Baseball bat victim hit 14 times by an Asian!

[trevortt]

Originally Posted by Damien

That does not mean it was a racist attack, only that Dosanjh made a racist comment. There is no evidence that this attack was made because the guy was white. He was already angry, and got into a argument and then into a fight. All of this was triggered because of the fact he drunk, distressed/angry, and outside his ex-girlfriends house.

He did not go there to attack white people.

Maybe not but what i am trying to get at is the fact that if the victim was black or Asian and the attacker was white this story would have racist all over it but because the attacker was Asian and the victim white it does not get much coverage at all and like most people on here have already stated, it cannot be classed as racist.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by trevortt

Read the article properly.

Trevor, can you read the article properly.

Can i summarise the events as the article itself puts it.

1) Drunk Asian man in street in the early hours arguing outside ex girlfriend's house.

2) elderly man fearing for his own safety comes out of his house in the early hours armed with a baseball bat.

3) Asian man gets involved with white 20 year old - and at some point - grabs the baseball bat of the 'eldery' man and hits 20 year old white guy, killing him

4) allegations are made that the DRUNKEN asian guy fired of a racial comment.

Trevor do you fail to grasp my logic that if the old man handnt come out of the street with a baseball bat - fearing for his own safety mind (did he expect asian guy to knock on his door, kick it in and beat him up) then the asian guy would not have had the ability to kill someone with a baseball bat?

[trevortt]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Trevor the fact you can even attempt to use this for whatever agenda is also hilarious.

Its a story..there is no agenda behind it.

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Trevor, can you read the article properly.

Can i summarise the events as the article itself puts it.

1) Drunk Asian man in street in the early hours arguing outside ex girlfriend's house.

2) elderly man fearing for his own safety comes out of his house in the early hours armed with a baseball bat.

3) Asian man gets involved with white 20 year old - and at some point - grabs the baseball bat of the 'eldery' man and hits 20 year old white guy, killing him

4) allegations are made that the DRUNKEN asian guy fired of a racial comment.

Trevor do you fail to grasp my logic that if the old man handnt come out of the street with a baseball bat - fearing for his own safety mind (did he expect asian guy to knock on his door, kick it in and beat him up) then the asian guy would not have had the ability to kill someone with a baseball bat?

he might have killed him with a brick a knife or any number of other things tip for anyone who owns a bat for self defence. Buy a wooden one not ali . Drill a hole though the thinner end. Attach a length of strong leather to said hole just big enough to fit over your hand and around the wrist. Said baseball bat (or anything else for that matter ie pick axe handle) is then a lot harder to get off you

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

he might have killed him with a brick a knife or any number of other things tip for anyone who owns a bat for self defence. Buy a wooden one not ali . Drill a hole though the thinner end. Attach a length of strong leather to said hole just big enough to fit over your hand and around the wrist. Said baseball bat (or anything else for that matter ie pick axe handle) is then a lot harder to get off you

Just curious, why wooden and not aliminium though? Would you still not be able to drill through aluminium, or would the edges around the hole eventually cut into the leather?

And slightly back on topic, no knife or bricks or anything else was found at the scene i dont hink. Well he could have used his beer can (Assuming he had one)

Originally Posted by Nugget

So, a drunk man makes a comment to someone that may be racial? Do you know what the comment was? I don't, but I'm also willing to accept that, in the heat of the moment, something inappropriate may have been said. However, how do we know that no comments were made to the accused?

what difference does that make? the law makes the distinction between a racial attack and as far as im concerned it cuts both ways even if both parties are racsist. However I think the discinction should be in law and the fact it is imo is discrimatory towards white men as its a lot less likely for them to go to the police saying he called me names. This case brings the old kids saying "STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK MY BONES BUT NAMES WILL NEVER HURT ME" this guy used a stick and broke bones any names made no difference

---------- Post added at 13:58 ---------- Previous post was at 13:57 ----------

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Just curious, why wooden and not aliminium though? Would you still not be able to drill through aluminium, or would the edges around the hole eventually cut into the leather?

And slightly back on topic, no knife or bricks or anything else was found at the scene i dont hink. Well he could have used his beer can (Assuming he had one)

Well drilling ali is a bit of a waste of a nice bat

I know for a fact if I had to I could rip someones throat out with my bare hands or kick someone to death if the situation demanded it so it still could have resulted in death irrelevent of the bat

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

what difference does that make? the law makes the distinction between a racial attack and as far as im concerned it cuts both ways even if both parties are racsist. However I think the discinction should be in law and the fact it is imo is discrimatory towards white men as its a lot less likely for them to go to the police saying he called me names. This case brings the old kids saying "STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK MY BONES BUT NAMES WILL NEVER HURT ME" this guy used a stick and broke bones any names made no difference

I'm not saying that it does make a difference but, having read the article, I can't see any specific mention of it being a racially motivated crime. The fact that white men are less likely to report such incidents isn't discriminatory - maybe if more did, we wouldn't be positions like this where any such incident is immediately described as racially motivated.

I stand by what I said - a drunk guy makes a comment that a witness perceives as being racist. Without wishing to cast doubt on this witness, none of us were there to confirm that it was a racist comment

My point is that this "racially motivated " should imo be removed in law . Beating a guy up cuz he spilt a pint over me imo is no different to beating up some asian guy .I would still be a violent thug whichever the case and giving harsher sentences for one over the other is just wrong

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

My point is that this "racially motivated " should imo be removed in law . Beating a guy up cuz he spilt a pint over me imo is no different to beating up some asian guy .I would still be a violent thug whichever the case and giving harsher sentences for one over the other is just wrong

Ah, apologies zing - I misinterpreted what you posted. To be honest, I'm inclined to agree with you - using this specific case as the example, racial motivation or not is completely by the by. At the end of the day, someone has died as a result of someone elses actions - we already have laws covering murder and manslaughter and, in some cases, additional causes (be they real or implied) can, in some cases, only serve to muddy the waters.

Its my fault I do not express myself well at times lol

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

I think a racial motivation could make a difference where there could be a case of manslaughter as opposed to murder. On the whole though if you attack and kill someone, I dont think your sentence should be dependent on wether you were racist or not during the attack. Murder should carry a minimum life sentence either way.

I think Zingy is right too.I've been getting very worried by the way we always instantly look to see if violence is racially motivated before we acknowledge that it is a crime.Sometimes GBH is GBH and murder is murder and ethnic origins can be totally incidental.

I'm worried that we think a racially motivated crime is worse than a non racially motivated crime.All crime is bad surely and not to be tolerated.

Manslaughter implies killing someone without intent ie you punch someone he falls down bangs his head and is dead. If someone is repeatedly kicked whilst down although sometimes in law he will only get a manslaughter charge should be murder. Personally I can look after myself if needed but I do not need to ive not had a fight for a long time and that was when a friend was knocked to the floor and was kicked by a group. Any groups kicking a single person intends to do serious damage and if that person being hit is on the floor the perps know that there is a chance one of the blows could kill so they all should be done for murder. To many violent criminals get off the hook in whats nothing more than a plea bargain

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Nugget

Ah, apologies zing - I misinterpreted what you posted. To be honest, I'm inclined to agree with you - using this specific case as the example, racial motivation or not is completely by the by. At the end of the day, someone has died as a result of someone elses actions - we already have laws covering murder and manslaughter and, in some cases, additional causes (be they real or implied) can, in some cases, only serve to muddy the waters.

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Its my fault I do not express myself well at times lol

Well it's nice to see that peace has broken out in here

Oh and while we're all apologising, can I just offer my lovely wife a sincere apology for me being a stubborn, awkward old git!

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

I think Zingy is right too.I've been getting very worried by the way we always instantly look to see if violence is racially motivated before we acknowledge that it is a crime.Sometimes GBH is GBH and murder is murder and ethnic origins can be totally incidental.

I'm worried that we think a racially motivated crime is worse than a non racially motivated crime.All crime is bad surely and not to be tolerated.

I personally think that a crime should be treated as a crime. The cause is irrelevant.

That article appears to be presenting this crime as racially motivated, but what if the racial comment was just a shout expressing anger? The Asian guy was drunk (which does bring out whatever violent tendencies anyone has), and he had already fought with the victim. It's entirely possible that he just shouted the first thing thing that came into his head as an insult without meaning anything racist by it

That's not to say I am defending the Asian guy. He got drunk. He had a fight. He killed someone, so he is in the wrong, and should be punished.