- 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: South Carolina likely to remain one of only two states without hate crime laws
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:09 pm to Chucktown_Badger
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:09 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:You can start with the Thirteenth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866.quote:You sure about that?
I don't need to justify the creation or the application of these laws. The majority of the listed characteristics have existed for over a century.
1
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:10 pm to Salviati
quote:
You offered ZERO evidence that the perps were targeting women because they were women.
I repeatedly explained that to you, but here you are again.
So a string of robberies and assaults only targeting women isn't proof that the criminals were targeting them because they were women?
You're flying up the list of most moronic posters on this board and I've just become aware of you today. You're like AwgustaDawg just with smaller walls of text.
This post was edited on 4/29/26 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:13 pm to Salviati
quote:
You can start with the Thirteenth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
So you're equating providing people EQUAL treatment and protection under the law with doling out harsher penalties for crimes against certain types of people contained on random lists that were initially generated starting in the late 1970s?
Apple meet orange
Alright, I'm done with you...as they say, "never argue with an idiot"...
This post was edited on 4/29/26 at 5:16 pm
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:14 pm to CleverUserName
quote:YOU want to challenge hate crimes statutes as applied.
Ohhh the irony.
But YOU don't want to provide evidence.
Tell me more about irony.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:15 pm to Salviati
I find it telling that you didn't respond to this
quote:
If "hate" crime is really going to be applied consistently. Why isn't every rape a "hate" crime? You're choosing your victim based on the sex you prefer.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:18 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:The characteristics like race, color, national origin were not contained on random lists that were initially generated in the 1970s.
So you're equating providing people EQUAL treatment and protection under the law with doling out harsher penalties for crimes against certain types of people contained on random lists that were initially generated starting in the late 1970s?
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:24 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:It's cute the way you post your assumption (only targeting women) as a predicate for your conclusion (were targeting them because they were women) when you have no evidence of either.
So a string of robberies and assaults only targeting women isn't proof that the criminals were targeting them because they were women?
It may be that the women were the only available targets at the time and place of the crime, but you don't know because you have no evidence.
quote:
You're flying up the list of most moronic posters on this board and I've just become aware of you today.
Do you honestly think I care what you think of me? Do you?
This post was edited on 4/29/26 at 5:42 pm
Posted on 4/29/26 at 5:25 pm to jchamil
quote:Why is that telling? What is so terribly telling about it?
I find it telling that you didn't respond to thisquote:
If "hate" crime is really going to be applied consistently. Why isn't every rape a "hate" crime? You're choosing your victim based on the sex you prefer.
Have you read every piece of jurisprudence concerning rape and hate crimes? Do you have a comment to make?
You asked a question. I don't have to respond to every question.
Go ask ChatGPT or your preferred AI.
This post was edited on 4/29/26 at 5:30 pm
Posted on 4/29/26 at 7:21 pm to Salviati
quote:
YOU want to challenge hate crimes statutes as applied. But YOU don't want to provide evidence.
Just as I thought. You. Have. Nothing.
Nothing but what you are told to think. Which you submit yourself to fully.
Go await your further instructions. Remember the position, knee bent. Head bowed.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 9:29 pm to CleverUserName
quote:Holy shite. This is so fricking corny.
Just as I thought. You. Have. Nothing.
Nothing but what you are told to think. Which you submit yourself to fully.
Go await your further instructions. Remember the position, knee bent. Head bowed.
Is this supposed to be your coup de grace?
Do you honestly think that I am some messenger/minion of some dark organization?!?!
Grow the frick up. Get a life. Touch grass.
You entered this thread on page three with your first post contending that hate crime laws are "most certainly" not applied equally:
quote:LINK
They are actually not "hate crime" laws. I don't know why they call them that. If they were... they would be applied equally. And they most certainly are not.
That's YOUR statement. That's YOUR contention: "Hate crime" laws are most certainly not applied equally. Own your statement.
Then your next five posts are your anecdotal story about a crime in Mississippi. You offer no analysis of the Mississippi hate crime statute or the Mississippi hate crime procedure.
When that story fails to support your equal application argument, you pivot to argue that I didn't provide evidence to disprove YOUR statement:
quote:LINK
From someone claiming equal application of hate crimes?
quote:LINK
Not from a simpleton that claims equal application of hate crime laws.
* * *
How about YOU provide dependable evidence it is?
Then you deny that you claimed that "hate crime" laws are most certainly not applied equally:
quote:Then you drop your final piece of crap of the day:
MY statement?? You are the one claiming they are applied equally page after page after page after page. And in response to anything to the contrary.. you just ask for more evidence.
How about YOU provide something?
* * *
Step up hoss. Link? Link? Link?
quote:God damn son. That's just embarrassing.
Just as I thought. You. Have. Nothing.
Nothing but what you are told to think. Which you submit yourself to fully.
Go await your further instructions. Remember the position, knee bent. Head bowed.
Posted on 4/30/26 at 5:57 am to Salviati
quote:
Do you honestly think that I am some messenger/minion of some dark organization?!?!
Messenger? Oh hell no. You are a DEFINITELY a follower of the narrative. Just like those idiot "no kings" morons who freely give up their Saturdays to protest something that doesn't exist. The MESSENGERS are the people smart enough to make money to con the people into doing their narrative pushing for free.
quote:
That's YOUR statement. That's YOUR contention: "Hate crime" laws are most certainly not applied equally. Own your statement.
Then, I provided actual examples. And then you just discounted them. Because. You. Have. Nothing.
quote:
Then your next five posts are your anecdotal story about a crime in Mississippi. You offer no analysis of the Mississippi hate crime statute or the Mississippi hate crime procedure.
You want me to waste my time quoting you hate law statutes to be sure a crowd of people following someone of the opposite race, calling them racial slurs, then attacking them because they are mad about what they perceive as an attack on their own race, and against someone who had nothing to do with it? You want me to show you how the statute would have been applied ro Emmitt Till too??
quote:
Then you deny that you claimed that "hate crime" laws are most certainly not applied equally:
Then I provided you with skewed FBI crime statistics that mean one of two things. Get on record with it:
1) black Americans are by far the least racist ethnic group in the commission of crime and white Americans are by far and away the most.
2) hate crime applications are not applied fairly.
Now go on to your "I'm just right.. you need to prove everything" idiotic schtick.
Posted on 4/30/26 at 6:37 am to Chucktown_Badger
Good.
The whole concept is bullshite.
Crime is committed but because the person committing it was a meanie or said naughty things about certain people, they get a bump.
So, a serial killer is bad, but a serial killer that targets minorities is worse.
The whole concept is bullshite.
Crime is committed but because the person committing it was a meanie or said naughty things about certain people, they get a bump.
So, a serial killer is bad, but a serial killer that targets minorities is worse.
Posted on 4/30/26 at 6:43 am to Salviati
quote:
Grow the frick up. Get a life. Touch grass.
quote:
by Salviati
Page 9 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News