A Freak’s Fortune: the farce of the “hate crime”

After reading and hearing about this recent news story of England – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-22018888 – I immediately started thinking again about how the idea of a “hate crime” and the legal issues surrounding it is an outrageous mockery of any idea of justice and punishment, for a number of reasons.

Firstly, there are the huge problems that already exist, and have done for a long time, regarding hate crime prosecution. Just as blacks, Muslims, Jews, the disabled etc. get special treatment through Affirmative Action when looking for work, these poor minorities are given special treatment where the law is concerned. Apparently being beaten up because you are black, Jewish, a Muslim, transexual or disabled is so much worse and more despicable than being beaten up by a similar thug for (apparently) no real reason at all. Apparently having a “hateful” motive makes you a much worse and much more dangerous criminal than someone who just beats people up or rapes people when he feels like it. Now however, as is already the case to some extent, being a freak has greater benefits too. If you go against nature, defile your body and disgrace your parents by having a sex-change this means that someone would stay in prison for longer for beating up or raping you than they would for doing the same to a normal, decent human being for “no reason”, the same for those who apparently are much more immoral and dangerous for disapproving of unnatural, defective homosexuals than those who attack others for “no reason”. Now the liberal morons of this country want to take it to even greater extremes – if you belong to a so-called “subculture”, go out of your way to attract attention to yourself and look ridiculous, try as hard as you can to look like the opposite sex, a dead person or whatever, this also supposedly makes any crime against you much more despicable. Yes, many of these cases people being cruelly beaten up (often to death) “for a reason” are indeed tragic, but why should they be considered any more unacceptable than unprovoked violent crime in general?

And this is where the plot thickens: what immunity and special treatment will be given to those beaten up or raped for having other “alternative” views and belonging to undesirable sub-cultures? If a black man or a Muslim beats up a white man, will this be considered a hate crime? More to the point, if they beat up or rape a European openly proud of their culture (now driven underground as a “subculture” itself), will this be considered a hate crime? Apparently attacking a man who devoutly follows a religion that supports abuse, murder and rape of women, the abuse and rape of children, and hates basically everyone else, is a completely despicable hate crime, yet when someone attacks the wrong kind of racist, one of those horrible, “bigoted” Europeans, when someone mocks their culture and tramples on it, will the law care? Of course not. This is just another clear example of the atrocious cultural and ethnic cleansing of Europe, where freaks, mongrels and retards are untouchable, with special rights, and normal, intelligent, decent, chaste and hard-working Europeans will be more and more ignored as the situation worsens.

 

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “A Freak’s Fortune: the farce of the “hate crime”

  1. If there was a robbery on street and i arrived there fast enough to see what the criminal looked like and then when police asks me about what happen and i said something like “he was about 180 cm negro male with hoodie and black jeans” and i would probably get in trouble because i said what race he is, should i say something like “he was 180 cm human”. I wouldn’t be surprised if thinks go like that in future.

    • Indeed, I find that less and less reporters specify what race wanted criminals are when you can usually guarantee they are black or Muslims, yet even politically correct BBC’s show Crimewatch can’t ignore or distort the statistics, everytime I have seen it and they put up the list of wanted criminals they need help finding, most or ALL of them are black or Asian, and maybe one or two Romanians.

  2. Aye, evidently if you commit a “hate” crime (which is a stupid term in itself, IMO) which could be as simple as punching a, in most cases very deserving, nigger or an Arab, you’re automatically more despicable for it than any other documented criminal. Even those greasy paedophile types, which REALLY fucks me off, if you’ll pardon my language.

    It’s all about arranging the law in such a manner that targets the normal, hard-working, honourable European. Then there’s the added bonus of “removing” any political opposition of the back of inciting “racial hatred” or some such nonsense.

    If people had any sense they would see that legally recognising goths/emos/whatever as subcultures is probably the stupidest step the law could take in this context. What’s wrong with a good, old-fashioned crackdown on drunk, violent thugs, like the ones who attacked the goth girl?

    Of course, if this was to happen, then that could provide a basis for imposing harsher punishments on the honourable European who’s been labelled a violent thug for defending himself against some black bastard who tried to steal his wallet or something. Hmm.

    In any case, playing on the emotional upheaval of the goth girls parents in order to legally recognise this or that as a protected “subculture” is nowhere close to a solution.

      • Of course. I look forward to the total overthrow of the Jewish self-appointed oligarchy. Privatised law firms need to be completely abolished. Justice should not be a lucrative business.

        What do you think of the prison system? It seems a lot of people these days are under the idea that prisons should be used/are being used as “correctional facilities.” This seems almost wholly ineffective to me. I’ve been entertaining the idea (for a while) of concentration camps with correctional courses involving hard work, teaching self discipline and responsibility and also physical fitness and health. Things of that nature. Almost like a boot camp and a prison sentence merged. The sentences would naturally be shorter but harsher. I think this would simultaneously reprimand criminals and release them back into society with some values/virtues while sorting those who can be “corrected” from those who can’t.

        I suppose then the discussion of what to do with those who can’t be corrected. I’ve heard that some people hold the (quite rightful) notion that prisons should simply be used to keep repeat offenders out of society. Even then, I still can’t get on board with the idea. It seems like, frankly, a waste of everyone’s time and money, housing persistently violent criminals. To be prose, wouldn’t it be better for everyone if they were dead? Not to suggest all criminals should be shot indiscriminately, of course.

        I don’t know. I’m just spitballing here. All I know for sure at this point is that the justice system has been perverted into a lucrative scheme.

        Same as the NHS, by the way! Not sure if you heard but the whole thing’s been privatised. Now, our tax money provides a platform for private companies to bid on health contracts. Additionally, the people at the top who applied the recent changes all have a stake in at least one of these companies. They make me sick.

      • liberal ignoramuses just call you a “daily mail reader” here for moaning about the lenient prison system, but they do spend more money on prison food than on hospital food, they do get Sky TV, dance classes, “rehabilitation”…it’s a total joke. I say serious offenders, i.e. murderers and ALL sex offenders should be executed, and anyone else should just be thrown into a dungeon that does not waste space and food until they learn their lesson.

        Of course, like I said, this depends on it being controlled by good people too. As for the NHS, they could solve many of their problems by refusing to help drunks, alcoholics and smokers for a start….Hiring competent white doctors instead of niggers and Jews would be a good idea too

  3. The point is that they cant really know wether the commited crime was done out of hate or not. Its impossible to really know what a person was thinking when he did the killing, brutal assault or property damage. Its not possible to travel back in time and scan the brain of the vicious attacker and determine that he was indeed feeling hate at the time of the crime, very silly. They simply assert that it was hate when a white man attacks a nigger or paki, even though there are many good solid reasons why pakis and niggers should be attacked not just emotional hate but intellectual grounds. However when it comes to the foreigners then it isnt hate, even though they obviously mainly target specific targets, namely; native white people, even though there seems to never be any visible motivation for their crimes. How come in the first case its assumed to be hate but in the second its not hate. what makes these crimes different? Its a blatant double standart, thats what it is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s