Gay Candidate’s Signs Defaced With Antigay Graffiti

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by leekohler, Jul 21, 2010.

  1. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #1
    Florida. 'Nuff said.

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_...dates_Signs_Defaced_with_Homophobic_Graffiti/
     

    Attached Files:

  2. bobber205 macrumors 68020

    bobber205

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oregon
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
  4. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    Yeah. I hear ya.
     
  5. JediZenMaster macrumors 68000

    JediZenMaster

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Location:
    Portland,Oregon
    #5
    Why is it in 2010 people act like they are stuck in the 1910? This is terrible people should be for Equality instead of against it. I guess ignorant people have to resort to Name calling.
     
  6. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    People seem to always need some group to hate. Right now, we seem to be the favorite.
     
  7. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #7
    stupid rednecks. gotta love how they cant shut the **** up about how this country has freedom and equality and then they go and do stuff like that.

    that is what we call hypocrisy.
     
  8. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #8
    [​IMG]

    How ****ing tolerant. :mad:

    Somebody's obviously got their own masculinity issues.
     
  9. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #9
    Hopefully, they will catch whoever did it and charge them with whatever crime they can.
     
  10. bobber205 macrumors 68020

    bobber205

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oregon
    #10
    @lee
    To someone who is very close to this issue (more than I can ever be) can you tell me what you think is an appropriate punishment for this BS?

    I would like to say life in prison. ;)
     
  11. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #11
    Not cool. Candidate intimidation is the sort of crap you expect in Zimbabwe. Amazing how much Florida appears to have in common with that particular African dictatorship when it comes to the democratic process.
     
  12. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #12
    I'm not completely clear what crimes apply. Vandalism, maybe?

    I hesitate to open this can of worms, but this, perhaps more than actual violent crimes, is where I think hate crimes laws can have their place. If some neighborhood punk had just gone through and tagged a bunch of political signs in the traditional indecipherable manner, nobody would much care. It's an annoyance, but the residents would probably be grateful he just defaced a bunch of disposable signs rather than something that needs to be cleaned up.

    But when the "tagging" is spray painting "fag" on a gay candidate's signs, or say a swastika on a Jewish candidate's, an essentially identical act takes on a new and more sinister character. It marginalizes at least, but could even be understood to entail a physical threat. One's intuition is that this is somehow a worse transgression than even a more neutral defamation like "liar" would be. And as crimes go, "liar" would at least have defamation going for it. "Fag" is an unpleasant way of expressing something essentially accurate. But our sense is that there is somehow more harm entailed here than in more innocent contexts for the same basic action.

    In that difference we find our justification for hate crimes laws. It's not that gay candidates deserve special defense against their signs being tagged by vandals. It's that this particular act of vandalism entails a sui generis harm that normal tagging does not, and we want to somehow capture our sense of that difference in our laws.
     
  13. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #13
    I would say this falls under hate crimes laws.
     
  14. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #14
    I would say you need to look at who doing it. I think at most it should be punishment that would be like damaging any political sign.
    If I had to guess who was doing this it would be some young kids who do not really know better and might be reacting to something their parents are saying at home. Making an example out of them would just be poor form and only making things worse.
    I think the best use of it would be try to use it as a teaching moment. Taking a minor offense like this and using over harsh punishment just drives that group farther way. So I think use it as a teaching tool not as a weapon for harsh punishment.
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    Hmm... he doesn't look like a Harley owner... :p

    Well, you opened the can, so here goes... Where does one draw the line between tagging and hate speech? If a member of one gang tags over a rival gang member's "artwork", does that also not imply a threat of violence? My understanding is that tagging is also used extensively to mark "turf", which is an implicit threat of violence if you do not respect the turf marker. I would assume someone from a Norteno gang who finds a "13" on their door would feel threatened, despite the fact that most of the rest of us would only view such defacement as standard vandalism.

    To me, severe penalties for certain types of vandalism but not others makes about as much sense as severe penalties for certain types of cocaine but not others. It's capricious, arbitrary, and an attempt to put a band-aid of unfairness on a much larger problem rather than attempting to cure the underlying problem itself.
     
  16. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #16
    Gang-related activities are actually another great example of the same thing. Many areas in which this is a problem do have specific laws that enhance charges for crimes committed under the color of gang membership. Context always matters.

    Even with cocaine, most people would agree that "selling cocaine to an eight-year-old" is at least a different crime in degree, and possibly in kind, to just selling cocaine generally. And possession of a gram is not the same crime as possession of a kilo. Why? Because if you've got that much, the justice system reasonably infers "intent to distribute."

    This goes on all the time, in all manner of crimes, and for the most part people don't notice or care, or they approve of the attention given to intent and context. Certainly anyone who advances a self-defense argument is glad of it.

    With hate crimes, people who don't want their society to object to harassment of an unpopular minority know better than to simply say that, so they invent a "principle" that is superficially plausible enough to persuade even some non-bigots to accept it, but I stress superficial, because that principle has no basis in our legal system. You've got to debate the specifics, because the "A is A" argument is nonsense.
     
  17. imac/cheese macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    #17
    I would say this is more of a misguided religious issue than a masculinity issue. Anyone willing to deface a sign with baby blue spray paint must be pretty comfortable with their masculinity.

    It is sad to see such hatred.
     
  18. MattSepeta macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #18
    First instinct

    My first instinct when I saw the actual defaced sign was "Stupid Kids." I bet it was just some dumb-ass middle/high-school kids that were bored on a friday night.

    Does not make it any more right, but this just seems spectacularly juvenile, not to mention the only time I hear the word "fag" tossed around anymore is from young kids in passing.
     
  19. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #19
    Except that the candidate is actually a homosexual. If someone wrote the N word on an Obama sign, would you say the same thing?
     
  20. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #20
    Of course it does, but I'm still leery of criminalizing hatred.

    I'm actually talking about the disparity in sentencing for crack versus powder. White kids used the powder, which is on average sentenced less harshly than crack -- which just happens to be used more predominantly in the black community. The sentencing disparities for what is essentially the same drug are actually quite staggering.
     
  21. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #21
    I would. Stupid kids doing stupid kid thing is not a hate crime.
     
  22. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #22
    I don't get this. No one is criminalizing hatred. You can hate anyone you want. But when you act on that hatred and commit a crime, that's when you get into trouble with this law.

    I'm surprised you would try to distill this into something so simple. That's usually the other side's MO.
     
  23. Ttownbeast macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    #23
  24. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #24
    Defacing a sign is vandalism not a hate crime. You could write a number of hateful things all over the place and not direct it at anyone. Unless this politician was physically harmed I don't see how it can be called a hate crime. While there might be hateful intent unless you can prove that this person was provoked you can't prosecute it as a hate crime.
     
  25. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #25
    Aren't the differences in sentencing because crack is a lot cheaper and has the potential to reach many more people; and because it is a lot more addictive than the powder form. I don't know, which is why I'm asking.
     

Share This Page