evil_gop_liars Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Atomoranic.. do you know what 'hatecrime' means? Is that when you tie a gay guy up to fence post in the middle of Wyoming because of a bad meth deal?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Atomoranic.. do you know what 'hatecrime' means? I assume it has to do with committing a crime... which the second act by the gay guy definitely wasn't. The article on the first one at the campus doesn't have enough details to judge whether an actual crime was committed or not, regardless of the "hate" level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Is that when you tie a gay guy up to fence post in the middle of Wyoming because of a bad meth deal?? Hawt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 When I get donation requests from ACLU mailed to me , I burn them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 When I get donation requests from ACLU mailed to me , I burn them And I do the same when cliaz sends me hungarian porn magazines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 if youre not a student its trespassing .. 1) how do you know he's not a student? if anything, i would have to assume he IS. 2) when has a non-student ever been arrested for trespassing for being on a college campus? 3) none of the hate crimes he is charged with have trespassing as any sort of element to the crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I assume it has to do with committing a crime... which the second act by the gay guy definitely wasn't. The article on the first one at the campus doesn't have enough details to judge whether an actual crime was committed or not, regardless of the "hate" level. well, there's more info available, like here. MM has a copy of the complaint. Turns out the newspaper reports were wrong: he hasn’t been charged with any counts of aggravated harassment, just two counts of fourth-degree criminal mischief (one for each Koran he flushed). As we saw yesterday, fourth-degree mischief is a misdemeanor. So how did Shmulevich end up with two felonies? Simple — they used the state hate crimes statute to elevate the penalty. You’ll find it here in section 485.05; criminal mischief is specifically identified as a covered offense in subsection 3. The provision ordering the court to enhance the punishment is in subsection 2 of section 485.10, right below the hate crimes statute. In pertinent part:When a person is convicted of a hate crime pursuant to this article and the specified offense is a misdemeanor or a class C, D or E felony, the hate crime shall be deemed to be one category higher than the specified offense the defendant committed, or one category higher than the offense level applicable to the defendant’s conviction for an attempt or conspiracy to commit a specified offense, whichever is applicable. Presumably, Shmulevich is looking at two Class E felonies now instead of misdemeanors. What’s the penalty for a Class E felony in New York? If the judge is feeling uncharitable, four years. At a minimum, per the same statute, one year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 1) how do you know he's not a student? if anything, i would have to assume he IS.2) when has a non-student ever been arrested for trespassing for being on a college campus? 3) none of the hate crimes he is charged with have trespassing as any sort of element to the crime. how do u know he is yes many have dont know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 He was a student at the time, last fall. This fact is NOT IN DISPUTE. He is currently not a student, he likely fears for his life from the Religion of Peace and Love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 In the United States if you are white and a christian you have no rights I give it a 9.334456 on the Sarcaso-meter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) He was a student at the time, last fall. This fact is NOT IN DISPUTE. He is currently not a student, he likely fears for his life from the Religion of Peace and Love. Link? Because your article says: Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn was arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment, both hate crimes, police said. It was unclear if he was a student at the school. A message left at the Shmulevich home was not immediately returned. But forget trespassing for a minute. Here's the statute for 4th degree criminal mischief: Section 145.00 Criminal mischief in the fourth degree A person is guilty of criminal mischief in the fourth degree when, having no right to do so nor any reasonable ground to believe that he has such right, he: 1. Intentionally damages property of another person; or 2. Intentionally participates in the destruction of an abandoned building as defined in section one thousand nine hundred seventy-one-a of the real property actions and proceedings law; or 3. Recklessly damages property in an amount exceeding two hundred fifty dollars. Criminal mischief in the fourth degree is a class A misdemeanor. Does it change your mind if this was a crime if he stole someone else's koran and flushed it? You have to admit... that sounds an awful lot less like a free speech case, doesn't it? So either he's guilty of taking someone else's book and flushing it, or he's not guilty of any of this. It's that simple. It's either a case of false arrest because he didn't take anyone else's property, or it's not a free speech case. Either way, H8, you're an idiot... again, and Az is suckling your sweet teet. Edited July 31, 2007 by AtomicCEO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 It was unclear if he was a student at the school Uhm, f0ktard. student currently, the incident happened last fall when he was in school. But we have Atomoranic on record saying 4 years in the state pen for flushing someone elses koran is OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 Atomoranic, you are the gigantistal f0ktard ever to smear the pages of the internet. A former Pace University student faces hate-crime charges for taking paperback copies of the Koran from the campus library on two occasions last fall and disposing of the Muslim holy book in toilets. Toilets on the schools grounds mind you... http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a.../107310034/1002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 But we have Atomoranic on record saying 4 years in the state pen for flushing someone elses koran is OK. Did I say that? Where? All I said was that trespassing or stealing stuff wasn't covered by the first amendment. It isn't... right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) Atomoranic, you are the gigantistal f0ktard ever to smear the pages of the internet.Toilets on the schools grounds mind you... http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a.../107310034/1002 He stole property and destroyed it. Yup. Definitely not covered by the first amendment. Do you want to change your argument yet? Because... you see... this thread is titled: The First Amendment ... and you're making a pretty f'ing poor case here. Az? Anything to add? Edited July 31, 2007 by AtomicCEO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 Did I say that? Where? All I said was that trespassing or stealing stuff wasn't covered by the first amendment. It isn't... right? See children, this is called 'backpeddling'. A student in the library is now tresspassing? Taking a book... which the muslims hand out for free, paperback korans, from the library where you go to school is stealing? See, this is why you make copies, coffee boy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Taking a book... which the muslims hand out for free, paperback korans, from the library where you go to school is stealing? Why wouldn't it be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Link? Because your article says: But forget trespassing for a minute. Here's the statute for 4th degree criminal mischief: Does it change your mind if this was a crime if he stole someone else's koran and flushed it? You have to admit... that sounds an awful lot less like a free speech case, doesn't it? So either he's guilty of taking someone else's book and flushing it, or he's not guilty of any of this. It's that simple. It's either a case of false arrest because he didn't take anyone else's property, or it's not a free speech case. Either way, H8, you're an idiot... again, and Az is suckling your sweet teet. dipchit, if you could read, you'd know that he did indeed flush someone else's koran (the library's), so he's guilty of misdemeanor defacing of property or theft or somesuch. what elevates it to a class E felony (with a minimum sentence of a year in prison) is the fact that it was a "hate crime", the fact that he was chitting on the library's book to make a point about someone else's religion. the difference between a slap on the wrist and having his libary card revoked on the one hand, and being a convicted felon serving 4 years in prison on the other, stems directly from the point he was making by chitting on that library book in particular. of course it's about speech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Why do you hate hate crimes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Taking ... from the library... is stealing? Yes. And willfuly destroying property that isn't yours is criminal mischief by definition. Do you want me to explain it slower? Hang on: Taking... stuff... and... destroying... it... is... illegal. Hope that clarifies things. of course it's about speech. So, you're arguing that destroying someone else's property is covered by the first amendment. God, no wonder you flunked out of law school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 Anyone else here possibly agree with this moran besides maybe skins? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 So, you're arguing that destroying someone else's property is covered by the first amendment. God, no wonder you flunked out of law school. way to cut right to the meat of the argument. pathetic. would you like to respond to the part of my post you cut out? he did indeed flush someone else's koran (the library's), so he's guilty of misdemeanor defacing of property or theft or somesuch. what elevates it to a class E felony (with a minimum sentence of a year in prison) is the fact that it was a "hate crime", the fact that he was chitting on the library's book to make a point about someone else's religion. the difference between a slap on the wrist and having his libary card revoked on the one hand, and being a convicted felon serving 4 years in prison on the other, stems directly from the point he was making by chitting on that library book in particular. destroying someone else's book is a misdemeanor. doing it to willingly dryhump someone else's religion is a felony. there is a big difference, or so i learned in law school before i flunked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) o.f.f.e.n.d = willingly dryhump Edited July 31, 2007 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) Anyone else here possibly agree with this moran besides maybe skins? I think you're wonderfully showing the use of the first amendment by arguing that stealing a book from a library isn't stealing, as long as it's handed out _somewhere_ in this country for free. Edited July 31, 2007 by Pope Flick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 destroying someone else's book is a misdemeanor. doing it to willingly dryhump someone else's religion is a felony. How is the destruction of a religious book a felony, yet burning the American flag isn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.