# Sadly, the victim is white, so, this clearly is not a hate crime



## Big Don (Mar 25, 2012)

[h=1]Police: Pair Set 13-Year-Old Boy On Fire[/h][h=2]_Boy Treated At Hospital For Burns_[/h]POSTED: 3:48 pm CST February 29, 2012
UPDATED: 9:26 pm CST February 29, 2012
KMBC EXCERPT: Emphasis mine

*KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- *A 13-year-old Kansas City boy is back home after two teenagers poured gasoline on him and lit him on fire.It  happened Tuesday at the teen's home on Quincy Avenue, just down the  street from Kansas City's East High School.  The boy lives less than two  blocks away from the school and was walking home when the attack  happened.Melissa Coon said her son turned from the school's  stadium onto Quincy Avenue and noticed two teenagers following him. She  said the teens followed her son home and attacked him outside his front  door."And they rushed him on the porch as he tried to get the  door open," she said.  "(One of them) poured the gasoline, then flicked  the Bic, and said, 'This is what you deserve.  You get what you deserve,  white boy'."The two attackers ran away, and the eighth grader  put the fire out with the shirt off his back.  He managed to call 911 on  his own, then his father.  He was taken by ambulance to Children's  Mercy Hospital and spent several hours in the hospital's burn unit.


END EXCERPT
IMHO, setting someone afire is worse than shooting them.
Where is the outrage? Where are $harpton and Ja¢k$on? If the Obama had a son, he would look like the perps, wouldn't he?


----------



## elder999 (Mar 25, 2012)

Big Don said:


> END EXCERPT
> IMHO, setting someone afire is worse than shooting them.
> Where is the outrage? Where are $harpton and Ja¢k$on? If the Obama had a son, he would look like the perps, wouldn't he?



Except that the police are actively seeking the _alleged_ perps for arrest, aren't they?


----------



## Big Don (Mar 25, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Except that the police are actively seeking the _alleged_ perps for arrest, aren't they?



Sure don't see this in the national media...


----------



## elder999 (Mar 25, 2012)

Big Don said:


> Sure don't see this in the national media...



Sure do:

New York Daily News 

London Daily Mail.


----------



## MA-Caver (Mar 25, 2012)

Honestly this racial crap has gotten really really old. 
There need to be a national color-blind day.... everyday!


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 25, 2012)

It has been noted recently that when a little white girl goes missing, the nation goes on alert.  When a little black girl goes missing, very little notice is taken.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-repo...bies-get-more-media-coverage-than-minorities/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome

I don't deny there is truth in what you point out.  But the situation runs both ways; there is clearly a media preference for some things based on color; whether or not that reflects national attitudes, I don't know.  It seems to go either way depending on the issue.

So what's the deal?  I wish I knew.


----------



## MJS (Mar 25, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> It has been noted recently that when a little white girl goes missing, the nation goes on alert.  When a little black girl goes missing, very little notice is taken.
> 
> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-repo...bies-get-more-media-coverage-than-minorities/
> 
> ...



Good point.  Then again, to play devils advocate for a minute...while I do agree with what you said, it would seem that in some cases, we don't see as drastic of a response as we do in other cases, of the same race. ie: there have been some white youths that've gone missing and we see hundreds of people helping with a search.  Yet we don't see that with every white youth that disappears.  

But I agree with Mac.....its a shame things like this happen.


----------



## Big Don (Mar 25, 2012)

Sensationalism sells, we all know this. Somehow, a boy being set ON FIRE, is less sensational than a kid getting shot... Give me a break.


----------



## WC_lun (Mar 25, 2012)

It does apear that sometimes there are many different standards when it comes to reporting on crimes and race.  So what to about it?  My personal opinion is that I can only control how I aproach a story.  I will not use race to determine my interest or discussion on a particular story.  If a young person is killed or a child goes missing, those are tragedies all by themselves.  However, I also recognize that in the world we live in racism is alive and well.  I will not pretend that it does not exsist or that it doesn't disgust me so that someone else is more comfortable with the story or that they can political points.


----------



## elder999 (Mar 25, 2012)

Big Don said:
			
		

> Sensationalism sells, we all know this. Somehow, a boy being set ON FIRE, is less sensational than a kid getting shot... Give me a break.



Kid *ON FIRE* put the fire out, and lived. Give me a break...


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 26, 2012)

No, this is clearly a hate crime too. Though I feel your angst here and don't disagree. This dynamic sucks. It's almost as though we're afraid to charge people of color with a hate crime if they offend on people because they're white.  What is that about? Is it white guilt? Do we think we're doing offenders in this type of situation a favor?? Are ... (forgive me) ... non-whites exempt from racial crime??

Elder, no disrespect here, while you are correct that this boy is living, he is a victim nonetheless.  A living one with witnesses and who can tell his tale.

Ugh.

There's just nothing pleasant or right or okay or Grass-is-greener than ANY of this.


----------



## Master Dan (Mar 26, 2012)

Two wrongs don't make a right and they did not shoot and kill him and if they did or even in this case with fire surely the police did do charges? but if you want to play the full on reverse satire why not say well the white boy must have had a 10 year long criminal record maybe even invetro pre birth or maybe the two black boys were driven to it because the white kid raped thier sister or mother? that kind of thinking or justifications is just as offensive serves nothing justice should be done in any case including kill to protect your home and family if needed.


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2012)

If we think about it, things like this happen in the media everyday.  For example...does anyone think that if I was standing outside somewhere and someone came up behind me and dumped a bag of flour on my head, that it'd be national news?  Not likely.  Yet Kim K gets flour bombed and its all over the news, the net, etc.  

Would Zimmerman have done what he did if it was a suspicious white youth wearing a hoodie, walking with a drink and some candy?  I dont know.  Listening to the tapes, I heard some racial slurs.  Reading what BD linked here, yes, I'd say this was also very racially motivated.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 26, 2012)

Big Don said:


> Sensationalism sells, we all know this. Somehow, a boy being set ON FIRE, is less sensational than a kid getting shot... Give me a break.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/teenagers-set-boy-on-fire_n_1320993.html



> Two teenagers allegedly attacked a 13-year-old boy and set him on fire with gasoline in what police in Missouri are *investigating as a possible hate crime*.



http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/crime/white-kansas-city-teen-set-fire-hate-crime


> Police say they are investigating this as a possible hate crime.
> 
> "It was pretty bad stuff," said Kansas City Police Department Detective Stacey Taylor.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ted-attack-Kansas-City.html?ito=feeds-newsxml



> Police are investigating a possible race hate attack after a 13-year-old boy was doused in gasoline and set on fire.
> 
> The teenager, who suffered first degree burns to his face and hands, is white and his two attackers black.



It would appear that the crime is being given the concern it deserves.

What exactly is it that you want to have happen which is not happening?


----------



## elder999 (Mar 26, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> No, this is clearly a hate crime too. Though I feel your angst here and don't disagree. This dynamic sucks. It's almost as though we're afraid to charge people of color with a hate crime if they offend on people because they're white. What is that about? Is it white guilt? Do we think we're doing offenders in this type of situation a favor?? Are ... (forgive me) ... non-whites exempt from racial crime??



Pretty certain "this dynamic" doesn't exist. Non whites are arrested for and have been convicted of "hate crimes" in several jurisdictions where such a distinction exists. If the distinction exists in Kansas City, or the state of  _Missouri_, these boys should be charged in just such a way, when and if they are apprehended.



shesulsa said:


> Elder, no disrespect here, while you are correct that this boy is living, he is a victim nonetheless. A living one with witnesses and who can tell his tale.



Unquestionably-in spite of THE FIRE, though, the story isn't quite as sensational as the story that it may even have been "retaliation" for, _because_ the boy is alive. If _If it bleeds, it leads_ is one maxim of the media, it's a certainty that _If it dies, it flies_ is another.



There's just nothing pleasant or right or okay or Grass-is-greener than ANY of this.[/QUOTE]


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 26, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Pretty certain "this dynamic" doesn't exist. Non whites are arrested for and have been convicted of "hate crimes" in several jurisdictions where such a distinction exists.



What I *think* you're saying (please forgive me for being ASSumptive  ) is that many non-whites are convicted of crimes disproportionately to population and that this is, essentially, hate ... not necessarily that they have been charged with "racially-motivated mugging" or "hate-based assault" ... is that right??

I ask because I rarely hear any non-white being convicted of crimes being called hate-based unless it's a terrorist crime. (ugh)

And please forgive me if I'm not eloquent here - rough couple weeks here dealing with our own bias issues. Thanks.


----------



## elder999 (Mar 26, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> What I *think* you're saying (please forgive me for being ASSumptive  ) is that many non-whites are convicted of crimes disproportionately to population and that this is, essentially, hate ... not necessarily that they have been charged with "racially-motivated mugging" or "hate-based assault" ... is that right??
> 
> I ask because I rarely hear any non-white being convicted of crimes being called hate-based unless it's a terrorist crime. (ugh)
> 
> And please forgive me if I'm not eloquent here - rough couple weeks here dealing with our own bias issues. Thanks.



No, that's not what I was saying at all.

The black women in the famous "MacDonald's beat down" video were convicted of a hate crime.

[video]http://patdollard.com/2011/09/black-teen-convicted-of-hate-crime-in-mcdonalds-transgender-brutal-beating/[/video]

Here's a black man who was convicted of a hate crime for killing a woman "because she was white":





Here's a black man convictd of hate-crime for targeting elderly women.


There are more-remember, gender, age,religion, nationality and sexual orientation can all be targets of "hate-crime," as well as the *entirely artificial* construction know as "race," but quite a few non-whites have been convicted of hate-crime on other races. Very recently in my home town of Peekskill,NY, some young men were convicted of hate crime in the beating of an Ecuadorian immigrant.

Most of these stories just aren't sensational enough for national attention, either........


----------



## ballen0351 (Mar 26, 2012)

Tthe McDonalds hate crime was because the victim was a transgender male dressed as a woman it had nothing to do with the race and the beating as well had nothing to do with race they beat her/him/her whatever because it was transgender.

Transgender/gay are now even more a protected class then a racial minority so its ok to convict a racial minority over a Transgender/gay victim they are higher on the protection ladder


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 26, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> Tthe McDonalds hate crime was because the victim was a transgender male dressed as a woman it had nothing to do with the race and the beating as well had nothing to do with race they beat her/him/her whatever because it was transgender.
> 
> Transgender/gay are now even more a protected class then a racial minority so its ok to convict a racial minority over a Transgender/gay victim they are higher on the protection ladder



I repeat; what is it you want to have happen that is not happening?  You seem very convinced that something untoward is happening.  What is it and what do you want done about it?


----------



## ballen0351 (Mar 26, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I repeat; what is it you want to have happen that is not happening?  You seem very convinced that something untoward is happening.  What is it and what do you want done about it?



I have no dog in this fight.  The McDonalds fight was used to show a minoity was convicted of hate crime against a majority and thats just not the case in this incident.

 I have said several times there should not be a "HATE" Crime a crime is a crime why should someone get special treatment under the law that others do not?  Why shoud this  female get sent to jail for 5 years because she beat up a transgender male when had he been wearing mens jeans and a t-shirt at most she would have gotten 18 months suspended 6 allowing her to stay at the local county jail.  This happened 15 min from where I work I know the courts around here I know the normal sentences I have NEVER seen anyone get 5 years for an assault charge.  But because the guy decides to wear a dress now we need to make an example out of her.  How is that fair or even constitutional?  You will never end racism, sexism, or any other isms until everyone is treated the SAME.  We dont do that.  Every year I have to take sensitivity classes on how to deal with Transgender/gay victims, hispanic community, woman of domestic violence and the black community.  Four differnet classes every year each one telling me I need to treat there group special


----------



## elder999 (Mar 26, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> I have no dog in this fight. The McDonalds fight was used to show a minoity was convicted of hate crime against a majority and thats just not the case in this incident.



No, that's not what I was showing at all. While the other cases quoted would fulfill that (rather absurd) demographic, what shesulsa said was:



shesulsa said:


> I ask because I rarely hear* any non-white being convicted of crimes being called hate-based *unless it's a terrorist crime.



And I was just showing that it did, in fact, happen in areas where such a distinction has been made possible.


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 26, 2012)

Thanks for the clarification, Jeff. I want to do some thinking here on race and crime before I comment more on it, though would like to read your thoughts on how hate lends itself to intent, _ongoing intent_, and how this helps/hinders in the legal process.


----------

