Susan's Place Logo

News:

Based on internal web log processing I show 3,417,511 Users made 5,324,115 Visits Accounting for 199,729,420 pageviews and 8.954.49 TB of data transfer for 2017, all on a little over $2,000 per month.

Help support this website by Donating or Subscribing! (Updated)

Main Menu

Pride symbol defaced in Saskatoon, Canada

Started by ErosNightleaf, June 06, 2017, 07:45:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ErosNightleaf

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/rainbow-crosswalk-defaced-saskatoon-1.4147384

I recommend reading the whole article first, as I won't regurgitate the whole thing.

MY OPINION: (please don't attack me for it, I mean no offence)
In my opinion, I don't think the person who defaced the pride symbol should be charged with hate crimes. I am part of the LGBT+ community, and I am not trying to attack anyone else who is a part of it. It is just in my personal opinion that there is not 100% proof that this was even on purpose. This could have been caused from speeding along the road. Of course, the article did mention that there may have been a social media post of someone saying that they wanted to do this, but unless they can prove that this was the same person, I don't think they should charge the person who drove over the road with hate crimes. With destruction of public property, sure, and them having to pay for repairs, but I do not think that this is 100% on purpose (though still most likely). Also, even if it is proven to be on purpose - this is just my opinion - I do not think they should be charged with a hate crime. The fact that they damaged property on purpose is almost always a sign of hate to someone or something. It could be hate towards the city, or society, or the country. So if those situations would not get charged with hate crimes, why would hate against LGBT+ be charged extra? We are equals to the rest of the country, not superiors. The charge of purposefully destroying public property already includes the idea of hate in it because 99% of the time it is from some form of hate to something. I think we should charge the person for that, but not hate crimes, and break out of our stereotypes that people have of us.

DISCUSSION:
What are your opinions on this? Do you think that the person who did this deserves to be charged with hate crimes when they are identified? Do you think that this was on purpose?
  •  

FTMDiaries

Hi, and welcome to our family! :)

I see you're still very young, so there's a chance you might not be completely aware of how hate crimes work (at least, I certainly hope so!), and you're probably still catching up on our LGBT history.

I read through the article you linked & looked at the photos. As an experienced driver I know it's possible for a driver to skid on a painted surface, particularly in the rain... but if it was an accidental skid then the skidmarks would've started part-way through or just after the painted surface as the tyres began to lose traction due to the paint. On the photos accompanying your article, the skidmarks start immediately before the rainbow, and they end immediately afterwards. That means they were deliberately created in that specific location.

Deliberately creating skidmarks is an act of aggression. In law, it's an assault against the LGBT community (because it threatens physical harm to us; the implication being that the driver would want to run us over). Assault is investigated by the police, irrespective of who the target is - and if it's found to have been targeted against a specific group (as appears to be the case here) then the police can and must investigate that aspect of the crime because those crimes tend to escalate to include further victims. Whoever did this was riled up about something (I think we can all guess what!) and they were angry and aggressive enough to drive recklessly. And all because of a bit of paint on a road. Or more accurately... because they violently object to the types of people who are represented by that paint.

So if they're already violent & aggressive enough to risk crashing their vehicle - and if they enjoyed the adrenaline rush it gave them - you can bet they're absolutely thrilled to see that their act of aggression has made the news. They think it gives them legendary status, and any friends of theirs who are also homophobic or transphobic will validate them & reinforce that view. So now that they're hyped up on having done that, what else are they willing to do? Would they beat up a gay couple leaving a bar? Would they sexually assault a lesbian to show her that all she needs is a 'real man'? How do you think they'd respond if they found that a woman to whom they're attracted is trans and pre-op? That's right: she'd wind up in a ditch. All of that starts with random acts of aggression such as this one.

You mentioned hate towards a city, society or country: after the last few terrorist attacks in the UK it emerged that the perpetrators were already known to the police. They had a pathological hatred of Westerners and our way of life, and they were willing to murder innocent people because of it. And it all started with smaller acts of aggression such the one you've seen over there in Saskatoon.

This is why hate crimes need to be investigated and prosecuted: because hatred tends to escalate over time and sooner or later, some innocent person will wind up hurt or killed all because of some other idiot's irrational fear. So yes, the perpetrator needs to be found & assessed to see exactly what threat he poses (and sadly, it's very likely to be a he!). People have died because of idiots who started out by doing exactly this sort of thing. Innocent lives need to be protected.

P.S. Thanks for correctly using 'purposefully'; it really grinds my gears when I see people use the non-existent 'purposely'.  ;D





  •  

Devlyn

I don't know. It just looks like a panic stop or a burnout to me. I've put down better marks than that. The only thing I was hating on was the road and my tires!  :laugh:

Hugs, Devlyn
  •  

arice

Honestly, I think that it should be investigated but I think it is unlikely that criminal charges will be laid. According to Alberta law (which I can only assume is almost identical to that of our neighbouring province), I think it will likely be labelled as a "hate incidence" rather than a "hate crime". The difference has to do with proof of a recognized criminal activity being done. This is currently a bit of a gray area here.
If they can prove that the individual in question committed a crime (dangerous driving perhaps) in order to attack the LGBT+ community, they might be able to call it a hate crime... but I doubt the charges would stick.

Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk

  •  

Sinclair

Sometimes a burnout is just a burnout. Look at the marks. They start where someone would be stopped at the light. The red light turns green, and they go. The fact that there are two tire marks suggest a performance vehicle. Sometimes kids doing burnouts is just kids doing burnouts. We, as a community need to take a step back and allow the rest of humanity to be who they are, and not freak out at every perceived insult. As a former street racer, that's just a burnout. Get over it. You're overreacting and that only hurts our cause. Hate crime? Good gracious ... a hate crime is Nazi Germany killing six million Jews, let's get real.
I love dresses!!
  •  

Contravene

That's a pretty long burnout for it to be an accident. My car is rear wheel drive so I accidentally peel out of my driveway all the time since it's on a slope. It only takes a second for the tires to chirp then I lay off the gas I don't keep going like those tire marks do. That combined with social media posts from people already planning on peeling out across the walkways suggests it was done on purpose. Charging the person with a hate crime seems a bit extreme though but I could see a charge for vandalism possibly. They should make the person who did it go out with some buckets and clean then repaint it.
  •  

Kylo

Quote from: Sinclair on June 07, 2017, 10:30:04 PMWe, as a community need to take a step back and allow the rest of humanity to be who they are, and not freak out at every perceived insult. You're overreacting and that only hurts our cause.

Agreed. Tolerance is what we are entitled to, but nobody is entitled to acceptance. I don't have to "accept" and endorse someone else's views or lifestyles and they don't have to accept or endorse mine, but we do have to tolerate each other physically. The community in general - or rather some of it and those who say they are "speaking for us" - is becoming almost militant at this point and I don't think it's the right way to earn acceptance. Prosecuting or going after people for damaging a sign won't have them thinking much better of us. In the same way prosecuting people for not using pronouns will also backfire upon us, I believe. 
"If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."
  •  

ErosNightleaf

Quote from: FTMDiaries on June 07, 2017, 05:03:55 AM


I agree and understand. Thanks for helping! The fact that people were posting about it makes it more believable as a hate crime. Though I do think that unless they can prove that the offender was a part of that social media movement, and that he did it on purpose, they shouldn't charge them with hate crime. You never know, they could have just been in a really unlucky situation.
  •  

bobbisue

  The damage has been repaired by members of the LGBTIQA+ community the materials were donated by a paint company I dont know if i can say which one here unfortunatly I was unable to help as it was on a work night but several members of the support group I attend when I can were there   The family of the young man who did this has issued an apology I am unaware of what charges he will face but it seem unlikley there will be hate crime charges

     bobbisue :)
[ gotta be me everyone else is taken ]
started HRT june 16 2017              
Out to all my family Oct 21 2017 no rejections
Fulltime Dec 9 2017 ahead of schedule
First pass Dec 11 2017
  •