Jump to content

The Responsibilities of Citizenship


Goddess

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Omni said:

Except "nerd" is not really what you could call an identifiable community, which is the focus of hate crimes.

So what? Violent hate crimes are extremely rare in Canada to begin with. If we want to deter violence we should deter ALL violence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, dialamah said:

So then your claim that Muslim immigrants are driving some kind of crime wave is wrong.

My neighbourhood is about 50% immigrant.  The people who engage in petty crime and "harassing/beating" of others is pretty close to 100% white.   

So you say. And your evidence is what? My evidence for the violence of Muslims in my neck of the woods is the many, many Islamic names among the killers and victims in the drug/gang wars here, as well as all those Islamic people on the wanted lists. Both of which I have previously posted.

Edited by Argus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

So what? Violent hate crimes are extremely rare in Canada to begin with. If we want to deter violence we should deter ALL violence.

We do. And I would remind you that hate crimes don't have to be violent to qualify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, jbg said:

An attack against police is an attack on social order as much as an attack on another person.

Exactly.  Same as an identified group.

 

19 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Plus, we put them in harm's way for our protection.  I'm okay with the police having more protection than me.

If indeed, that is what happens.

They don't get more protection than you......hate crime legislation is reactionary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bob Macadoo said:

Exactly.  Same as an identified group.

 

They don't get more protection than you......hate crime legislation is reactionary.

Well, they should.  I'd be okay with penalties for crimes against the police actually being greater than those for crimes against me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Well, they should.  I'd be okay with penalties for crimes against the police actually being greater than those for crimes against me. 

But no added penalties for crimes against specific groups. aren't police specific groups? A little contradiction in your argument, again,  it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Omni said:

But no added penalties for crimes against specific groups. aren't police specific groups? A little contradiction in your argument, again,  it seems.

Attacks on the police though are attacks on all of us, the collective order. Sorry the right to legal violence is monopolized by the Crown and the police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Omni said:

But no added penalties for crimes against specific groups. aren't police specific groups? A little contradiction in your argument, again,  it seems.

Only those that deserve it.  You never asked about deserves.  In the case of the police, "Deserves got something to do with it".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Only those that deserve it.  You never asked about deserves.  In the case of the police, "Deserves got something to do with it".

In order for your "deserves" thing to apply to sentencing, it has has to be built into the wording of the law. And that's what is done with hate crimes legislation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Omni said:

In order for your "deserves" thing to apply to sentencing, it has has to be built into the wording of the law. And that's what is done with hate crimes legislation. 

I know.  With the Police, I agree with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bob Macadoo said:

Exactly.  Same as an identified group.

Has anyone physically attacked a whole 'identifiable group before'?

Because an attack on one is not an attack on all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 months later...
On ‎2017‎-‎04‎-‎24 at 3:58 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Not quite...several of the American rights do not apply to Canada (e.g. free speech, firearms), while others are not rights at all even in the United States, just wishful thinking.    Citizen rights in the U.S. are inalienable except when restricted by law (e.g. convicted felons), regardless of any collective or individual responsibilities.

They still have responsibilities and there is no way around that. As do we all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,604
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    markanderson8093
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Hodad earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Stark22 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Stark22 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Freddie earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • capitosinora earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...