It’s not MY “intent” argument, this is how the law works whether you like it or not. It’s not by action to the max degree of punishment. That’s why there are degrees of severity on charges.
There isn’t a blanket murder charge. There isn’t a blanket drug charge. You may watch TV shows where they say something like “Possession with the INTENT to distribute”? That’s because there’s a clear intent to the crime that has harsher punishments based on the degree.
This is also why there are manslaughter charges. You can harm someone by accident and catch a 2nd degree manslaughter charge, though if you INTENDED to harm someone, that’s 1st degree manslaughter. They have different prosecutorial and sentencing guidelines based on the intent of the crime.
If a person goes through a Tesla dealership and paints Swastikas on 100 cars, they have an obvious argument that it wasn’t a hate crime, they were intending to point out that a neo-nazi is running Tesla. That’s not a hate crime because of the intent.
So if Pam Bondi can prove that the person who spray painted a Swastika on a specific Tesla owned by a specific Jewish person, THEN you’d have the argument that a Hate Crime has been committed.
You’re also selectively reading my messages and saying I’m somehow okay with hate crimes. This is classic dipshittery and whataboutism in its dumbest form. Never said anything like that. I am explaining the law to you in a very child-like way (like people don’t Trump), because you’re failing to understand the difference between what is protected by free speech and hate crimes laws, and what is not. The subject matter you brought up was Swastika vandalism.
I’m not even advocating FOR vandalism of Tesla at all, I even said it was stupid, and not the right way to go about it. Pocketbook is a better target.
The same way Elon Musk is allowed to walk around and throw around Nazi salutes and spout the “benefits” of racial seperatism like the piece of shit he is, is the same way people are allowed to appropriate symbols of hate in their freedom of expression.
As I’ve previously said, I don’t particularly like that, but that’s free speech, and it’s covered by the constitution. Once you start whittling that down, shit gets messy, so it’s all or nothing.
As the saying goes: “I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It”
That’s freedom of speech and expression. Take the good with the bad, or be done with the whole thing. Trump wants to do the latter, and I’ll take the former with my dying breath.
I thought you said it was all about “intent” though? Cuz he says he didn’t intend for that to be a nazi salute.
Lemmy told me that if you defend a nazi thing, then you are a nazi thing. So, sorry man, I gotta put on you the list. It’s ok, Lemmy thinks it should be that way. I’m sure you understand.
Along with the Adl and leader of Israel. It’s weird how all the anti-Semitic left want to call Elon a Nazi while they want to genocide the Jews. It’s weird as fuck
Yeah, the nazi leanings I am getting from Democrats lately is sick to watch. It’s almost as if they are throwing the Nazi word around so much just to hide their true nature.
They have their brown shirts (antifa), they attack Jewish people and their businesses, they love to classify people by race and gender, disloyalty from group think is punished. I mean the list goes on and on.
It’s not MY “intent” argument, this is how the law works whether you like it or not. It’s not by action to the max degree of punishment. That’s why there are degrees of severity on charges.
There isn’t a blanket murder charge. There isn’t a blanket drug charge. You may watch TV shows where they say something like “Possession with the INTENT to distribute”? That’s because there’s a clear intent to the crime that has harsher punishments based on the degree.
This is also why there are manslaughter charges. You can harm someone by accident and catch a 2nd degree manslaughter charge, though if you INTENDED to harm someone, that’s 1st degree manslaughter. They have different prosecutorial and sentencing guidelines based on the intent of the crime.
If a person goes through a Tesla dealership and paints Swastikas on 100 cars, they have an obvious argument that it wasn’t a hate crime, they were intending to point out that a neo-nazi is running Tesla. That’s not a hate crime because of the intent.
So if Pam Bondi can prove that the person who spray painted a Swastika on a specific Tesla owned by a specific Jewish person, THEN you’d have the argument that a Hate Crime has been committed.
You’re also selectively reading my messages and saying I’m somehow okay with hate crimes. This is classic dipshittery and whataboutism in its dumbest form. Never said anything like that. I am explaining the law to you in a very child-like way (like people don’t Trump), because you’re failing to understand the difference between what is protected by free speech and hate crimes laws, and what is not. The subject matter you brought up was Swastika vandalism.
I’m not even advocating FOR vandalism of Tesla at all, I even said it was stupid, and not the right way to go about it. Pocketbook is a better target.
Let’s see if the courts agree with you then. And it’s noted that you seem to think painting a swasttika on something isn’t a hate crime. lol
Funny how Lemmy pretends to be all anti-nazi unless some of their own start spray painting swastikas on shit. lol
Actually I’m beginning to think you may be a nazi since you’re defending that shit.
What does Lemmy say? Oh something like “if you defend nazi shit, then you are a nazi shit.”
I learned it from Lemmy. So you can thank Lemmy for my opinion of you. :)
The same way Elon Musk is allowed to walk around and throw around Nazi salutes and spout the “benefits” of racial seperatism like the piece of shit he is, is the same way people are allowed to appropriate symbols of hate in their freedom of expression.
As I’ve previously said, I don’t particularly like that, but that’s free speech, and it’s covered by the constitution. Once you start whittling that down, shit gets messy, so it’s all or nothing.
As the saying goes: “I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It”
That’s freedom of speech and expression. Take the good with the bad, or be done with the whole thing. Trump wants to do the latter, and I’ll take the former with my dying breath.
I thought you said it was all about “intent” though? Cuz he says he didn’t intend for that to be a nazi salute.
Lemmy told me that if you defend a nazi thing, then you are a nazi thing. So, sorry man, I gotta put on you the list. It’s ok, Lemmy thinks it should be that way. I’m sure you understand.
Removed by mod
Random upvotes? What world do you live in where you think us republicans are getting random upvotes on Lemmy by posting conservative articles?! lmao
Don’t attack the person
Along with the Adl and leader of Israel. It’s weird how all the anti-Semitic left want to call Elon a Nazi while they want to genocide the Jews. It’s weird as fuck
Yeah, the nazi leanings I am getting from Democrats lately is sick to watch. It’s almost as if they are throwing the Nazi word around so much just to hide their true nature.
They have their brown shirts (antifa), they attack Jewish people and their businesses, they love to classify people by race and gender, disloyalty from group think is punished. I mean the list goes on and on.
Yep. They’re pretty terrible.
No their intent to show they are Nazis. That’s why they draw the swastika. It isn’t free speech to draw a swastika on a Jews Tesla. That’s a crime.
Want to edit your comment for grammar and to make sense?
It makes perfect sense
https://www.timesofisrael.com/chicago-jewish-man-finds-swastika-protest-against-elon-musk-on-his-tesla/amp/
You mixed up your accounts.
?