Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Brian Currie

‘Does a victim who doesn’t belong to any of these groups feel less pain when they are beaten up, stabbed or slashed?’

VIEWPOINTS — “If you are white, heterosexual, not religious, don’t work for the emergency services and are not disabled, you’ve just become a minority group in Scotland. In the eyes of the Scottish Parliament, if you belong to the above grouping and you are the victim of an assault – verbal or physical – the courts don’t have to treat your attacker as harshly as they would otherwise. That is the outcome of the latest piece of law-making by MSPs who have just extended existing hate crime laws on race and religion to cover disabled people and the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities. [...] It is abhorrent that members of the gay community have been assaulted or killed because of who they are, and it is barely credible that disabled people would be victims of assault. [...] The extremists and idiots who perpetrate these crimes are an affront to Scotland and they deserve to be treated harshly by the courts. But does a victim who doesn’t belong to any of these groups feel less pain when they are beaten up, stabbed or slashed?” — Brian Currie, arguing in the Scotland Herald about how hate crimes laws don’t protect the privileged

By:           editor editor
On:           Jun 9, 2009
Tagged: , ,
  • 8 Comments
    • tavdy79
      tavdy79

      While I don’t know the specific wording of the various Scottish anti-discrimination laws, I’m reasonably confident that they’re a cut-and-paste of their British equivalent (which, despite their name, only affect England & Wales). If so then their terminology re. sexuality is pretty much the same, covering not just homo- and biphobia but heterophobia as well. Likewise the laws’ terminology re. both religious belief would include all possible options – including prejudice against all forms of non-belief. And guess what? The laws’ terminology would also cover all possible forms of racism, including racism against whites.

      So, these laws don’t cover asexuals incapable of religious belief with no sense of ethnicity. That implies an incredibly low IQ – definitely low enough to qualify them as disabled.

      Jun 9, 2009 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      I guess the only solution is to “beat up, stab, and slash” Brian Curry, so that HE can become a “protected class” and then everything will be just fine, right?

      Jun 9, 2009 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      So yet another person who doesn’t understand what a hate crime is. THe unfairness argument is old…and it hasn’t been adjusted here in light of serious criticism. When “others” are more likely to be the victim of violent crime, then sentencing enhancements will attempt to even that out in an attempt to make everyone’s potential victimhood with regard to those traits equal (and badly, as they are rarely applied except in the most obvious cases–and even then, it’s a gamble).

      Jun 9, 2009 at 1:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan20004
      galefan20004

      EXACTLY the problem with hate crimes legislation. The much better approach is to simply raise the punishment for the crime itself instead of adding protected groups.

      Jun 9, 2009 at 3:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • timncguy
      timncguy

      Why is the theory of “Hate Crimes” legislation so difficult to understand? Is it because of the name “Hate Crimes”? Or, is it just willful ignorance and an unwillingness to learn?

      The theory behind hate crimes legislation is that the protected groups are victims of crimes, not because they are hated on a “personal” level, but because the group they belong to is hated. The only reason they are attacked is because they are a part of that hated group. And, the attack is not intended to just hurt the person who was attacked. It is also intended to send a message to the rest of the members of the group. The attacker is also sending the message that you better “stay in line” or you’ll be next.

      Hate crimes legislation also allows the federal government to get involved in the investigation of a crime when the local government can’t or won’t investigate. When the “local yokel” sheriff doesn’t investigate because the victim was gay and they deserved what they got.

      What do you think “lynchings” and “cross burnings” in the south were all about. They were to scare the shit out of the rest of the black community. And, how often did the local authorities look the other way and not investigate and/or prosecute the crimes?

      That’s what Hate Crimes legislation is designed to take care of.

      Jun 9, 2009 at 5:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Julian Morrison
      Julian Morrison

      I’ve read that law, and it’s carefully worded. It’s about the attacker’s perception, not about the victim’s nature. So for example it protects straight people who are victims of gay bashing. It doesn’t mean “some people are more protected”, it means “some reasons for crime are more heinous”.

      Jun 9, 2009 at 7:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • blacknightukalba
      blacknightukalba

      thats right – percieved hate of the perpetrator.
      The Scottish hate crimes (2009)law is not yet in force, it gets signed by the Queen in July.
      Scotland (Alba) has its own [devolved]Parliament and its own; totally seperate – legal [eg. 15 person juries, public prosecuters, sherriffs(judges) etc.], education, and health system ‘s from the rest of the United Kingdom(UK).pop 5.6m
      The Hate crime bill was passed UNANIMOUSLY, by the Parliament without ammendment,after it came out Committee.
      This is the first transgender-inclusive hate crime bill in Europe, and has the most inclusive definition of transgender identity in any European legislation.

      you can find out more here- http://www.equality-network.org

      if you are really into it you can read the debate here-
      http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-09/sor0603-02.htm#Col18098
      Kate

      Jun 10, 2009 at 5:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rob Tisinai
      Rob Tisinai

      Forgive me, but I can’t let this go without shouting my response:

      A WHITE MAN WHO IS ATTACKED FOR HIS RACE IS JUST AS PROTECTED BY HATE CRIME LAWS AS A BLACK MAN WHO IS ATTACKED FOR HIS RACE.

      A STRAIGHT MAN WHO IS ATTACKED FOR HIS ORIENTATION IS JUST AS PROTECTED AS A GAY MAN WHO IS ATTACKED FOR HIS ORIENTATION.

      I can’t speak for what’s happening in Scotland, but here in the US the myth is prevalent that whites, straights, and Christians are unprotected by hate crime legislation. That’s an outright lie — an untruth easy to check — put forth by our opponents.

      Jun 10, 2009 at 12:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.