Repeal the "Stand Your Ground" Laws

[AquaMan]

I guess its because of the possibility that this may be prosecuted as a hate crime which is race oriented. I don't think the hate crime laws are about ethnicity.

[Conan71]

The two races discussed here are Caucasian (white), Negroid(black). Hispanic is not a race it is an ethnicity. Hispanics are actually those Caucasians that live or came from Hispania (Spain) as opposed to Latino's whose ancestry may have been Hispanic mixed with other indignenous peoples from or in the Latin American countries. The two terms are often misused and intermixed along with Mexican (a country).

Funny though, HB 1804 was called "racist" and defined as "racism", not ethnicism.

The inference in the Martin case is that someone of the majority shot a minority which is clearly a falsehood.  This is an instance of one minority killing another minority but it serves those who wish to keep pushing the racial divide quite well to characterize him as "white".  Had this been an Anglophile who shot an Hispanic, you can be certain the victim would not have been referred to as a "white Hispanic" he simply would have been "Hispanic".

I guess its because of the possibility that this may be prosecuted as a hate crime which is race oriented. I don't think the hate crime laws are about ethnicity.

Who gets to determine a shooting like this was a hate crime?  Why wasn't the killing of two white people by two black men in Hicks Park back in September ruled or even insinuated as a hate crime?  Perhaps those young men had a hatred of white people and that's why they singled out these two instead of robbing a couple of black people.  It's almost as if blacks, Hispanics, gays, or women aren't capable of hate crimes, only white, straight males.  And that right there is an example of profiling.

[Red Arrow]

I don't think the hate crime laws are about ethnicity.

They are about whatever minority group can get enough support to have them passed.   I believe that within my lifetime white males will be a minority and it will become a hate crime to beat up or kill white guys.

[we vs us]

Funny though, HB 1804 was called "racist" and defined as "racism", not ethnicism.

The inference in the Martin case is that someone of the majority shot a minority which is clearly a falsehood.  This is an instance of one minority killing another minority but it serves those who wish to keep pushing the racial divide quite well to characterize him as "white".  Had this been an Anglophile who shot an Hispanic, you can be certain the victim would not have been referred to as a "white Hispanic" he simply would have been "Hispanic".

Who gets to determine a shooting like this was a hate crime?  Why wasn't the killing of two white people by two black men in Hicks Park back in September ruled or even insinuated as a hate crime?  Perhaps those young men had a hatred of white people and that's why they singled out these two instead of robbing a couple of black people.  It's almost as if blacks, Hispanics, gays, or women aren't capable of hate crimes, only white, straight males.  And that right there is an example of profiling.

A hate crime isn't about majority or minority groups.  The crime has to be motivated by race, ethnicity, sex, etc to qualify.  So if can be proven that a black man (for argument's sake) murdered a white man specifically because of his race or ethnicity, then it's a hate crime. 

If an Hispanic man (Zimmerman) murdered a black man (Martin) specifically because Martin was black, that qualifies as a hate crime.

If it could be proven that the Hicks Park incident was primarily about race then it would also be a hate crime.  I don't know anything about the Hicks Park thing, so can't speak about whether that would apply.

[AquaMan]

Funny though, HB 1804 was called "racist" and defined as "racism", not ethnicism.

The inference in the Martin case is that someone of the majority shot a minority which is clearly a falsehood.  This is an instance of one minority killing another minority but it serves those who wish to keep pushing the racial divide quite well to characterize him as "white".  Had this been an Anglophile who shot an Hispanic, you can be certain the victim would not have been referred to as a "white Hispanic" he simply would have been "Hispanic".

Who gets to determine a shooting like this was a hate crime?  Why wasn't the killing of two white people by two black men in Hicks Park back in September ruled or even insinuated as a hate crime?  Perhaps those young men had a hatred of white people and that's why they singled out these two instead of robbing a couple of black people.  It's almost as if blacks, Hispanics, gays, or women aren't capable of hate crimes, only white, straight males.  And that right there is an example of profiling.

Obviously this is a confusing situation. I can't speak to inferences, to 1804 as racist or even if this case was a racially based murder. In our haste to make everyone equal in the eyes of the law we have simply gone too far with race identifications. My education of three major races from back in the 70's has now been scrubbed up to recognize that race is irrelevant as far as biology and was only used in the last few centuries as a basis for discrimination and politics. The lines are so blurred that we have substituted ethnicity as practically equal to race. So...the three racial classifications, Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid are now passe'.

This was a case of profiling and overzealous neighborhood security imo. Strange that the guy referred to the young man as a "Coon" since his family is racially diverse and stranger still that his friend, this Oliver guy, thinks "Coon" doesn't mean anything racist except to Cajuns and white guys over 50! Wow. Talk about living in your own little world. He needs to go visit Cajun country some time and call some folks under 40 Coon (or Coonass if you don't know them).

The guy made a mistake and killed an innocent person who provided no threat and he did it based on an assumption that was in part based on his race. I am surprised that the police did no testing on the assailant but did on the victim. I am surprised that they readily accepted the killer's story and tried to tidy up the crime and just move along. Wait, I am not surprised at all. That is what lazy cops do. They got caught and now its a bloody mess.

[Red Arrow]

A hate crime isn't about majority or minority groups.  The crime has to be motivated by race, ethnicity, sex, etc to qualify.  So if can be proven that a black man (for argument's sake) murdered a white man specifically because of his race or ethnicity, then it's a hate crime.

What you are describing is a crime of or involving hate but "Hate Crimes" are specific to groups that are typically a minority and have laws passed referring specifically to that group.

The last I heard, anyone can murder a white man and whether it involves hate or not, it is not a "Hate Crime".  It is still murder, manslaughter, or whatever but not a "Hate Crime".

Edit:
I looked around and perhaps the term I should have used is "Hate Crime Law" for the law that increases the penalties for crimes against protected groups.

[Gaspar]

A hate crime isn't about majority or minority groups.  The crime has to be motivated by race, ethnicity, sex, etc to qualify.  So if can be proven that a black man (for argument's sake) murdered a white man specifically because of his race or ethnicity, then it's a hate crime. 

If an Hispanic man (Zimmerman) murdered a black man (Martin) specifically because Martin was black, that qualifies as a hate crime.

If it could be proven that the Hicks Park incident was primarily about race then it would also be a hate crime.  I don't know anything about the Hicks Park thing, so can't speak about whether that would apply.

What if Zimmerman profiled Martin based on race, followed him, then confronted him "what are you doing here."  Then Martin, outraged by being followed and confronted, engaged in assault then battery, causing Zimmerman to fire upon Martin.

Would that be considered a hate crime?

If this is the scenario (and I'm not saying it is), was the act of taking Martin's life motivated by race, or self defense?  

Can someone be a racist and engage in an act of self defense against another race without that act considered as racially motivated?  

A little further speculation. . .if Martin attacked Zimmerman for profiling him based on race, would Martin's act be considered a hate crime?  

Again, I am only exploring possible scenarios.  I offer no opinion on who I believe to be guilty of a crime.  I am not privy to enough evidence to form an opinion yet.

[Cats Cats Cats]

What if Zimmerman profiled Martin based on race, followed him, then confronted him "what are you doing here."  Then Martin, outraged by being followed and confronted, engaged in assault then battery, causing Zimmerman to fire upon Martin.

Would that be considered a hate crime?

If this is the scenario (and I'm not saying it is), was the act of taking Martin's life motivated by race, or self defense?  

Can someone be a racist and engage in an act of self defense against another race without that act considered as racially motivated?  

A little further speculation. . .if Martin attacked Zimmerman for profiling him based on race, would Martin's act be considered a hate crime?  

Again, I am only exploring possible scenarios.  I offer no opinion on who I believe to be guilty of a crime.  I am not privy to enough evidence to form an opinion yet.

He was definitely followed solely because he was black.  That is pretty certain based on the persons history and comments on the calls.  I don't believe that he shot him because he was black.  I think that is what constitutes a hate crime.  But if he wasn't black this never would have happened.

[we vs us]

What you are describing is a crime of or involving hate but "Hate Crimes" are specific to groups that are typically a minority and have laws passed referring specifically to that group.

The last I heard, anyone can murder a white man and whether it involves hate or not, it is not a "Hate Crime".  It is still murder, manslaughter, or whatever but not a "Hate Crime".

Edit:
I looked around and perhaps the term I should have used is "Hate Crime Law" for the law that increases the penalties for crimes against protected groups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States

. . . does a good job summarizing what hate crimes and laws in the US are and aren't.  There's a whole section about hate crimes committed against white people. 

It doesn't matter whether the crime was perpetrated by one specific race on another specific race.  What matters is the motivation for the crime.  If the crime was motivated by hate for a race or sex or ethnicity (etc) then it's a hate crime.  That can and does include crimes perpetrated by other races on white people. 

[we vs us]

What if Zimmerman profiled Martin based on race, followed him, then confronted him "what are you doing here."  Then Martin, outraged by being followed and confronted, engaged in assault then battery, causing Zimmerman to fire upon Martin.

Would that be considered a hate crime?

If this is the scenario (and I'm not saying it is), was the act of taking Martin's life motivated by race, or self defense?  

Can someone be a racist and engage in an act of self defense against another race without that act considered as racially motivated?  

A little further speculation. . .if Martin attacked Zimmerman for profiling him based on race, would Martin's act be considered a hate crime?  

Again, I am only exploring possible scenarios.  I offer no opinion on who I believe to be guilty of a crime.  I am not privy to enough evidence to form an opinion yet.

I don't think any of these things are exclusive, and they can all be part of the scenario.  Zimmerman may be completely innocent and have comported himself admirably.   A trial will definitely make most of this clear(er).

[Teatownclown]

You guys (are there any gals? or did they get misogynized here?) love vague laws and ambiguity... you feed on divisiveness and threats to the white male.

[nathanm]

In the interest of fostering global understanding, people from Hispaniola don't really like being called hispanic. They also consider anybody who isn't black as night white.

The More You Know ☆彡

[we vs us]

In the interest of fostering global understanding, people from Hispaniola don't really like being called hispanic. They also consider anybody who isn't black as night white.

The More You Know ☆彡

I use this thing at work ALL THE TIME.

[Red Arrow]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States
. . . does a good job summarizing what hate crimes and laws in the US are and aren't.  There's a whole section about hate crimes committed against white people. 
It doesn't matter whether the crime was perpetrated by one specific race on another specific race.  What matters is the motivation for the crime.  If the crime was motivated by hate for a race or sex or ethnicity (etc) then it's a hate crime.  That can and does include crimes perpetrated by other races on white people. 

I saw your link before posting my reply.  The whole section was inconclusive to me.

Also, this made me skeptical:

Text document with red question mark.svg
   This article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (October 2009)

[nathanm]

The emoji doesn't require an image download. Of course, at least half the internet can't see it, but if I can't be elitist about the Internet what can I be elitist about?