- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Louisiana's 'Blue Lives Matter Bill' Under Attack
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:36 am to tke857
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:36 am to tke857
Let me put it this way. Go assault a police officer without this bill and then decide how lenient our justice system is on people who attack cops. I'll give you a hint, you are going to prison for longer than other assaults even without this bill.
1
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:39 am to CorporateTiger
This was a feel good law to help legislatures talk about how much the support law enforcement. There are already laws in place specifically related to violence towards police, fire, ems etc. So far the only time I have seen an agency try to use this law it has been inapplicable to the situation or over reach.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:40 am to Dizz
It's conservative virtue signaling. We need less (or better yet no) hate crime laws. Not more.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:42 am to tke857
Rather than repeal it just create a bill for soldiers and create it as a hate crime if they are attacked while in uniform. Problem solved. frick that was hard.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:43 am to Dizz
quote:
This was a feel good law to use while campaigning
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:43 am to tigerbutt
quote:
Rather than repeal it just create a bill for soldiers and create it as a hate crime if they are attacked while in uniform. Problem solved. frick that was hard.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:51 am to tke857
Hate crime legislation is bullshite by default.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:53 am to tke857
My argument for sentencing of criminals is that the sentence should be based on how long we can reasonably estimate that we need to protect the public from this person.
Someone who kills another person based solely on their classification (black, white, man, woman, police officer, catholic, Muslim, etc) is a threat to that entire group of people, therefore the public needs far more protection from that person. So that person should be sentenced much more harshly. Which is my reasoning for hate crime law.
However, the important distinction is that ANY classification should count for this. So a serial killer (someone who targets women that he doesn't know) is committing hate crimes
Someone who kills another person based solely on their classification (black, white, man, woman, police officer, catholic, Muslim, etc) is a threat to that entire group of people, therefore the public needs far more protection from that person. So that person should be sentenced much more harshly. Which is my reasoning for hate crime law.
However, the important distinction is that ANY classification should count for this. So a serial killer (someone who targets women that he doesn't know) is committing hate crimes
This post was edited on 3/16/17 at 8:54 am
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:56 am to Upperdecker
quote:
Someone who kills another person based solely on their classification (black, white, man, woman, police officer, catholic, Muslim, etc) is a threat to that entire group of people, therefore the public needs far more protection from that person.
bullshite. The public needs to be protected from anyone who kills someone. Period. We don't need to reinvent the wheel and pretend that killing someone of a certain profession or race or sexual orientation is worse or more injurious to the public that killing a random joe who isn't gay, black or a cop.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 8:59 am to tke857
A Navy SEAL is a sailor, not a soldier. Just sayin'...
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:04 am to tke857
.
This post was edited on 8/21/19 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:13 am to lsu2006
quote:
bullshite. The public needs to be protected from anyone who kills someone. Period. We don't need to reinvent the wheel and pretend that killing someone of a certain profession or race or sexual orientation is worse or more injurious to the public that killing a random joe who isn't gay, black or a cop.
You don't understand the concept. The intent of a murder is important. The intent gives you an idea of the mental state of a person and their likelihood to kill again. Compare a person who kidnaps a random woman that he does not know and kills her with a man that kills his wife for filing divorce papers. Both are wrong, and both get murder charges. But is the man that kills his wife as dangerous to the public as the man that kills for no reason? That's the intent of my definition of hate crime laws. It's a distinction that allows us to put dangerous people away for longer
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:18 am to Upperdecker
Weird it's like we already have different degrees of crimes for killing people.
A first degree conviction is already designed to punish someone for a pre-meditated killing. What more do we need?
A first degree conviction is already designed to punish someone for a pre-meditated killing. What more do we need?
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:19 am to tke857
Cops that are targeted should get the same treatment as that Seal would get it they're targeted.
When do we start training LEO's on how to call in an airstrike?
When do we start training LEO's on how to call in an airstrike?
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:20 am to Upperdecker
I get that. Obviously looking to intent and likelihood of doing it again is important. I just don't agree with the designation being made by race, sexual orientation or occupation of the victim. To me it arbitrarily pigeon holes the case into something it might not be. It's especially absurd in the context of the "blue lives" legislation, considering there are already protections in place for cops.
This post was edited on 3/16/17 at 9:25 am
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:22 am to tke857
Hate crimes shouldn't exist at all, whether it be for classes or for certain professions.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:27 am to tke857
quote:
Seal
Nope.
quote:
SEALS
Wrong again, Fat Gary.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:30 am to lsu2006
If I go intentionally murder a bunch of car dealers because I got screwed on a new car, why should I get less punishment than targeting a bunch of cops because I have a grudge against cops.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:44 am to ell_13
quote:
If a job title is a classification and if a person is attacked due to that classification, that should be a hate crime.
Absolutely. If hate crimes exist then this is logical.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 9:45 am to tke857
it's not really under attack just because FGC doesn't like something/
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News