Racist Chanting

[gregs_y2k]

Obviously a playful slap on a girlfriend's arse isn't the perfect comparison. But there aren't many out there. I'm just trying to outline the fact that it's one of the few scenarios where you're not hitting someone to inflict maximum damage on them.

 

[Richie]

Do you have no sense of humour? Have you read the thread? Why does me living 30 miles up the road from Leicester instantly make me a racist/BNP member? If you had known that I only moved here two years ago would you revise that link?

No he wouldn't, because his prejudice is so ingrained about "racists". The very thing his type complain about, ingrained prejudice. The irony.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Wow, insulting and patronising, a man ( woman ?? ) of many talents.

Perhaps you can explain to this here thick ignoramus then why black girls kicking a white girl whilst shrieking “kill the white bitch” was not classed as a race / hate crime ?

This should be interesting.

PS – I am bright enough to be able to spell attack.

My God. My entire argument has been undermined by a typo!

It's not complicated... there is a very obvious distinction between one person assaulting another because of their skin colour and one person assaulting another and then, aside from the motive, using racist language during the assault.

As an example:

a) A black bloke knocks over a white bloke's pint in a pub. Words are had and in escalates into a fight. During the course of the fight the white bloke says "**** you, you black bastard".

b) A black bloke is walking down a street. A racist spots him and decides to assault him because he is black.

Example a) was not a racially motivated assault, but racist language was used during the course of the event. Example b) was racially motivated.

 

[Macky]

I'm sorry in a perfect world we could create boundaries with words and by hiding the sweets but it just isn't the case. Children are by nature rebellious and intelligent. Part of their growing up and development is pushing the boundaries as far as possible. It's no coincidence that nowadays a lot of children run amok because they know that they have the upper hand and that no one can touch them. No matter how much you love them they will still push you as far as possible to test those boundaries. It's not violence to strike them once to let them know they've done wrong. I'm not saying you beat them with your fists. If someone smacks a child they shouldn't put their full force into a blow but hit them hard enough to make sure they know that they have overstepped the mark. It's much more difficult and ineffective to try and do this with alternative methods.

If you strike a child, it is violence. It is lazy parenting and it is demonstrably counterproductive. Not using violence against a child doesn't mean that they are allowed to run wild without boundaries or consequences.

 

[Rich B]

That's easy Rich, because there was no evidence that the reason they were attacking her was because she was white. It's really not that difficult.

Just for example, if I box you on the nose for stealing my wallet and call you a Florist ****, did I break your nose because you stole my wallet or because you support f0r£$t?

Think the vital part here is "Kill the white bitch".

Oh and it would be wallet first, anything after is incidental

 

[gregs_y2k]

If you strike a child, it is violence. It is lazy parenting and it is demonstrably counterproductive. Not using violence against a child doesn't mean that they are allowed to run wild without boundaries or consequences.

We'll just agree to disagree on that one.

 

[fitz]

Please bestow me with your definition of the word then.

Given the context of what the original poster was referring to I'd say 'including several different cultures'. I don't believe they were suggesting that it is harmonious society.

 

[gregs_y2k]

Think the vital part here is "Kill the white bitch".

Oh and it would be wallet first, anything after is incidental

Although I don't necessarily agree with the way that Rich has formulated a lot of his points. I would agree with him that this attack probably should have been tried as a hate crime. The reason it was not is because race has become a hot topic again and the authorities probably don't want to fan the flames by charging a minority for a racist attack. A bit like the FA and the Suarrez Evra affair, who were quick to jump on Suarrez and determined to make an example of him but at the same time brushing Evra's racist comments under the carpet.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Multicultural? That must be why we have so many race relations boards in action, because the world is such a happy & harmonious place.

Oh christ. You said multicultural. I just laughed at your use of it.

Do you not see that your racist views are one of the many root causes for a lack of harmoniousness?

Maybe there isn't, but if only the other people of colour would stop rioting perhaps people wouldn't hold such stereotypical views?

Don't be silly. I know you're being flippant, but you know as well as I do that the riots do not represent black people in Britain any more than the idiots involved in the EDL represent white people.

And imagine me a true Brit having the gall to question this integration that was forced on me? I know, let's call him names and tell him his attitude is backward. That way we can all pretend we live in a multicultural wonderland.

If it was a wonderland, I wouldn't need to have conversations like this with sad, ignorant, embittered types such as yourself.

And you're no more a 'true Brit' (WTF?) than someone who's first, second or third-generation British.

I'd like to say how I really feel, because rest assured I would stand by every word of it, however, there are a whole raft of race laws stopping people from telling things as they really see it, so I'll have to be careful not to step over that line.

Weak. Very weak.

Give me one good reason why you think you're better than the average black or Asian people. Just one. You can't. The only thing apparent is that, actually, you're worth less than the average person on this showing.

Is the economic reasons you keep parroting not excusing it? If not, what is it?

It's explaining to you why the riots happened and why there was a significant percentage of black people involved in the rights.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Think the vital part here is "Kill the white bitch".

Oh and it would be wallet first, anything after is incidental

Well there you go. You've got it! In the instance cited is was deemed to be assault first, racist language incidental.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Although I don't necessarily agree with the way that Rich has formulated a lot of his points. I would agree with him that this attack probably should have been tried as a hate crime. The reason it was not is because race has become a hot topic again and the authorities probably don't want to fan the flames by charging a minority for a racist attack. A bit like the FA and the Suarrez Evra affair, who were quick to jump on Suarrez and determined to make an example of him but at the same time brushing Evra's racist comments under the carpet.

Why do you think it should have been tried as a hate crime? Do you have an intimate knowledge of the case or are you just assuming that the girl was attached BECAUSE she was white?

 

[ChrisFilter]

No he wouldn't, because his prejudice is so ingrained about "racists". The very thing his type complain about, ingrained prejudice. The irony.

Oh dear god. You're clearly an idiot.

 

[pork pie fox]

If you strike a child, it is violence. It is lazy parenting and it is demonstrably counterproductive. Not using violence against a child doesn't mean that they are allowed to run wild without boundaries or consequences.

Amen to that Macky.

 

[bocadillo]

Do you not see that your racist views are one of the many root causes for a lack of harmoniousness?

If only somebody would invent the word 'harmony', eh?

 

[gregs_y2k]

Why do you think it should have been tried as a hate crime? Do you have an intimate knowledge of the case or are you just assuming that the girl was attached BECAUSE she was white?

I don't have too much knowledge of the case but if someone's being attacked and their attackers are using racist language then I would deem that as a racist attack. If it were a gang of white people attacking another person of any race and were shouting racist language as they kicked the crap out of them, then it would and should be tried as a racially motivated assault.

 

[camberwell fox]

Just for example, if I box you on the nose for stealing my wallet and call you a Florist ****, did I break your nose because you stole my wallet or because you support f0r£$t?

Both? :icon_lol:

 

[Macky]

If it were a gang of white people attacking another person of any race and were shouting racist language as they kicked the crap out of them, then it would and should be tried as a racially motivated assault.

Are you suggesting that they would be prosecuted for a racially motivated attack purely because they're white?

 

[Macky]

If only somebody would invent the word 'harmony', eh?

I can't see it catching on

 

[gregs_y2k]

Are you suggesting that they would be prosecuted for a racially motivated attack purely because they're white?

No because they are hurling racist abuse at them whilst they are beating them up....did you read my post?

 

[Macky]

Both? :icon_lol:

Maybe, but they'd have to prove it and the wallet theft gives me a good alibi :icon_bigg