GRINDSTONE, Maine — Anti-gay epithets left at the scene of a fire that destroyed a Grindstone Road cabin this past weekend will be investigated by the Maine attorney general’s office as a possible civil rights violation, officials said Monday.
The investigation into the fire continues and no determination of its cause has been made, but Sgt. Tim York of the Maine state fire marshal’s office said Monday that he immediately referred the matter to the attorney general’s office for investigation.
“We have received that notification,” said Brenda Kielty, a special assistant to Maine Attorney General William Schneider, “and this office would be responsible for investigating any incident that might be a civil rights violation.”
The epithets were spray painted in large black letters on the front of a shed and on what looked like part of a roof of a smaller structure near the remains of the cabin, which is on the Penobscot River. No one was injured in the fire, and the camp’s occupants were not there but might have been earlier in the day, East Millinocket firefighters said.
A 911 call reporting the fire came in at about 12:07 a.m. Saturday. Neighbors reported that they had heard an explosion. When the first East Millinocket firefighters arrived around 20 minutes later, the roof of the one-story structure had collapsed and flames were demolishing the rest of the building, firefighters said.
Efforts by the Bangor Daily News to contact the camp’s occupants since Saturday have been unsuccessful. One of their neighbors, John Coon, said the spray-painting of the slurs was “hard for me to believe.”
“It’s too bad,” Coon said. “I have met one of the guys several times. He is a very nice, friendly guy.”
The Grindstone Road property was put up for sale about a month ago, said real estate agent Alice Weed, who is handling the sale effort. The owners have also put their Millinocket home on the market.
Coon said they “did a lot of work on it [the property] over the summer,” apparently hiring a contractor. The work appeared to make a huge improvement on what was a somewhat dilapidated structure, he said.
Given the struggling real estate market in the Katahdin region, it would have been “a tough sale but not impossible,” Weed said. “It was a nice house.”
Twelve Medway Fire Department firefighters and two tanker-trucks assisted the East Millinocket firefighters who covered the blaze, Medway Fire Chief John Lee said. Five East Millinocket firefighters responded. Both towns cover Grindstone through contract or by mutual-aid agreement.
It was unclear whether the explosion ignited or resulted from the fire.
Whatever happened to ” live and let live”?
Thats New Hampshire not Maine.
That’s not even New Hampshire.. Just saying
New Hampshire is “Live Free or Die”
Or, if you want to be cynical, Live Free And Die.
Stamped into license plates by prisoners.
Irony?
You can’t fix stupid but there is usually another story to be told. let’s call that the stupid story.
Perhaps the arsonist thought the presence of a gay couple in their neighborhood was a threat to the very foundation of society. I am sorry for the homeowners.
Or perhaps this is an insurance scam made to look like a hate crime?
Yes because we all know that insurance companies pay out larger sums of money when it becomes a hate crime.
It means an insurance company will drag out settling, and what if these folks still have to make their note?
Insurance companies don’t need a reason to drag out payout claims. It’s part and parcel of who they are.
Uh, what I believe he meant was they torched it themselves and wrote that to make it look like a hate crime.
Oh I know what he meant but since it does nothing to increase amount paid out by the insurance company it makes no sense for someone to do it.
And trust me, the Maine Fire Marshall’s Office looks at ALL possibilities when they investigate an arson.
You burn your own house, make it look like someone else did it as a hate crime. Makes perfect sense.
So because it’s possible, it means they did it? Is that how things in this country work? We don’t use evidence and just point our fingers immediately?
I think it’s possible you kill people at night and then steal their money. If that the standard, that it’s possible — well you my friend, are guilty! It makes perfect sense!
LOL! Are you for real?
It’s exactly what you’re doing. You have no evidence and yet you’re suggesting they faked this. I don’t have evidence that you kill people at night and steal their money, but so what, you didn’t let a lack of evidence stop your accusations.
OK Boss, whatever you say. *wink wink*
It makes no sense at all.
Why make it “look liie a hate crime”. There is no financial gain from it. It doens’t increase the money from the insurance company. It will not take the focus off of the arson for the Fire Marshall’s office. Their focus is on the arson. The AGs office will focus on the potential “hate crime” aspect.
jd rattling the cage again. You know what they were saying. if you house is insured for 200K and you can’t sell it. the insurance company pay for it this way. so you get your money either way. just divert attention.
push do try and keep up with the comment thread…..
I’m not the one “rattling the cage” or “diverting attention”. That would have been D Biggs for introducing the “let’s burn the place down and what the heck, let’s spray paint some gay slurs on it so the authorities will look elsewhere and we can collect the insurance money” comment.
And if you have ever dealt with an insurance company on a total lose, you will find that they will drag their heels for as long as possible before paying anyone anything.
D Biggs introducing that thought was nothing more than a pathetic attempt at attempting to make the victim the criminal in this case. Let the Fire Marshall’s office do their job. If it leads back to the homeowner they will be charged accordingly.
But I understand those (you included) that like to demonize gay people for who they sleep with. It’s sad and pathetic that you do that, but you do.
jd I do not demonize gay people, I have had many friends over the years, They being gay had nothing to do with it. See they were my friends not my gay friends.. I may use the word gay in the comment section because of the story, but I don’t view them any different then my hetro friends, I may give them more respect because they seem more down to earth then my straight friends. Most people who hate gays with a passion are dealing big time with their own sexuality.
Funny how people come to a conclusion when reading comments isn’t push? See I read above your comments about “heterozexual bashing” and “heterosexual slurs” and “if a person has never been charged with a hate crime when the victim is white then throw the law out” comments and you just naturally made that leap that you are demonizing gay people.
push’s comment reeks of “I’m not homophobic, but [insert something homophobic]” or “I have gay friends, but [insert something homophobic]“
That’s just what the anti-gays say all the time. And then they pretend they don’t understand why some kook doesn’t “do something about it.”
That’s the first time I’ve heard it !
your hate for hetro’s is evident. It is not anti gay it is Pro-hetro
Or maybe the arsonist thought the very presence of a gay person in the neighborhood was a THREAT to his manhood…….maybe he started questioning his……..or just plain, an ignorant person…..
Who gets extra “rights”? Please tell me something I don’t know about.
Oh…poor you.
Are you referring to hate crime victims? There are special laws for people in special groups, it’s not right. Crime is the same for everybody.
No, they’re not. Is having f*g spray painted on a gay person’s house the same as having a window broken for example? Is having a swastika painted on a mosque the same as having a window broken?
Everyone is protected by the hate crime legislation EVERYONE. If you’re attacked for your race (even if you’re white), you’re protected. If you’re targeted for your religion (even if you’re christian), you’er protected.
I’m not gay, but the law for spraying that on my house should be the same as anybody’s house.
Those laws already existed, we didn’t need “special laws”.
So you think if I wrote “wolfndeer” on your house and if I drew a swastika on a mosque, those are the same thing? The same people are impacted and in the same way? You really think so? Ignore your disdain for gay people for a moment and answer the question honestly.
It has nothing to do with being gay. If somebody beats up a gay person in the street he should be breaking the same law as if he beat up a straight person.
I asked you a specific question — why can’t you answer it?
Don’t waste your time.
I would argue that every crime is a “hate crime”. What does it matter the “cause” for committing the crime? It seems that whoever burned down the property “hates” the owner. Why should the charges be any less for which reason they hate the owner? Maybe they hate him/her because they are rich/poor. Why are we treating certain hate differently? Bottom line is throw the book at the criminal that did this no matter what reason or so-called “special group” society says the victim belongs to?
You’re being willfully ignorant and you didn’t answer my question either.
You don’t have to belong to a special group. If someone attacks you because of your ethnicity, your religion, your gender, your sexual orientation, your disability status, etc. then the hate crime legislation protects you. No matter what.
In fact, if you are not gay but perceived as so by the aggressor, and subjected to name calling, etc. it is still a hate crime. As you pointed out, the motive is taken into account when charges are filed.
If that is true then why are women the most abused and murdered group on the planet and thats not considered a hate crime?
I believe that a man that abuses a woman should face just as harsh of charges as a person harming these so called “protected groups”. It’s a double standard that has been blown out of proportion.
What is you are beaten up because you’re in the group called a**h*les?
I’m still not convinced hate crimes are a good idea….
Okay, that’s fine. But you’re never going to convince me that drawing a swastika on a synagogue is the same thing as someone writing their name on let’s say a McDonald’s.
If you were attacked specifically because you are heterosexual and anti-heterosexual slurs (you are more than welcome to come up with some) were part of the attack …. the it is a hate crime based on your sexual orientation.
You’re also being willfully ignorant about hate crime legislation works. If a gay person is attacked it’s not a hate crime. If they’re attacked for being gay then it’s a hate crime. So yes, it does have something to do with being gay. Or religion. Or ethnicity. Or background. Or gender. Or religion.
Again, I’ll ask you the question that you seem to be too much of a coward to answer honestly. Do you think if I wrote “wolfndeer” on your house and if I drew a swastika on a mosque, those are the same thing? The same people are impacted and in the same way?
So the three young men that beat and then tossed Charlie Howard into the Kenduskead where he drowned should have no “special circumstances” added or looked at when they admitted that the crime was simple because he was gay?
The murder was committed only because he was gay. They didn’t rob him. They took no property. They beat him and even after begging for his life because he couldn’t swim, those three young men tossed him over a three foot railing and walked away while Charlie Howard drowned for being gay.
And why is that worse than a guy raping a two year old and then murdering the child and throwing the body in a dumpster?
Who said it was ?
Ah, right; just you.
What does that remark have to do with the article ?
Ah, right, nothing.
Remarks like your are what is called “trolling”.
What was the motivation for the crime Mapleton? You know what motivation is right?
Maybe Charlie shouldn’t have chased them around the mall being nasty and vulgar saying gay sexually toned remarks at those hetro BOYS.
I will agree with the one truth that comes up repeatedly they did toss him over a 3 foot railing into 4 ft. or less of water.
Just so we understand each other…
Are you suggesting that Charlie Howard homocide was justified because he chased three teenage youth around the mall “being nasty and vulgar saying gay sexually toned remarks”?
I have read similar “accounts” on these comment pages that Charlie Howard was some how responsible for his own death because he “taunted”, etc…but have never seen any conclusive proof that he did any such thing. If you have that proof I would be interested in reading it.
Truth of the matter is this.
1) Charlie Howard was beaten,
2) Charlie Howard begged for his life,
3) Charlie Howard told his attackers that he could not swim,
4) Charlie Howard’s attackers picked him up and tossed him over a three foot railing,
5) Charlie Howard might have landed in 4 feet of water of less depending on when high and low tied was. He may have landed in considerably more water than that. Charlie Howard may also have landed on one of the concrete “pads” that line either side of the Kenduskeag Stream,
6) People reported hearing Charlie Howard cry out for help,
7) Charlie Howards attackers ignored those screams and walked away.
So please tell me that you do not agree that Charlie Howard deserved to be murdered for “taunting”.
jd …. the thinking is the same as blaming a female rape victim for wearing suggestive clothing or not fighting hard enough .. they refuse to acknowledge that Charlie was not responsible for the actions of his attackers. He must have done something to provoke them that made them incapable of thinking or acting in a reasonable manner….. otherwise they would have walked away before they attacked him.
So are you implying it’s ok for an adult to sexual stalk children and it’s not the stalkers fault cause they are gay and the kids are not?
Quite the reach ….. I was saying that blaming a victim for the actions of the perpetrator is a ridiculous and ignorant way to think. Perpetrators are responsible for their actions not the victims.
Children who were able to lift a man up and drop him into a river. While there were legally minors, implying that the 15, 16, and 17 year old boys were helpless children who were stalked is misleading. These young men killed someone. There is also no indication that these murderers were not gay or gay. (You know as well as I do that many homophobes are gay themselves, so it’s also misleading to make the assumption that the young men were not gay).
As for the stalking, can you cite where that is? I have done some research and haven’t yet found that. I did find, though, in the BDN, that the three were is a car that stopped after they saw Howard. After stopping, “The three boys chased Howard, kicked him when he fell, then threw him
over the rail into the stream, according to police. The teenagers
returned to their car and left.” http://bangor-launch.newspackstaging.com/2009/07/12/news/bangor/where-are-charlie-howardrsquos-killers/
Again, please stop misleading people. What happened is not the same as what you implied.
Did I say he is responsible or deserved it? No I did not. But if your going to tell a story tell the truth. If Charlie and his “friend” had not tormented those boys the night before and as an adult he knew better, they in turn would not have been terrified and felt like they had to defend themselves and or feel like they had to man up against him and give him a taste of his behavior and not to chase young boys around. If it were young girls being chased by a dirty old man, it would have the same emotional effect. Only the girls father would kick the dirty old man’s butt instead.
If Charlie had not behaved the way he had the night before at the mall and yes I was there and yes I saw this, these boys would not have tossed him off the bridge because they never would have known him or cared otherwise if he was gay.
Do I think it was a bad thing all the way around? Yes, I do , but these boys were not driving down the road and said oh look gay guy lets toss him. What they likely said was hey there’s that gay guy who threatened to do sick things to us.
The lesson from all of this should be before you taunt, torment, bully people be careful as they might do it back to you and it could turn out worse then you imagined. As well as before you seek revenge by pay back be careful it could turn out worse then you imagined.
I said that if you have proof provide it and I will read it. We have your word that you “saw” the events the night before and then you say “they had to defend themselves and or feel like they had to man up against him and give him a taste of his behavior and not to chase young boys around”.
They had to “defend” themselves? So Charlie beat up these three young men the night before and 24 hours later Charlie was unable to defend himself from he same three young men?
And yes, you ARE saying he deserved it when you make statements like this “If Charlie had not behaved the way he had the night before at the mall and yes I was there and yes I saw this, these boys would not have tossed him off the bridge because they never would have known him or cared otherwise if he was gay”.
So tell me…what did Charlie do that deserved to be beathen and thrown over a railing into the Kenduskeag to die?
No the lesson is you don’t beat people and throw them over a railing to die because your masculinity was bruised by WORDS!
What don’t you ask, what was an adult doing sexually harrassing children. Why are you blaming the kids for his behavior? Because they wouldn’t become homosexuals for this guy and that is why you won’t accept that these boys didn’t mean or plan to cause his death and it was because he approached them in a most negative way that started the events of a all around sad ending.
You can go ahead and keep twisting and warping what people say to suit yourself but it just makes the whole gay cause look like it’s built on fabrication not reality.
How do you have relationships when you change eveything people say into the opposite of what comes out their mouth. Don’t bother answering that one, no answer would make sense.
Except you haven’t provided any proof that any sexual harrassment actually occurred. jd asked for you to provide that proof, and so far you have been unable to provide it. So, until you can actually prove that any sexual harrassment actually occurred, then we have no reason to consider it. Don’t like that, then provde the proof.
Oh, I was waiting for someone to send me proof he didn’t, first.
You make the claim, you provide the proof.
“What don’t you ask, what was an adult doing sexually harrassing children.”
Well I have asked for the PROOF of Charlie Howard “harassing” the three teenagers more than once and so far no one, not one person has provided ANY evidence that Charlie Howard “harassed” anyone the night before his death.
~~~~~
“Why are you blaming the kids for his behavior?”
I am blaming the kids for their actions which included beating and kicking Charlie Howard before they threw him into the Kenduskeag.
~~~~~
“Because they wouldn’t become homosexuals for this guy and that is why you won’t accept that these boys didn’t mean or plan to cause his death and it was because he approached them in a most negative way that started the events of a all around sad ending.”
They “didn’t mean or plan to cause” Charlie Howard’s death. Really? Charlie ran away when the car that contained his assailants began to slow down. Charlie fell and suffered an asthma attack. They pounced on Charlie and began beating and kicking him. The 15 year old shouted to throw Charlie over the bridge and grabbed him by the legs. He and and the 17 year old began lifting him. Charlie pleaded for his life, he grabbed the rail and begged them not to throw him in the river as he could not swim. Prying his hand loose, they began to pitch him over the rail, with the 16 year old gave the final push. The boys then returned to the car where the girls were trying to start the car and drove off.
~~~~~
“You can go ahead and keep twisting and warping what people say to suit yourself but it just makes the whole gay cause look like it’s built on fabrication not reality.”
Those are the facts Scintillate so how exactly have I “twisted” or “warped” anything?
~~~~~
“How do you have relationships when you change everything people say into the opposite of what comes out their mouth.”
So here is you chance to show everybody that I “twist” and “warp” everything people “say” so it becomes the “opposite of what comes out their mouth.”
~~~~~
“Don’t bother answering that one, no answer would make sense.”
Please Scintillate I really really want your to show everyone I “twist” and “warp” everything people “say” so it becomes the “opposite of what comes out their mouth.” So please do take the time to respond.
They did not act in self defense. They stopped the car and attacked him. If they had felt threatened by Howard’s actions, I’m sure they would have received plenty of sympathy when they filed a police report.
That sounds fabulous in theory. You do understand that when someone is tried for say…murder they look at MOTIVE which helps determine premeditation etc. So the motive for why the crime was committed matters legally.
I find it hilarious when someone attempts to use ‘well the gay person came on to me and that’s why I assaulted, killed (or whatever they did that was violent to the gay person) because their ‘advances’ were unwelcome.’ Seriously? Do you know how many dead heterosexual males there would be in this world if women responded to their unwanted advances with violence? Too many to count.
I don’t think anybody in modern times feels it necessary to beat up a gay guy because he was “hit on”, we could care less that your gay. If you feel the need to be violent because you were hit on than you have a problem. It’s comparable to getting caught checking out some dudes wife and he wanting to fight over it. My point is the same law applies to both situations.
You’re wrong people do use this as a legal defense and whether you believe it or not doesn’t make it any less real- it happens and it’s a pathetic excuse to attempt to justify hate motivated crime. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense
Clearly if someone is violent they have ‘problems’ to say the least, but that doesn’t stop people from being violent or picking out people they hate for one reason or another. Read up on the Federal Law the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. hate crimes prevention act. Both of these people were murdered for 1 reason and 1 reason only- James Byrd was black and Matthew Shepard was gay THAT was the motivation behind these crimes- HATE nothing more nothing less than HATE.
Think a white guy in Mississippi who kills a black person get’s the same amount of time? Treyvon Martin ring any bells? If Treyvon had shot a white guy think it would have taken the police 40+ days to arrest him? Do you know in the last 2012 GOP primary in Mississippi there was a poll taken and 29% still believe that interracial marriage should still be illegal- so much for your theory of ‘modern times.’
Martin was a gangsta wanna be punk. The media attempted to portray him as an innocent little school boy by only showing pictures of him at 14 years old. Zimmerman is not white either.
Besides, for all you know this could have done by the homosexual gangsta club, marking their territory.
Yeah because we all know all about those ‘homosexual gansta clubs’- you see them all the time in the pride parades with their rainbow flags and glitter signs…..scary, scary people…THAT’s what happened. You need to get out of the state of Maine for more than 15 minutes or read a book- doesn’t matter which but do pick one. Sigh.
So then you believe the “gay panic defense” is hogwash …. even though it is used in court? Glad to hear it.
Pretty much the same thing. Muslims might go sharia on your a** and issue a death warrent.
You’re not an honest person.
You couldn’t have said it better.
you do see that the law for spray painting that on your house WOULD be the same, right? That you are protected under the law too…you get that, right?
I suspect you’d sing a different song if you were.
We’re a civilization and crime motivated by someone’s hate for another person exercising a right, is of greater social gravity than what is otherwise vandalism with spray paint.
It’s a hate crime designation if it is determined a crime motivated by a hatred of a GROUP of people. The reason the designation exists is because the crime impacts the group of people; it’s like burning a cross on someone’s lawn – the intention is to make the ENTIRE group afraid.
That’s why the designation exists. It’s not just the specific victims of the specific crime that are affected.
http://www.washingtonblade.com/2012/07/25/who-signed-the-md-anti-gay-marriage-petition/
Yeah, right! You are trying to say that there is no such thing as a hate crime? Does the name Charlie Howard ring any bells?
That wasn’t a hate crime, they didn’t target or stock him because he was gay. they came out of a bar and did something very stupid.. don’t make it more than it was.
NO, they were at the mall the night before and Charlie Howard followed them around making some sexually suggestive remarks at them. They saw him downtown on the night he got chucked off the bridge into 4 ft. of water.
So are you saying that alleged “sexually suggestive remarks”were justification for payback of a physical (and ultimately fatal) reaction?
Please read my reply post to jd2008d who asked basically the same question.
Do your truly believe that they would have reacted (stupidly in your words) the same if Charlie had been Charlotte …. if a female had made alleged (as there is no proof) sexually suggestive remarks rather that a male?
Stupid is your word, not mine.
I truly believe if they had been homosexual boys they wouldn’t have asked him to leave them alone, stop stalking them, stop bothering them.
I truly believe if he had not approached them, had not tormented them, had not stalked them and he had left them alone after they asked him too, they would not know him from any nail in the bucket, would not have reconize him trolling the streets downtown, would not have confronted him.
But let me ask you this, why is an adult at the mall following kids around, why did his friend not stop him from following those kids around the mall, did not jump in the shallow stream and help him, but yet wrote a book not entirely true and made money from it?
Once again, what evidence do you have that he was “stalking” them? Until you can provide that evidence, you are lying about a dead person. How “classy” of you…
So should marriage and equal rights….lots of bigots!!!!
You hit the nail on the head…. straight people have become second class citizens. It’s been blown so far out of proportion that we see stories like this that make a priority out of the “anti-gay slurs” instead of the arsonist on the loose. Thanks for speaking your mind.
Yeah, those privilege gay people. They’re so fortune and above the rest of us. How luck for them to have F*G spray painted on their burnt down property.
I don’t see any spray painting. Can someone point out where it is?
They took down the photos that were up earlier.
Bahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahaha yes poor 2nd class straight people…..after all we are all voting in November to decide to allow straight people to marry the person they love Bahahahahahahahahhahahaha.
Yeah like we have done two or three times before. Are you speaking for your sheep?
Ummmm once before genius in 2009, but never let the facts or information get in the way of you and your sheeple. Baaaaaa Baaaaaaaa. LOL.
If the arsonist on the loose is gay, you’d figure that malkes the arsonist a 1.5 class citizen by your math.
Well I am straight and most certainly do not feel like a second class citizen. I also attempt to treat ALL people with the same respect I would like shown me.
Now, I would say we have a potential arsonist who is also a bigot on the loose. Neither is acceptable and together they are a very dangerous combination.
The homeowners were a gay couple..
Probably still are.
In other words, You Don’t Know. Oh, and yes, no and no.
Was the graffiti painted before the fire, or on the ruins?
“Choosen” ?
Your extra right should be English class.
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/university-punishes-staffer-for-signing-marriage-petition.html Lack of tolerance works both ways.
No comparison at all. That woman that signed the petition for the Hate Vote still has her job and is being PAID. These folks’ camp has been torched in a violent attack.
http://www.washingtonblade.com/2012/07/25/who-signed-the-md-anti-gay-marriage-petition/
Yeah, that’s the same as having your property burnt down.
Wouldn’t be surprised ifinsurance money. the homeowners did this themselves to collect
Or maybe someone thought they were the ones who ratted out the pot growers a couple weeks ago?
Equality is not an “extra right”.
Sounds to me like some one is trying to influence a vote course this will be deleted by by bdn can’t have anyone not stirring up sympathy for gays
Hate Crime? Where does Walter Garndner start with his list of people that would do the spray painting. His list has to include all the people he hates and has pissed off. Who will he start with?
Too bad you left your handwriting on the wall Bubba. Your ignorance and stupidity all came out at once. Watch your back ,Bubba and your brothers Bubba and Bubba too!! Do I hear Deliverance playing in the night air? Did you sign your name on the building or was it too hard to spell? Stupid people!
Ok, so some of you don’t approve of homosexualtiy. Well, no one is asking you to. Nor is anyone asking you to promote homosexuality or even change your mind about your opposition to it. That’s fine.
All we ask is that you practice tolerance in your actions and join the rest of us in putting an end to violence and hatred against those who walk a different path in life. My guess is that all of you, having the benefit of having seen history play out, will not tolerate hatred and violence against Jews. Or women. Or foreigners. You’ve learned the lesson of what happens when you stand by quitely while slurs are written on the synagogue walls. Ignoring civil rights violations only endangers your very own civil rights.
Grow up. There are people in the world who are different from you. They seek only what you enjoy at present–equality. It’s not a “special” right or a great leap of the imagination to allow a fellow human being to enjoy the same rights that you enjoy in a nation built on offering a level playing field, tolerance and equality under the law.
Well put
So you want people to tolerate something they don’t agree with.
You don’t have to believe that in the middle east women are of the same value as livestock, we just want you to tolerate it.
Political correctness is unconstitutional. you cannot force people to believe.
The US is not a middle eastern country and we do not treat humans as some do there. Historically women and others were treated as chattel in the US ….. and in some cases they still are but not by the government. Married women could not file rape charges against their husbands until 1976 ….. it hasn’t been that long relatively speaking.
As US citizens we are asked to tolerate many things we don’t agree with or believe differently about.
Yes. That’s part of living in a free country.
We’re not asking for ACCEPTANCE, just leave us alone, and let us live our lives in peace as you live yours.
But I wonder how many people who don’t “agree” with homosexuality are fine with using us for our services, whether they be the stereotypical services (hairdresser or florist) or non-stereotypical (fireman or nurse). I get the feeling sometimes that it’s okay for us to provide services and pay our taxes, but just keep quiet and don’t rock the boat by asking for more. Keep our nasty doings behind closed doors (while it’s still legal). What sort of America is that?
Not a fan of “hate crimes” concepts at all…
Does it really matter if I beat the stew out of you because I don’t like you for being ________, or because I don’t like that you have more money than I?
A crime is a crime. The crime here is arson. Enforce the law to its fullest and be done with it.
Completely disagree. You would think that me spray painting “wolfndeer” on a Walmart is the same as me spray painting a swastika on a synagogue?
Spray painting “wolfndeer” on WalMart is the same crime (vandalism) as spray painting swastikas on a synagogue.
Yes.
The crime already exists… it needs nothing to complicate it.
The impact isn’t the same. The motivation isn’t the same.
That’s why if I put a knife in a person (for example), I could be guilty of a multitude of different crimes — if at all.
As I said, I don’t see a difference.
You commit the crime because you don’t like Wally World… you commit the crime because you don’t like Jews.
The crime is the same.
The law has always parsed these things out — always. You can infringe on a person in certain ways, but there are ways in which we are protected from infringement, like religion for example. We’ve always understood and realized a difference between these sorts of things.
If we’ve always understood it, then there is no need to codify such things into law, over-complicating an already complex legal system.
Fewer laws, stiffer penalties… that would to a long way.
Who says the spray painter on Walmart doesn’t have the exact same amount of hate for Walmart that the synogogue painter has for the Jewish people? Or the arsonist of a homosexuals home?
Most crimes that are from one person onto another is some form of hate. Do we really (even though we already have, I’m gonna pretend we haven’t) need laws that measure the amount of hate? And who is the final arbitor of that measurment? And would someone effected by the Holocost be unbiased to be a measurer of hate? And would…..yea, you get my point…..
I agree.
No need to complicate the laws. Remove the complications and convict those that are guilty to stiffer penalties than hand-smacking.
But there is a difference. Motive is always the key. For example, lets look at murder. If you go out and find that jerk from high school just to run him down with your car, that would be considered murder. It was pre meditated and you had the intent to kill that person. Compare that to a person driving along and they accidentaly hit a kid who ran into the street. It was an accident. It is technically the same crime, killing someone with your car, but the motive makes the difference between vehicular manslaughter and murder.
In the case of hate crimes, it might be the same basic crime, but the motive does make a difference. Spray painting “f**k” on the side of a building has one target, the owner of the building. However, spray painting “f*g” on the side of a building BECAUSE the owner is gay, or a swastika on a Jewis temple, is a different situation. It is meant to target more than just the owner of the building, but instead all of the gay people, or all Jewish people, in the area. Because it has a larger target and the intent is to do more harm, a stricter punishment is issued.
OK, let’s look at murder.
My aunt was murdered in 1978 because a man wanted her van. He did not hate my aunt.
Then let’s compare that to the fictional account of a man who killed my aunt because he “hated women”.
What is the difference? My aunt was gone… never to return.
It didn’t matter why she was murdered, only that she was. I still celebrated when her killer were executed and needed no hate crimes laws.
In your scenario, if it’s an accident, it cannot by definition be murder.
Don’t over complicate easy laws… vandalism and arson are vandalism and arson. Exact the stiffest penalty possible when one is guilty.
It’s simple.
So let’s look at the person that murdered you aunt in 1979. She was murdered because she had something the murderer wanted…a van.
Now that same person murderers your aunt for no reason at all other that she is a woman and during the commission of the crime the murderer is heard saying such things as “I hate woman”, etc…
Let’s look at Charlie Howard. Beaten and tossed into the Kenduskeag Stream because he was gay. They three murderers took nothing. They didn’t rob him or do anything other than toss him into a stream because he was gay and they didn’t like him.
Do you see the difference?
By the way…that crime where your aunt was murdered in 1979 is now a “special” crime called “car jacking”. Do you believe that law should be done away with too?
I see murder.
Hold each guilty of the crime to the same accountability. Murder for want of a van is no less horrendous a crime than murder for being gay.
I know what a gay slur is, so wouldn’t an anti-gay slur be a good thing??
give them time, lot2say
Pro Hetrosexual slurs are often mistaken for anti gay slurs.
Then it shouldn’t be difficult for you to provide and examples of “Pro Hetrosexual slurs” that are “often mistaken for anti gay slurs”.
How about “The breeders are our leaders”? I just made that one up but I’m not going to copyright it.
If you say so ….. can you give some examples of Pro Heterosexual slurs? Or how about some Anti-Heterosexual slurs?
PLEASE give example of a “pro hetro-sexual slur”.
Has anyone in any minority group been charged with a hate crime againt a straight white person. If not then the law should be thrown out.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses
There are recorded hate crimes against straight people and white people. You should just be glad that it happens far less frequently that for non white people and for non straight people.
I’m guessing that the people responsible for the anti-gay stuff, if they vote, will be voting Republican.
Just my opinion.
To Tedlick Bradkey: The difference is that in the first situation, the man murdered your aunt because he wanted her van. In the second situation, the man was not targeting your aunt, but women in general. The end goal of the second situation was not to kill your aunt, but instead to terrorize women in the area.
“In your scenario, if it’s an accident, it cannot by definition be murder.” – That’s the entire point. The motive defines the crime. The actions are the same, both involve someone being killed by the car, but the motive completely changes the crime.
It was Brandon Spikes.