h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Stone Aart

I have done some googling regarding your question Bs

It doesn't criminilise activities that aren't all ready criminal and is tied to a number of statutes, such as murder, physical injury, haressment and public order.

The hatred element is, if proven, is taken into account at the sentancing stage as an aggrevating factor

Incog, as it stands the sentancing would harsher.

It reflects the fact that the crime wasn't just commited against the person, it was commited against the group of people that they belong to or were percived to belong to

I am going to quote PC as she put it so neatly

'What bias crime law here says is that whites attacking a black person *because he is black* is more henious than attacking him because you wanted his wallet, he flirted with your wife, or he looked at you funny. Because that kind of assault isn't just meant to harm the victim, it's meant to send a message to other members of the "out" group: "Hey, you (with the different colored skin / nose piercing / same sex partner / etc), we don't want your kind here. Stay under the radar, stay out of our way, or you're next".'

As it stands in the uk a hate crime is any criminal offence that is motivated by hostility or prejudice based upon the victim's disability,race,religion or belief,sexual orientation or transgender identity.

Greater Manchester police are recording reported crimes or incidents against sub cultures as hate crimes but they can not be proseuted as such

While there are campaigns to do so, there are no proposals to do so

(jumps on the "if Littlejohn is against it, I'm for it bandwagon")

All the Greater Manchester Police are going to do at the moment is monitor this type of thing and get some statistics. Surely that isn't a bad thing?

PC put it so well that I'm not going to even address the question about white on black (or black on white) racially motivated crime.

To be honest, I'd be all for classing this kind of thing as a hate crime (I prefer the term bias crime) because I do find it worse for someone to be singled out and victimised based on nothing more than their choice of "look" - but then, as I said, I'm an ex-goth and I had a lot of name calling and jostling about during that time and it is, to say the least, very frightening and restricting)

btw, anyone got a link to the littlejohn piece?

It's on the Daily Hate, Sho. I'm not linking to it.

thanks
I'll see if I can find the text elsewhere

The article's title is something like "Now it's a crime to hate the Sex Pistols"

A lot of people are talking about "tougher sentences" and so on, but this story has nothing to do with sentencing. It means it will be recorded in police statistics as a hate crime, and the police in that area will treat the victims as they treat victims of other hate crimes - but it has nothing to do with giving tougher sentences.

To be clear: the law hasn't changed. Police procedure has changed.

Next time I want to say something potentially quotable, I'll make sure to check for typos before posting!


I didn't realize that this was just a change to police procedure as opposed to law. Regardless, though, I imagine it would be of immense help to the victims, if they survive, and other members of protected groups, that the mitigating factors are acknowledged, recorded, and taken seriously. I think this sends a message to any potential perpetrators that singling people out for assault or whatever based on race, gender, etc, shouldn't and won't be tolerated in civilized society.

And sorry for spamming, but I've just read the appalling Littlejohn article. I'd never heard of him before (it seems like that may have been a stroke of luck); does the fact that he is typing always mean that he is lying, or was this an exceptional case?

Ach, he's one of those mediocre journalists who make a living out of shock value. I'm not surprised you haven't heard of him; he's more boring than he realises.

I just read a couple of his articles. He is quite offensive, isn't he?

Deb

I can't use the proper word for him, as the filter won't allow it.

We have a smiley for him. Surely that's enough.

Nowhere near enough.

he is not worthy of a smiley

He's fundamentally boring and predictable.

pretty much covers him for me, thanks.

ok

Richard Littlebrain.

PP.