Hammer Attack Guilty, but...

ErNciLator said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/7268763.stm

Am I not the only person thinking, all these names sound asian and the guy is english?

If this was the other way around would the headline be more-frontpage and a different title?

Surely double standards?!?! i dont know!
Click to expand...

I was just reading the same story. Just because two different races "fight" so to speak doesn't make it racist per se.

I do understand where you are coming from though.
 
Slinwagh said:
Just because two different races "fight" so to speak doesn't make it racist per se.
Click to expand...

Thats the point though, it would be '7 racist pigdogs deserve death' if it was Amjid Rashid being attacked by Lee Smith, David Jones, etc.
 
Gilly said:
Thats the point though, it would be '7 racist pigdogs deserve death' if it was Amjid Rashid being attacked by Lee Smith, David Jones, etc.
Click to expand...

Indeed :( I wish they would at least brand this kind of attack as 'racist', too. Or even better, not brand attacks as racist until they have found out whether it was a racist attack or not :rolleyes:
 
I'm confused. Usually people get on their soap boxes here to moan that when an asian person gets attacked by a white person in a racial attack its double standards and now when a white person gets attacked by an asian person, with no mention of racism in the article, its double standards again?

WHEN WILL YOU PEOPLE BE HAPPY?
 
The whole idea of 'hate crime' makes no sense. Why should an attack motivated by hate be more severely punished than one motivated by something else like greed? Assault is assault irrespective of the motive.
 
Not every attack involving different race people is a racist attack. If there was no hint of racist motivation to the attack, it should not be brought up full stop.

The issue here is not that the linked attack should be branded racist, but some of the other attacks probably should not be.
 
SiD the Turtle said:
I'm confused. Usually people get on their soap boxes here to moan that when an asian person gets attacked by a white person in a racial attack its double standards and now when a white person gets attacked by an asian person, with no mention of racism in the article, its double standards again?

WHEN WILL YOU PEOPLE BE HAPPY?
Click to expand...

what you just said is what im getting at

Asian Attacks English->Not Racist
English Attack -> Racist

^^ As portraited by papers.

IMO Nearly 0% of attacks are racist, neitehr should be, unless after much research they find like nazi propaganda in the attackers room. But eitherway, i think most ppl can agree the double standards are BAD.
 
ErNciLator said:
But eitherway, i think most ppl can agree the double standards are BAD.
Click to expand...

Ugh. This has nothing to do with the press and its not double standards. If it was a racially motivated attack they would have been done for racially motivated assault surely?

I would say that you are making a mountain out of a molehill here, but in this case there isn't even a molehill.
 
Gilly said:
Of course it has, you're wrong on both counts.


I'm afraid you've missed the point entirely.
Click to expand...

Explain then, as from what I'm reading this thread is moaning that its double standards that an asian on white attack, with no mention of the guys being done for racially motivated assault is reported without mentioning race but a white on asian racially motivated assault is reported mentioning race.:confused:
 
Hmm, I bet if I went out with a hammer tomorrow with two white, English friends and beat up an asian man, it would be listed as a racially motivated assault.

It almost makes me feel sick that this is the case.
 
SiD the Turtle said:
Explain then, as from what I'm reading this thread is moaning that its double standards that an asian on white attack, with no mention of the guys being done for racially motivated assault is reported without mentioning race but a white on asian racially motivated assault is reported mentioning race.:confused:
Click to expand...

Because if it was an Asian person that was beaten half to death by 4 white men it would be called racially motivated but if it's the other way around then it isn't.
 
He was just saying how the papers always say it's racism when a bunch of whites beat up a black or asian guy, but if it's a bunch of blacks or asians on a white guy, it's not racist at all, just a normal (if you can call it that!) attack. The papers are so scared of being percieved as 'sticking up for the white guy' now that they will even try to switch perceptions on the whole thing. It's sad really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom