Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (170509)	6/4/2003 1:05:20 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579988

Given the scenario, its a logical conclusion. No it isn't. Not even a reasonably logical conclusion let alone the only one. Sorry, Tim, but it is a very logical conclusion. It may not be the only one but its a reasonable one under the circumstances. Why? Because people should be punished for their actions, a murder is a murder. Particular situations can be considered as mitigating or aggravating circumstances but it shouldn't be a different crime. Justice should be blind in regards to race. It shouldn't be a different crime if someone shoots someone because they are black then it should be if they shoot someone because they have blue eyes, or because they give the murderer a funny look, or because the murderer want's their money. It is a different kind of crime esp. when they shoot some one and then rob the person or mutilate him/her. The gay guy in Wyoming got robbed after he was crucified and beat him to a bloody pulp. In my book, that's two crimes.....why should they get off with just one punishment? The author of the article suggested that Bush was "soft on racism". No the author said the add unfairly suggested that Bush was soft on racism. Yes, and that was his interpretation........it was not a statement made by the people who did the ad. You are upset because of one man's opinion. No, but Reps are more likely to practice Extreme Politics than Dems. That isn't true. You can make your declarative statements all you want. You can refer to something dismissively as "nonsense" or "ridiculous" as well......none of that use of grammar or sentence structure will make you right. thus her reaction.........which most would consider is a fairly normal one. No it wasn't a fairly normal one, nor does it make any sense, There you go again.........you have an opinion at best and its not the only one. unless Bush was letting the people off for the crime. But they where not let off they where charged with murder which in Texas can mean the death penalty. Like I've said before, many of these hate crimes are double crimes......rape and then a beating; a beating then a robbery; tortue then a murder. In this society where race, gender, religion, sexual preference etc is treated like it was a disease by some in the majority, it looks to me like hate crimes need to be made a separate, punishable act. The message needs to be made clear that hate is not acceptable in this society. If that is not enough of a penalty well I'm sorry but both the constitution and public sentiment (which BTW I agree with) considers torture and maiming as a punishment to be "creul and unusual". I don't know where you're getting your public sentiment stance from.......that's not the stance here in WA state. If you can't understand from where she's coming and your only empathy is for Bush and not her father; then I don't understand how you think. My sympathy is with her for losing her father, but that doesn't mean it has to be with her on all issues. I didn't say sympathy, I said empathy.....there's a big difference. Taking part in an add comparing Bush's stance on hate crimes to the racially inspired murder of her father was not right. It presents a misleading and unfair view of Bush and all people who oppose hate crime laws. Sorry, but from what I've heard, Bush has a somewhat mixed record on individual rights in TX. She has every right to be pissed and if he thinks her ad was unfair, let him take an ad out and explain his position. That's how it works in a democracy. ted