Missing the mark (Or not)
Jul. 28th, 2008 12:31 pmThere was a shooting at a Unitarian Universalist church in Knoxville on the weekend. Two people died. The suspected attacker was, apparently, frustrated by Christianity. He was normal fairly peaceful, but sometimes had religious disagreements with his neighbors, one of whom is a King James literalist. If his attack was inspired by his frustration with Fundamentalist Christianity, then he picked a really bad target. Not that any target would have been a good one.
Edit: Though, apparently he was mostly mad at those darn liberals...
Edit: Though, apparently he was mostly mad at those darn liberals...
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 04:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 04:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 04:55 pm (UTC)I'm not sure how I feel about that. I mean, isn't any murder a hate crime? This guy clearly was disturbed, but I don't think that his thoughts and actions were on the same continuum as the average American "conservative".
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 05:06 pm (UTC)Anyways that's a real shame, people shouldn't go shooting up churches, unless it's a rescue operation during a ritual sacrifice.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 08:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-29 12:28 am (UTC)Well...
Date: 2008-07-28 05:07 pm (UTC)Re: Well...
Date: 2008-07-28 08:18 pm (UTC)So, you might kill somebody because they owe you money, or they had sex with your pig (Tennessee, after all!), or because they put their seed in your daughter's bellah. And that is obviously a crime, murder. However, if you kill somebody because they're a UU congregant, and do so specifically because they're liberals, that is not just murder, but also a crime against society's fabric by terrorizing UU members and liberals in general.
Confer: http://kianir.livejournal.com/155099.html
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 05:13 pm (UTC)I've often thought that. I can see "hate crimes" being a separate category when dealing with things like vandalism - painting a swastika on a synagogue is worse, in most senses, than painting your name. But, to me, killing a person without hate (as in a robbery) is actually a sign of greater instability than someone who kills with a reason.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 05:33 pm (UTC)I think in the US, hate crime legislation is aimed more at the rest of society than at the criminals themselves--some sort of weak political way of saying "hey, we REALLY disagree with racisim/homophobia/etc. and we're doing something about it, aren't we great". I'm not sure it really makes any difference, crime-wise.
That said, whether consequences are different or not, I think keeping statistics on the motivation behind the crime is important, just like we note if something is domestic violence.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 05:33 pm (UTC)Motivation is important in these kind of crimes. Most murderers are angry at a specific person for a specific reason and are looking to settle things in a permanent manner. When a killing is designed to intimidate an entire class of people, the scope of the killing is larger than the immediate victims.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 05:39 pm (UTC)Maybe not average, but the extreme edge does seem... pretty murderous. I'm from Georgia, I used to work for a defense contractor, so I've seen how right-wingers work. I kinda feel like when you plug normal ranting, hate-filled conservative rhetoric into sane people, you get sane people who just aren't pleasant, fair-minded, or truly community-oriented. You plug the same rhetoric into people who aren't entirely sane, and you get stuff like this or the anti-abortion whackos who murder doctors.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 04:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 04:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 05:38 pm (UTC)