Baltimore Chief of Police: It Would Be "Race-Baiting" To Note a Hate Crime Against A White Man Is In Fact A Hate Crime

Not a hate crime, just "opportunistic criminal behavior."

What was the opportunity? One white guy lost in a black neighborhood?

What was the selection process for their victim? Was it just random they chose the one white guy?

If that wasn't random -- if he was chosen, at it appears, because he was the one white interloper in sight -- it's a hate-crime.

But it would be "race baiting" to call it such.

In a radio interview, Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III urged Baltimore residents to "distinguish between criminality and racially motivated crime." Bealefeld, who is white, warned against "race-baiting" and "fear-mongering" in light of the Trayvon Martin shooting and other recent racially charged incidents.

"There's no doubt it's a crime," Bealefeld said of the March 17 assault. "We need to vigorously hold criminals accountable, and we have to be careful not to be pulled into this race-baiting."

The Supreme Court should strike these laws off the books. They violate the Equal Protections Clause, as actually practiced.

Last week I attempted to pressure Anderson Cooper into covering this. He's made a big deal about Hate and Bullying.

And yet his interest to call this behavior out seems to be limited to all the predictable cases.

If liberals believe that Public Shaming of bigotry, hatred, and bullying behavior can actually work to reduce such behavior -- and I actually do think this works, as I think shame generally guides behavior -- why do they stubbornly refuse to apply it to all bigotry, hatred, bullying, and gross criminal conduct?

If dehumanization and "Otherization" (as liberals term it) makes predatory and vicious conduct more likely, what precisely is the message being sent when the liberal media treats stuff like this as "acceptable losses"?

posted by Ace at 08:08 PM

| Access Comments