I’d been under the impression that it was a bunch of boys beating up on one girl (I’ve been busy, so I haven’t been reading as thoroughly as I should of late). Knowing more about the circumstances makes it more understandable–hardly forgivable, but slightly less heinous. Glad the prosecutor’s office has fixed the arresting cops’ error by upping the charges (if adding “hate” actually ups it).
Believe it or not, prosecuting those girls sends them the message that their behavior is not tolerated, NOT prosecuting them would have encouraged them to do more and worse.
Comment by Lornkanaga — 04.26.05 @ 9:49 am
Pajamazon,
That’s been going on for years, and is why they let minorities off…”The man repressed them for generations…it’s not their fault” syndrome.
Sorry…time to get over that tired excuse (I don’t like psychiatrists……Frankly, the fact that someone is ‘insane’ only exacerbates the need to lock them up. Not go easy on them. Wanna lock them into an asylum for nutballs never to let them out? Ok…but LOCK them up. Don’t put them in a white outfit and have them in a minimum security room.
Comment by Dan — 04.26.05 @ 9:54 am
I am glad this was reversed, but it is just a drop in the bucket. We see tons of stuff every day against whitey that should be called a hate crime, but isn’t. Why was no attention drawn to what this University of Texas professor said?
“Jose Angel Gutierrez, Professor, Univ of Texas and Founder, La Raza Unida (Political Party): “We have an aging white America. . . . They are dying. . . . They are shitting in their pants with fear! I love it!” “We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him.”
Why was there so much controversy on Ward Churchill, but absolutely nothing on this?
Please visit my new website, and PLEASE leave me some comments!
Tancredo ‘08!
Comment by Texas Republicans Against Bush — 04.26.05 @ 10:04 am
I agree with you on this one LaShawn. Nothing apalls me worse about my community than the cowardliness that seems to be rampant. Instead of one on one, now it is cool to run with a pack and ’stomp’ someone out. We had an event occur about a year ago in Nebraska, where six girls at a highschool fought two girls, and one of the girls assaulted died.
I have no sympathy for cowardliness and bullying whatsoever.
However, I think we still have not distinguished the difference between a hate crime and a regular assault. Simply saying things while fighting is not a hate crime, performing an assault for the sole purpose of someones race is.
So if I fought someone and they called me ‘nigger’ in the fight that is not a hate crime. However, if they attacked me specifically because I am black and for no other reason, that is a hate crime.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.26.05 @ 10:40 am
The thing that got me is why Coretta King and her organization aren’t out there tking these girls and any other thugs for taking “MLK’s name in vain”? Silence from black leaders is equally damning.
Comment by Andy — 04.26.05 @ 10:46 am
“However, I think we still have not distinguished the difference between a hate crime and a regular assault. Simply saying things while fighting is not a hate crime, performing an assault for the sole purpose of someones race is.”
I disagree. It’s assault. I’m not completely without predjudice. I still, however, keep myself from beating someone up because of their religion, skin color, beliefs….should I be prosecuted for a thought hate crime? Personally, you’re trying to legislate thought. You can hate all you want, not that it’s Christian, it certainly isn’t, but I’m human and far from Perfect, God is aware of this, as is his Son, Jesus, and as long as I strive to live as well as I can in the Christian manner and try to rise above it, I THINK I’m ok, however God judges all things. He is the final arbitor (sorry, sidetracked), at any rate, even if I beat someone up because I don’t like their religion, etc, it’s assault. You can’t CAN’T make it worse than that as you can’t legislate thought, Period.
Comment by Dan — 04.26.05 @ 10:48 am
I agree with you 100%, LaShawn. Unfortunately, though, I doubt these kids will get anything more than a slap on the wrist. After all, they’ve been kept down by ‘the man’ for so long, it isn’t their fault. *eyeroll*
Comment by Miss O'Hara — 04.26.05 @ 10:51 am
Dan - I was referring to the nature of the law, not whether I believe there should be such a thing as a ‘hate’ crime or not.
Under the law, the nature of a hate crime is based upon ‘intent’. I think in many cases this is easily determined.
A - Was the assault provoked by the simply fact that a person was of a different ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation?
Or
B - Was the assault predicated for other reasons than specifically the afformentioned ones.
For example in the above incident, like I mentioned, simply saying cracka and black power does not necessarily indicate a hate crime, the same as if some one got into it with me who was white and called me a nigger in the altercation. The above simply looked like a common bullying tactic that occurs on various levels all the time. The only difference is that the victims were little white catholic girls.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.26.05 @ 11:02 am
Dell, and either in A or B the victim is hurt just the same. If it was white on white girls, the assault is still a “hate” crime, in that to deliberately attack and hurt someone is motivated by bloodlust.
Comment by Andy — 04.26.05 @ 11:07 am
Andy, like I said before, I don’t agree with hate crime legislation (on the previous thread LaShawn had on the topic). I am pointing out the technical differences UNDER THE LAW. The woman in the article stated that it was a hate crime, and the intent of the post was to signify bias. I am not saying bias in the enforcement of this law does not exist, what I am saying is that this event is not necessarily a ‘hate crime’.
~The Quick Facts about: US Congress
The legislature of the United States governmentUS Congress (HR 4797 - 1992) defined a hate crime as: “[a crime in which] the defendant’s conduct was motivated by Quick Facts about: hatred
The emotion of hate; a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands actionhatred, bias, or prejudice, based on the actual or perceived Quick.”~
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.26.05 @ 11:34 am
When a group of marauding blacks, many of whom were teens, were attacking whites in VA somewhere between 2001 and 2003, they were caught and given a slap on the hand (by design of the Commonwealth Attorney). So, much for the justice system being color blind. By the way, I’m an defense attorney.
Comment by Voracious Reader — 04.26.05 @ 11:40 am
Around the Blogosphere
John Bolton Powerline, Blogs for Bush Lap-Top Liar Michelle Malkin, La Shawn Barber, Wizbang Color Coded Hate Crime Michelle Malkin,…
Trackback by JackLewis.net — 04.26.05 @ 11:45 am
Dell, got it, thanks.
Comment by Andy — 04.26.05 @ 11:52 am
Some Call It A Carnival/Bonfire Of Classiness.
We call it “Classiness, All Around Us.” Click to explore more WILLisms.com. In no particular order, WILLisms.com presents classiness from the blogosphere: 1. What does it mean to be rich? Peaktalk has some great thoughts in response to this Asymmetri…
Trackback by WILLisms.com — 04.26.05 @ 12:03 pm
It’s amazing that I live in Brooklyn and have not heard anything about this case until reading about it here, but I keep hearing about that little bad a** 5 year old who (deservedly) got handcuffed.
Comment by Jasmin — 04.26.05 @ 12:35 pm
It is amazing to me that in our day and age we continue to believe we are so different just because of the color of our skin. I believe that science can show that human being regardless of color are very similiar… I loved it when Jesse Jackson came to be with Terri Schiavo’s family and he said ” This is where the lions lay down with the lambs”…..I don’t usually agree with Jesse Jackson on a whole lot of issues! I really gained a new respect for him when he stood up for this case! It showed great courage and such high regard for what truly is right! Thanks Jesse!
Comment by linda — 04.26.05 @ 1:36 pm
Black Girl Charged With Hate Crime
I don’t agree with hate crime legislation, but if it’s going to be around, I’m glad it’s going to be applied in this case. Threatening people simply because they are minorities is no less heinous if you’re a minority yourself than if you’re …
Trackback by A Clear Voice — 04.26.05 @ 2:04 pm
I still think hate crime legislation is like whipping a dead horse, but it’s good to see that the law is being equally applied.
It’s still a bad law. There is evil and hatred behind every crime. What is already on the books before was plenty sufficient.
But, if it’s the law, let us apply it to everyone.
Comment by Chris Roberts — 04.26.05 @ 3:01 pm
La Shawn Barber shows again that she has better grip on reality than just about anyone else I […]
Pingback by E u p h o r i c R e a l i t y — 04.26.05 @ 3:57 pm
Sadly, there are too few stories of those who started down the path of violent criminal conduct and then changed the direction of their lives. Generally speaking, our character shapes our conduct, and our conduct shapes our character. When our character degrades, our conduct usually follows; and when our conduct degrades, our character usually follows.
Of course — and thankfully! — there are exceptions, and many of those exceptions involve people becoming followers of Christ, born from above. But when someone receives Christ and believes on His name, and receives the power/right to become a child of God, that is called a miracle.
Comment by laserlawyer — 04.26.05 @ 4:32 pm
Fake hate crime
Minority students Trinity International University — a Christian college affiliated with the Evangelical Free Church — were evacuated overnight from campus last week after several students received threatening racist hate mail. Now it turns out that …
Trackback by brightMystery — 04.26.05 @ 4:50 pm
Just a note about my trackback above — I changed the title of my article to “Fake hate email at a Christian college” because whereas the email was a hoax, the hate CRIME is very real.
Honestly, how hard could it have been to just tell her parents she didn’t want to go to college any more? I can’t imagine what I’d think if my daughter (who is Asian, although I am white) pulled the same kind of stunt.
Comment by Robert from brightMystery — 04.26.05 @ 5:03 pm
I like how Hillary, Jesse, and Al Sharpton came running to defend those “white crackers”. Oh you now tell me they had nothing to say??
Comment by ratso ferrari — 04.26.05 @ 7:42 pm
Someone mentioned Thomas Sowell a few posts ago, and I wanted to give some thoughts on him. I am currently reading Conquests and Cultures, and his ability to lay out the facts objectively and in perfect context is astounding. He has spent more time in research than probably any ten other authors I’ve read, and only the most indoctrinated could take issue with any point he makes.
I saw him on CSPAN talking about his “black redneck” theory, and it made perfect sense as well. I should know, having grown up around both black and white rednecks myself. His point is that destructive, anti-social behavior must not be excused in anyone because of the color of their skin or their cultural origins.
One thing which I don’t know if he’s ever brought up but that I wish he would, is the difference between blacks in America and native Africans. I have known quite a few Africans, mostly in the Army, and they were culturally more like whites than blacks. I never could figure that out until Dr. Sowell came along. He is one of the smartest people in America today, everyone should lend an ear when he speaks.
Comment by Improbulus Maximus — 04.26.05 @ 8:12 pm
Improbulus, that’s because for many Africans, getting here is fulfilling a great personal dream thru education, responsibility & merit. Plus they weren’t indoctrinated on the idea that the Man is trying to put them down.
The cultural problem is black Americans have a readymade scapegoat in racism, while Africans and Caribbean natives have none for personal shortcomings.
Comment by Andy — 04.26.05 @ 10:05 pm
I don’t agree with hate crime laws especially when they are not enforced fairly as this story demonstrated early on.
Hate is hate whether directed at someone because of race or not. And what makes laws like this illogical is that it ignores the fact that hate crimes exist within races, as I leanred the hard way in high school. In my class of about 600, there were three black young men, one of which played on the high school basketball team. When our school played a team with the reverse demographic, the black students on the opposing team, without fail, would verbally and physically taunt the black athlete on our team. They would call him white boy and ridicule him during and after games. What was so interesting is that, to me and my classmates, he always fit in. He was one of us and race never was an issue. He was just another guy. The only people to attack him about his race were people of his own race.
So do cases like that ever get any press? No. Do cases like the one La Shawn linked to get press? Not until someone screams about the hypocrisy. The only time we hear anything is when “evil and intolerant” white people do something mean and stupid. But I bet you the situation I witnessed in high school happens all the time. People who attack others should be punished with equal ferocity regardless of the motive. After all, the damage is the same.
Comment by Sensible Mom — 04.26.05 @ 10:10 pm
I am pleased with this outcome. Usually the result of a hate crime hoax is a tap on the wrist and a sympathetic hug for the hoaxer. At least this idiot is being charged with a hate crime, despite the school president’s failure to condemn her.
We’re moving in the right direction, personal responsibility.
Comment by mikem — 04.26.05 @ 11:10 pm
Do you people not read what the hate crime law is? You are defining hate according to your personal perspective on the word and not according to the way it is legally defined in the context of the laws on the books…sheesh…
To say every crime is born out of hate is unintelligent. Some crime is born out of greed, other crime is born out of a qwest for power, other crime is born out of lust.
So then the question becomes, if hate crime is defined as attacking someone simply BECAUSE of their race, then this is totally different then the way the majority of you are attempting to define it.
And I agree, Hate crime legislation is stupid. If someone attacks me, I want equal justice whether they did it because they hated me due to my blackness or for some other reason.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.27.05 @ 9:20 am
Dell, you need to spend more time with your Bible. All SIN is born out of hate for God & His Truths. It is moral relativism to state otherwise.
“Hate*” is written 179 times in the KJV. If you review all of those verses, you will see that God defines all wrongs as being born of hate, including greed, lust & power.
Christians should be careful to avoid defaulting to what Man’s Law says. Remember Acts 5:29. Likewise, we as Christians have the moral imperative to ensure that our legal system gets back to the core of our human rights as laid out in the founding document that I cited you in the other thread on positive ID for would be voters.
Comment by Andy — 04.27.05 @ 1:16 pm
Andy — One has to be careful about treating “hate” as if it were an absolute wrong that necessarily produces sin. The scriptures plainly state that hate is something God experiences (e.g., “I hate divorce”). One could also argue that if you truly love someone, you will necessarily hate that which seeks to destroy the one you love.
Comment by laserlawyer — 04.27.05 @ 1:51 pm
Laser, I understand the “hate the sin, love the sinner”. I’m saying that all sin is motivated by hate. That’s not the same as hating that which seeks to destroy the one you love, nor that hate in of itself is a sin. I didn’t think to clarify that earlier. Thanks.
Comment by Andy — 04.27.05 @ 2:03 pm
Great point Andy. I forgot to attach the scriptural reference to my earlier post.
Comment by Chris Roberts — 04.27.05 @ 7:27 pm
They should all be sent to prison for 30 years, no excuses, no interference by jesse jackson no blathering about racists. It’s time to make a example out of these young thugs, it’s time for them to face the music and face harsh punishment.
Comment by firebird — 04.28.05 @ 9:50 am