118
Martin Myers tried and failed to steal a cigarette. Why has he spent 18 years in prison for it?
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 01 May 2024
118 points (89.3% liked)
News
23266 readers
3513 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Okay let's play the logic game
What's the statical information on racist/bigot reoffending?
You completely ignored my point. We shouldn't build a society where anyone can assault strangers on the streets because they perceive they might hold socially regressive views. Because that society would be one effectively void of rule of law.
Anyone who disagrees or dislikes someone else could violently attack them then claim they said something offensive.
This system could even enable racism. For example an Asian man (who is prejudiced against Latinos) could bash and Latino he saw then claim they called him a slur to justify their racial violence. Should an KKK member be able to fatality batter and black man he hears says a slur?
If we are playing the logic game this facially fails. And not that the burden for disproving your hypothesis with statistics would fall on me when you've yet to back it with any yourself.
No your point was that racist bigot should be prosecuted, so come on let's hear the stats on hate crime reoffending?
Do you really think Hitler wouldn't have started WW2 if someone had punched him in the face? Would that have actually changed anything?
You still keep ignoring the biggest point here, who dictates who is a racist and deserves punishment? If someone thinks that you're prejudiced against them then is it fine for that person to punch you in the face?
Reread my earlier comment. I take issue with public violence between members of a society as a means of social change.
My point was that the fundamental error in that perspective was that it assumes that violence would be applied against exclusively the targeted group. And that while you typed your original comment you hadn't considered that because different people have different perspectives, someone might construe something you due as bigoted (even possibly at no fault of your own).
The problems in this idea pop up way before we get to address whether it'd even work.
And even if this was my point
Why do you take issue with that in the context now of hate crimes?