Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News The Hate Crime/Racism double standard has to stop!

  1. Jul 10, 2009 #1
    Imagine the public outrage there would be if a mob of white people beat up a black family while shouting pro-white statements.

    http://www.ohio.com/news/50172282.html [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 10, 2009 #2
    What are you talking about?

    From the link:
    Repeating what it says in the article:
    They are still investigating and they haven't reached any conclusion yet. That does not mean they are denying anything.

    As for media, yes I agree had it been some white kids on black/brown/yellow/purple/red, this would have been on all newspapers (I haven't confirmed this yet). And some groups of black/brown/yellow/purple/red community asking for apologies and other BS.

    On other note, I believe that in about 20/50 yrs from now, there would be no majority in the US because about 50% of children produced in 2008 were non white and minority birth rate is much higher than the majority. So that would change things a lot.
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2009
  4. Jul 10, 2009 #3
    Why does it not need to be investigated as a hate crime? What qualifies this decision? If it was the other way around, they would be investigating it as a hate crime from the get-go.

    It would be ALL over the place. Sharpton and Jackson would be camped out.
  5. Jul 10, 2009 #4
    Population majority is irrelevant. What matters is where the wealth is. If 10% of the population has color X but they own 90% of the wealth, then there's an obvious class difference that's highly correlated to race, and this fuels race related anger.
  6. Jul 10, 2009 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    1. I think it will take more like -2 years than 20 or 50.
    2. I don't think that will change things at all, let alone a lot.
  7. Jul 10, 2009 #6
    If someone were to beat up somebody because they were a certain race and it was ruled a "hate crime", would they get a harsher punishment than if they just beat up somebody chosen at random?

    As much as I think racism is pointless, I can't think of a reason for why there should be different penalties for the same exact crime, depending on if you're racist towards the person or not.
  8. Jul 10, 2009 #7


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Yes - what makes it more interesting is that if it was a minor crime the police might not bother investigating unless it was a race crime. So B beats up A = minor disturbance ignore it, A beats up B = race crime = prosecution
    Politicians wanting publicity ?

    Then it gets more entertaining deciding who is a 'race'. In Britain there was until recently laws against racial hatred but not religous hatred, under the existing laws Jews and Sikhs counted as races but Muslims and Hindus counted as religions.
    So in a fight between a Jew and Muslim the muslim is committing the hate crime, and similarly between Sikhs and Hindus. As you can imagine this led to a great improvement in race relations and harmony in the community.
  9. Jul 10, 2009 #8
    Well that's just because you're not racist. Racism is socially and culturally lauded in this society. Just look at how every institution and corporation gives preference to race in their acceptance/hiring procedures.
  10. Jul 10, 2009 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There are laws that allow harsher punishments if a crime is fueled by racism. I agree to an extent that it makes sense to punish these crimes harsher, but don't think it should be racism only that triggers this. Attacking someone because you are having trouble with them in some way (they owe you money, you have a dispute over a tree or something) is obviously wrong, but more likely an isolated incident. Attacking someone you don't know for reasons that don't benefit you should surely be punished more harshly than these types of crimes. Also, in the case of racism, the attack is almost surely done with an eye towards terrorizing a community or a family, and even if not intended will have this effect, so the crime is larger than just the incident involved
  11. Jul 10, 2009 #10
    So you're advocating punishing people for crimes they haven't yet committed?

    Both attacks, whether fueled by racism or not, are isolated incidents.
  12. Jul 10, 2009 #11
    I disagree. I don't think *any* reason for attacking someone is justified in in giving them a harsher punishment. If you attack someone, I don't care if it was because he was pink, gay, white, ugly, or stupid. You committed a violent crime, you get a punishment based on the extent of the violent crime, not also based on the fact that you dislike certain features about him. And if we must have our current system of discrimination toward hate crimes, we better stop having, as the OP said, a double standard of what to call a hate crime. This was *obviously* a hate crime. If the situation was the exact same, but white on black, there would be a march somewhere and black celebrities would be shaking their heads at the horror.
  13. Jul 10, 2009 #12


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Is there any article that explains what provoked the incident?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  14. Jul 10, 2009 #13


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    If you google on beating, Akron, and the guy's name, you will find at least 20 pages of wall-to wall repetition of the article in the OP, along with breathless pronouncements of racism. Strangely enough, the other two adult while males in the group were not beaten. Could there be more to the story? Are the Akron police privy to information than we don't have?

    Perhaps they should be allowed to investigate the incident.
  15. Jul 10, 2009 #14
    One of the men involved in the incident claims that his friend was hit from behind, unprovoked.

    The wife of one of the men claims that she homeschools their children because she doesn't feel they are safe at their local school. Also, there was more than one person assaulted here, at least 2 men and the duaghter. I can't say for certain, but it would seem very foolish for these men to provoke a mob of teenagers while their family is present, regardless of the race of the perpetrators or the views of the victims.

    This seems to me to be a display of authority by a small group of violent teenagers with a large group of unconscientious teenage observers. If the words that are claimed to be said, such as 'This is a black world" are true, then I think the victims were chosen as a matter of convenience, vulnerability and race.

    Here's an interview.

  16. Jul 10, 2009 #15
    Main Entry: spec·u·late
    Pronunciation: 'spe-ky&-"lAt
    Function: verb
    Inflected Forms: -lat·ed; -lat·ing
    intransitive verb 1 : to theorize on the basis of insufficient evidence
    NOTE: A jury is not permitted to speculate on a matter about which insufficient evidence has been presented in reaching its verdict.

    [1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/speculate
  17. Jul 10, 2009 #16
    The mayor of Akron is considering the possibility that this is a hate crime. The FBI has been called in to make that determination. This article also has several other interesting points if anyone cares to read it.

    http://www.ohio.com/news/break_news/50495622.html [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  18. Jul 10, 2009 #17


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There seems to be a lot missing here, like the entire part that led up to what happened. I don't consider violence to be an answer, but what provoked this?
  19. Jul 10, 2009 #18


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The article seems to speculate (go away Cyrus) that is was entirely unprovoked. Unprovoked racial violence is very common against whites/blacks/yellows/tyedye so don't count it out, especially with groups of people.
  20. Jul 10, 2009 #19
    I agree. If the only motivation is racial hatred, there is something more ugly about the act.

    I don't really know if the media attention on hate crimes would do anything more than fuel racism though. I think of the people at storm front, a sickening group of NAZIS and KKK, who would jump on a story like this to help them recruit, and spread hatred.
  21. Jul 10, 2009 #20
    There won't be any evidence of provocation until the testimonies of the perpetrators are taken. I speculate that they will not be anxious to present it.
  22. Jul 10, 2009 #21
    1) Media attention fuels racism.
    2) FACT: Crimes fueled by racism get more attention by the media
    3) So, racism is on the rise.
  23. Jul 10, 2009 #22
    That kind of wealth distribution is not possible in a free capitalistic society (ADD: that depends on immigrants).
  24. Jul 10, 2009 #23
    Is that a fact?

    I can't speak for the validity of the research but this professor of Sociology claims to have evidence to the contrary.


    And if you want to see how that wealth is distributed by race take a look at this report.

    There is a large disparity of wealth by race. It may be an underlying motivation for violence.
  25. Jul 10, 2009 #24

    What's the X color here?

    In that original post, it was pointed or as it appears that whites have 90% of the wealth. Also that the wealth is controlled through corruption or other means (which I think is more likely to fuel race related crimes than where people themselves choose not to make money).
  26. Jul 10, 2009 #25
    Yes, I agree too. If it's isolated, then no. If someone does something specifically because of hate/race, then I don't think that's right.

    If someone spray paints a black's car saying, "Go back to Africa", should he only get the usual punishment of vandalism, or is there something else involved?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook