4 charged in hate crime

If you wish to raise new topics on News, Current Events & Politics, please do so at Dhamma Wheel Engaged.
User avatar
Twilight
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Twilight » Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:03 pm

Without a link, no they are not convincing. I am sure you can find one example of such a hate crime from 1990 or 2010 if indeed you are correct. Obviously I would change my opinion after such a link. I am not the one rooting for a party or another, so it is easy for me to change my mind after evidence.
You'll have a better chance finding a moderate rebel in Ildib than finding a buddhist who ever changed his views. Views are there to be clung to. They are there to be defended with all one's might. Whatever clinging one will removed in regards to sense pleasures by practicing the path - that should be compensated with increased clinging to views. This is the fundamental balance of the noble 8thfold path. The yin and yang.
----------
Consciousness and no-self explained in drawings: link
How stream entry is achieved. Mahasi / Zen understanding vs Sutta understanding: link

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Cittasanto » Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:12 pm

SDC wrote:
Twilight wrote:
I saw a lot growing up and simply disagree with your assessment.
Give me an example.
That isn't the topic and even if it were I wouldn't indulge you.
:goodpost:
This topic is only about this one incident. I am sure there are other incidents involving other races in the USA, and News outlets have been cautious here and to an extent, I can understand this.

I certainly am open to other such crimes having their own topic, or shared within this topic, or discussion about how this sort of thing can be dealt with/helped stop from happening in the future regardless of specifics of a particular hate crime.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 5307
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by SDC » Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:39 pm


User avatar
srivijaya
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:31 pm
Location: UK

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by srivijaya » Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:03 pm

Labels here, labels there... I think as Buddhists we know what the deal is:
"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .budd.html

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6516
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: Texas

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Mkoll » Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:32 pm

Many kids are mean, some are even bullies, but this goes way beyond that. This is sadistic torture of another human being. Regardless of their exact motivation, these 4 need some serious help. Or they may already be beyond fixing.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Cittasanto » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:52 am

hi all
here is a video which shows some of the falsehoods surrounding this story. and yes it does have an anti-sjw slant but some of the debunking info is important as some are being claimed to support or defend the four who have not, but there is one who has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INsd37bADfU

Simone Sanders (the black CNN panelist) has now said this is a hate crime.
Last edited by Cittasanto on Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Cittasanto » Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:57 am

Mkoll wrote:Many kids are mean, some are even bullies, but this goes way beyond that. This is sadistic torture of another human being. Regardless of their exact motivation, these 4 need some serious help. Or they may already be beyond fixing.
They are young adults, They are all over 18.
The US is obviously different with unicef saying https://www.unicef.org/pon97/p56a.htm
In the US, the age of criminal responsibility is established by state law. Only 13 states have set minimum ages, which range from 6 to 12 years old. Most states rely on common law, which holds that from age 7 to age 14, children cannot be presumed to bear responsibility but can be held responsible.

Here the age for adult charges is 17 so callingthem kids is not accurate. They are young adults. no more or less.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6516
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: Texas

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Mkoll » Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:55 am

Cittasanto wrote:
Mkoll wrote:Many kids are mean, some are even bullies, but this goes way beyond that. This is sadistic torture of another human being. Regardless of their exact motivation, these 4 need some serious help. Or they may already be beyond fixing.
They are young adults, They are all over 18.
The US is obviously different with unicef saying https://www.unicef.org/pon97/p56a.htm
In the US, the age of criminal responsibility is established by state law. Only 13 states have set minimum ages, which range from 6 to 12 years old. Most states rely on common law, which holds that from age 7 to age 14, children cannot be presumed to bear responsibility but can be held responsible.

Here the age for adult charges is 17 so callingthem kids is not accurate. They are young adults. no more or less.
Accurate enough for a forum post. I'm not writing a scientific paper here.
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition wrote:kid (kĭd)
n.
1.
a. A young goat.
b. One of the young of certain similar animals.
2.
a. The flesh of a young goat.
b. Leather made from the skin of a young goat; kidskin.
c. An article made from this leather.
3. Informal
a. A child.
b. A young person.
Wikipedia: kid wrote:slang for a child, adolescent or young adult, especially a young man
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Cittasanto » Mon Jan 16, 2017 10:39 pm

Someone is defending the torture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PbQi3on-qg&t=1s

and Mkoll hadn't realised I didn't respond, so here it is...
Fair enough. My concern with the use was/is something of demeaning their responsibility by saying they are too young to be responsible fully. but like I said your explanation for your use is reasonable.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

chownah
Posts: 8581
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by chownah » Tue Jan 17, 2017 2:54 am

Cittasanto wrote:Someone is defending the torture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PbQi3on-qg&t=1s

and Mkoll hadn't realised I didn't respond, so here it is...
Fair enough. My concern with the use was/is something of demeaning their responsibility by saying they are too young to be responsible fully. but like I said your explanation for your use is reasonable.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
The sad thing about this video is that alot of what is said is exactly true and key in understanding some problems in the usa today...but it gets lost in the bullsh1t.
chownah

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6637
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: 4 charged in hate crime

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:56 pm

chownah wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:Someone is defending the torture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PbQi3on-qg&t=1s

and Mkoll hadn't realised I didn't respond, so here it is...
Fair enough. My concern with the use was/is something of demeaning their responsibility by saying they are too young to be responsible fully. but like I said your explanation for your use is reasonable.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
The sad thing about this video is that alot of what is said is exactly true and key in understanding some problems in the usa today...but it gets lost in the bullsh1t.
chownah
something being true, and something being useful to keep going over are not exclusive. learn from the past, but don't use it to justify anything, because someone who is a victim of things that didn't happen in their lifetime only lie to themselves and perpetuate the past.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests