Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
I apologise if I made it sound like a 'game' - that's not my intention.
|
Cheers, I didn't mean to imply you were making it sound like a game. It's just a phrase I used.
Quote:
|
But when a gang of one race targets victims of a different race, I cannot see how you could fail to recognise the racial significance of that.
|
Because there are enough white people in the country that it's not statistically significant that all the victims were white. Nor is it uncommon for people to associate with people from the same community therefore it wouldn't be wise to draw conclusions from the fact all the men were Asian.
The point I'm making is if a white person attacks a non-white it always seems to be approached as a racial crime however the reverse does not seem to be so. In either case I can accept it might not be racial - maybe the victim got beaten because they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Quote:
|
If it is the case that any crime committed by a White British Person on a member of a ethnic minority is treated as a race crime regardless of the context then I don't that is right. It is not a view I hold or encourage. So neither will I apply it when it's the other way around. If you think it's wrong then you shouldn't apply it the other way around either. Two wrongs don't make a right.
|
So in this case. Is there evidence that race as a big factor? Did the Asian men target white girls exclusively because of a racial element or hatred? Was it simply they went after 'at risk' children and these just happened to be white? Did they want to stay out of their community? Is there statistical (not anecdotal) evidence that Asian communities have a higher proportion of these kinds of offenders?
If they just happen to be paedophiles that are Asian then why is there race important at all? I think the focus on race without these answers risks harming an entire community.