Unbelievable - a mob attacked these people for nothing

[luvsJack]

I still think you are missing A LOT....

And, to answer the above question... If a group of white guys went and found a black family and did what has been described... yes, as everyone has posted.... the black advocacy groups would all the heck over it... These white guys would definitely, without a doubt, be assumed guilty of a hate crime. (And, it would most definitely BE a hate crime) So, in answer to your question... If the tables were turned and the whites would be accused and prosecuted of a hate crime, then ABSOLUTELY, anything but equality would NOT be enough.

And, here is another big issue.... this is not an isolated incident that happened with a couple of idiots at a night club. This was a gang lynching! This was apparently a large group (gang) of people of one race going out and lynching a person of another race. (unless the victims are outright lying....)

This is nothing like the example you just gave...
Not at all....
Not even close.

As far as the action/inaction of the Akron police department... I think the comments that were quoted smack of excuses, placation, reverse racism, etc.... I think that you are missing the fact that everyone knows that there will be no justice.

And, yes, when the powers that be simply abdicate their responsibility to protect and serve and bring justice..... People feel the need to protect themselves....

My husband is commissioned, he has a concealed carry permit, his Glock is like American Express, he never leaves home without it.

Part of the problem with race relations in this country is the fact that if a white and black get in a fight; everybody wants to jump on the "hate crime" band wagon. Sometimes it really is not about race.

BTW, it was not a "couple of idiots in a night club". It was 10 bouncers and 2 managers. Bouncers usually do not come in size small, KWIM? And 12 makes a pretty good size gang on one person. During the entire incident they were yelling to him "N-- lover" and "N-- wannabe". Do not dismiss what my son went through just because I am not jumping up and down yelling "race war". But, oh I see--because it was white on white it couldn't be a hate crime; or maybe because the bouncers weren't black? Even the cops admitted it was, but white on white is hard to prove hate crime so they didn't go that route. As for an isolated incident--it wasn't. They did this to at least 3 other people that we know of. But the incident in this case? It IS isolated because it was only a 1 time thing (so far).

What difference does it make what the crime is listed as? Time in jail is time in jail. You have to PROVE hate crime in order for it to make a difference in court, don't ya'll get that? They can charge anyone with anything but proving it in a court of law is a different thing.

No one KNOWS that justice will not prevail in this case. I don't think any of you have a crystal ball with all the answers. Did some second article say that the police department was dropping the case? There has been not one shred of evidence stated that proves the cops are not going to try to do something in this case. They only said they weren't calling it a hate crime.

"And, yes, when the powers that be simply abdicate their responsibility to protect and serve and bring justice..... People feel the need to protect themselves...." This was a one time incident and this sounds like you think everyone should run out and buy a gun to carry at all times. Do you really think that is the answer? Do you really think that every ye-haw out there with an itchy trigger finger should be carrying a gun to "protect themselves"? If everyone really did that do you not realize how many young black boys would get shot just because they are black? Deciding on your own that the law isn't doing their job and you should get a gun is ludacris. You have no clue what they are doing to investigate this case. The victim should be at the police station every day seeing what is going on but no one else can sit and say they KNOW what is going on. Because, guess what? If it comes out that the victim instigated some of this (although that DOES NOT excuse the extent things went to) we probably will never hear about it.

My problem with what is being said in this thread is not that anyone believes this to be a hate crime (because I too believe that it may have been). My problem is that y'all seem to be calling for an old fashion lynching and then saying the boys and cops are the ones that are racist!


ETA: Just wanted to be clear, I really do believe these boys should be proscecuted to the fullest extent that they can be and they should sit in jail for what they did and pay restitution for it. This may very well have been a hate crime, and the victim should be jumping up and down at the police station every day making sure everything that should be being done is being done. Its the "mob mentality" of everyone screaming racisim I have an issue with because it does no good for this case or any other like it.

 

[moburg]

I agree with you in principle, but as long as there are going to be prosecution of "hate crimes", they should be applied equally.

I completely agree!

 

[JPN4265]

If this had been reversed, and the attackers were white, it would darn sure be a hate crime. Double standards I guess.

 

[Cor44432]

"interviewed by congress, he said that groups that were "not historically mistreated", would not be included in hate crime legislation."

Interesting if this is actually true, or taken out of context. All I could find was that Holder argued "He emphasized that the bill is designed to give special protections to groups that historically have been victims solely based on who they are."

This doesn't necessarily mean that groups that have NOT been historically mistreated would be left out entirely.

I think justice will be served in the case that happened in Akron, and we just need to let it all play out and not jump to conclusions.

 

[LuvOrlando]

To me, the whole notion of elevating on persons victimization over another person's hurt is, at its very core, cruel and flawed because what it accomplishes,with the same swipe, is diminish someone else's victimization.

How can we reach equilibrium when there lack of equal treatment is so blatant?

And as for historical victimization, EVERYONE on the planet has had to endure victimization at one point or another, women more than most but I don't see us as getting special treatment. The argument is flawed at its very core and we all know it intuitively.

 

[WDWKOOK]

This was a one time incident and this sounds like you think everyone should run out and buy a gun to carry at all times. Do you really think that is the answer? Do you really think that every ye-haw out there with an itchy trigger finger should be carrying a gun to "protect themselves"? If everyone really did that do you not realize how many young black boys would get shot just because they are black? Deciding on your own that the law isn't doing their job and you should get a gun is ludacris.

Firstly, crime is never a "one time incident," and isn't "one time" too many?

Secondly, your placing the words "protect themselves" in quotation marks makes me think that you are indeed complacent with the notion that someone other than yourself is ultimately responsible for you safety and well-being and that you are unwilling to take on that responsibility for yourself. It is your choice to do so, however, your "tone" indicates that you have no respect for those who law-abidingly exercise their 2nd Amendment rights given to all of us under the Constitution. (It's #2 for an important reason.)

Lastly, statistically speaking, the vast majority of crimes against blacks are committed by blacks, using illegally procured firearms. The bad guys never follow the rules.

Whether I feel that "the law isn't doing their job" is inconsequential. I simply recognize the fact that law enforcement can't protect me 24/7 - that is my and my DH's responsibility to ourselves and our DD. If you feel more comfortable abdicating this responsiblity, then I wish you the best of luck. (BTW, your avatar showing a Thompson sub-machine gun confuses me).

"I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy"​

.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I've always disliked that whole "Hate Crime" thing. It is the crime that matters. If you beat people up, that's what you're punished for.

This is America. You can white people if you want. You can even say that you hate white people. That's allowed and not something for which the punks should be punished.

People ought to be punished for attacking others and the punishment should be the same whether or not it was a "hate" crime.

But if they're going to have this stupid "hate" thing, then of course it should be applied to all races. Duh.

 

[luvsJack]

Firstly, crime is never a "one time incident," and isn't "one time" too many?

Secondly, your placing the words "protect themselves" in quotation marks makes me think that you are indeed complacent with the notion that someone other than yourself is ultimately responsible for you safety and well-being and that you are unwilling to take on that responsibility for yourself. It is your choice to do so, however, your "tone" indicates that you have no respect for those who law-abidingly exercise their 2nd Amendment rights given to all of us under the Constitution. (It's #2 for an important reason.)

Lastly, statistically speaking, the vast majority of crimes against blacks are committed by blacks, using illegally procured firearms. The bad guys never follow the rules.

Whether I feel that "the law isn't doing their job" is inconsequential. I simply recognize the fact that law enforcement can't protect me 24/7 - that is my and my DH's responsibility to ourselves and our DD. If you feel more comfortable abdicating this responsiblity, then I wish you the best of luck. (BTW, your avatar showing a Thompson sub-machine gun confuses me).

"I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy"​

.

Ok, my avatar is about Johnny Depp, not guns, and I don't think John Dillinger was actually protecting himself from crime .

This discussion was not about gun laws. I don't care what the law is, I don't care if you have a gun. Go for it. I don't like guns and won't use a gun. I prefer dogs to protect my home. My dh has guns (doesn't every red-blooded, American, Mississippi born and raised boy?), I just don't shoot them or load them. You have every right to own a gun and so does anyone else. I am not debating that.

What has the statistics of black on black crime have to do with anything? This was a black on white crime. I wasn't even talking about any other crime or statistics or any such?

I was only speaking to everyone in Akron feeling they have to run out and buy a gun because of THIS incident. Everyone arming themselves because of THIS incident would open season on any and all young black men and teens in Akron.

As for protecting myself and my family, the before mentioned dogs do a pretty bang up job at my house, in the car (where I wouldn't have a gun even if I would shoot the thing) I keep the doors locked and stay out of known dangerous areas, park where there is lighting--you know all those safety rule things. I don't want a gun, that is my choice. You do, and that is your choice. I don't disrespect that, but don't disrespect my choice either. I simply feel there are other, safer ways to protect my family. Having those different choices is a bit of what the Constitution you mentioned is all about, now isn't it?

 

[JMD]

I was only speaking to everyone in Akron feeling they have to run out and buy a gun because of THIS incident. Everyone arming themselves because of THIS incident would open season on any and all young black men and teens in Akron.

Wow, what a slippery slope. It wouldn't be open season on any and all young black men, just those in large gangs attacking completely innocent people. Let's remember who the victims are here.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Before this gets overheated maybe there is a misunderstanding.

Ok, my avatar is about Johnny Depp, not guns, and I don't think John Dillinger was actually protecting himself from crime .

This discussion was not about gun laws. I don't care what the law is, I don't care if you have a gun. Go for it. I don't like guns and won't use a gun. I prefer dogs to protect my home. My dh has guns (doesn't every red-blooded, American, Mississippi born and raised boy?), I just don't shoot them or load them. You have every right to own a gun and so does anyone else. I am not debating that.

What has the statistics of black on black crime have to do with anything? This was a black on white crime. I wasn't even talking about any other crime or statistics or any such?

I was only speaking to everyone in Akron feeling they have to run out and buy a gun because of THIS incident. Everyone arming themselves because of THIS incident would open season on any and all young black men and teens in Akron.

As for protecting myself and my family, the before mentioned dogs do a pretty bang up job at my house, in the car (where I wouldn't have a gun even if I would shoot the thing) I keep the doors locked and stay out of known dangerous areas, park where there is lighting--you know all those safety rule things. I don't want a gun, that is my choice. You do, and that is your choice. I don't disrespect that, but don't disrespect my choice either. I simply feel there are other, safer ways to protect my family. Having those different choices is a bit of what the Constitution you mentioned is all about, now isn't it?

If you are implying that anyone who feels unprotected due to this incident and therefore goes out to buy a firearm is doing so simply because its an excuse to hunt human beings I have to say I think you're taking this way too far. If this is not what you mean, then the term 'open season' probably should be rethought because hunting is exactly what the term implies. If I lived in Akron, which thankfully I do not, I would also feel defenseless in the face of such behavior not only coming from my neighbors but also from the Police who are SUPPOSED to protect everyone.

Please lets stay on topic, it's these tangents that get a post into hot water and that is crippling for free thought & speech.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Wow, luvsjack... Your posts are so far 'out there' that I really have no words....

Gangs (of whatever race) attack innocent families, and apparently, in your opinion, and when those are inclined to procure protection, it is not a reasonable response... but 'vigilantism', 'open season', etc...

There simply can be no real discussion/argument with irrational and erroneous assumptions.

Again, I am with most of the others...
If we are gonna have the whole 'hate crime' thing, then you better bet that it should be applied across the board.

 

[Kim&Chris]

I was only speaking to everyone in Akron feeling they have to run out and buy a gun because of THIS incident. Everyone arming themselves because of THIS incident would open season on any and all young black men and teens in Akron.

OMG, I can't believe you made a statement like that. Very, very wrong

 

[luvsJack]

Wow, what a slippery slope. It wouldn't be open season on any and all young black men, just those in large gangs attacking completely innocent people. Let's remember who the victims are here.

Have you never seen the "mob mentality" people get when they are afraid? Do you really think that it is so far out there to think that someone would be so afraid that with a gun they may start shooting first and ask questions later? Remember the black boy who was killed one night when he knocked on someone's door? (I don't remember the city) He was killed because he knocked on the wrong door and the people living there were terrified of blacks. It happens. And an incident like this can certainly cause it to happen again. So, again its not "out there".

When I said "open season", I didn't literally mean "hunting humans". Its an expression, meaning if someone buys a gun because they are afraid of this gang attacking them, they could very well shoot at the first black kid that walks up to them. Remember: It can happen. It has and it can again.

I know who the victims are. I would just hate to see more victims because of it.

 

[luvsJack]

OMG, I can't believe you made a statement like that. Very, very wrong

oh, geez. I didn't say it should happen or that it is ok to happen. I was saying if a whole bunch of people run out and buy guns because they are afraid of being attacked by a black gang it could happen.

 

[Disney Doll]

To me, the whole notion of elevating on persons victimization over another person's hurt is, at its very core, cruel and flawed because what it accomplishes,with the same swipe, is diminish someone else's victimization.

How can we reach equilibrium when there lack of equal treatment is so blatant?

And as for historical victimization, EVERYONE on the planet has had to endure victimization at one point or another, women more than most but I don't see us as getting special treatment. The argument is flawed at its very core and we all know it intuitively.

Very true...

 

[shrubber]

oh, geez. I didn't say it should happen or that it is ok to happen. I was saying if a whole bunch of people run out and buy guns because they are afraid of being attacked by a black gang it could happen.

so....what would be an acceptable reason to run out and buy a gun?

If there were roaming packs of rabid gerbils attacking people in Akron, I'd have my gun.
It so happens, there are roaming gangs in Akron, and I'd be sure to have my gun.

 

[luvsJack]

Before this gets overheated maybe there is a misunderstanding.



If you are implying that anyone who feels unprotected due to this incident and therefore goes out to buy a firearm is doing so simply because its an excuse to hunt human beings I have to say I think you're taking this way too far. If this is not what you mean, then the term 'open season' probably should be rethought because hunting is exactly what the term implies. If I lived in Akron, which thankfully I do not, I would also feel defenseless in the face of such behavior not only coming from my neighbors but also from the Police who are SUPPOSED to protect everyone.

Please lets stay on topic, it's these tangents that get a post into hot water and that is crippling for free thought & speech.

I am simply saying that if everyone who feels the law is not protecting them due to this incident goes out and buys a gun AND is afraid of this gang they could shoot someone out of fear not because they are being threatened. "Open season" is a figure of speech. I simply meant that people may suddenly think its ok to shoot first and ask questions later because they are afraid. People have done this. People have been killed simply because someone else was afraid.


And all the talk of "the cops aren't going to do anything. its all about race." are just the types of things to be said that can cause that kind of panic in people.

From the posts I read, people being armed to protect themselves was on topic.

 

[WDWKOOK]

so....what would be an acceptable reason to run out and buy a gun? If there were roaming packs of rabid gerbils attacking people in Akron, I'd have my gun.

 

[shrubber]

I am simply saying that if everyone who feels the law is not protecting them due to this incident goes out and buys a gun AND is afraid of this gang they could shoot someone out of fear not because they are being threatened. "Open season" is a figure of speech. I simply meant that people may suddenly think its ok to shoot first and ask questions later because they are afraid. People have done this. People have been killed simply because someone else was afraid.


And all the talk of "the cops aren't going to do anything. its all about race." are just the types of things to be said that can cause that kind of panic in people.

From the posts I read, people being armed to protect themselves was on topic.

If I'm threatened I'll shoot first and ask questions later....

If I'm just afraid or fearful without feeling threatened , I guess I'd better go see a Psychiatrist!!!

 

[luvsJack]

Wow, luvsjack... Your posts are so far 'out there' that I really have no words....

Gangs (of whatever race) attack innocent families, and apparently, in your opinion, and when those are inclined to procure protection, it is not a reasonable response... but 'vigilantism', 'open season', etc...

There simply can be no real discussion/argument with irrational and erroneous assumptions.

Again, I am with most of the others...
If we are gonna have the whole 'hate crime' thing, then you better bet that it should be applied across the board.

It is not "irrational or erroneous" to simply be saying something that HAS happened. People have been shot because of fear from an incident such as this. It has happened before and can (and probably will) happen again.

I never meant that someone could not protect themselves. I simply was speaking of a large number of people running out to purchase guns to protect themselves from this particular group of boys. IF people were to be trully frightened by something like this, they can do some really stupid things.

I never said that this wasn't a hate crime. I just said that the police didn't say they weren't going to do anything about it, they just said they were not calling it a hate crime. They are investigating it.

Everyone was saying that nothing was being done but "you can sure bet if it was white boys that jumped on a black family" something would be done. And "its a double standard" and all of that. I simply posted to say that its not always about whether or not it trully is a hate crime but whether a hate crime can be proven (speaking from experience).