Our society has a subset of offenses that can only be committed by white peoples, and which carry heavier penalties than murder or rape. This is our present reality. Raw, state-enforced anarcho-tyranny.
Edit: if it is, in fact, “just” 42 months, that is obviously way less insane. It is still a crime that is never enforced both ways. How many cases of black-on-white violence are refused a hate crime designation for garbage reasons? Hell, look at the “hate crime” stats that show non-whites are disproportionately victims and then the fbi crime stats showing non-whites are disproportionately perpetrators. How do you reconcile those two stats? Simple: “hate crime” is a bogus category specifically designed to attack whites.
Not only that he plead guilty! That was the "deal" What would have happened if it went to trial?l Life without possibility of parole? He was insane to accept that
Edit: I found an article from a local news source that says 42 months. AP may have made an error with this article. Still excessive of course.
He would have gotten less time had he killed the family or molested their children. I could see this being part of a pattern of criminal harassment that would merit some punishment, but it's clear that he's being punished for sacrilege more than anything else.
His attorney, Jim Davis...told the Biloxi Sun Herald that Cox was reacting to his neighbors allegedly shooting and killing his dog. He added that his client acted “totally inappropriately.”
...I...I don't even know man. If true, a cross burning and some bad words let them off really damn fucking easy. You kill my dog...yeah, I'm thinking I'm back.
It's also depressing how few people read past the headlines. I went to Yahoo, clicked "Show More Comments" nine times, and Ctrl+F'ed "dog" and got one results; the one from the article. Fucking read it, people.
Yeah, if true they killed a living creature, and he hurt some feelings. What kind of fucking clown world do they get no punishment and he goes to jail for 42 years.
It was a mistake in the reporting, and it's 42 months (3.5) years, but it's still insane. And not even for threats, but for some sort of 'housing discrimination' or something.
This is Progressives (i.e., Rainbow-Marxists) abusing the legal system to discourage opposing them. "Hate crime" as a legal category must be abolished.
threats are not protected speech, and the case states that he did it in order to threaten and intimidate his neighbors. I agree the sentence is way too fucking high, but jail time is deserved.
if man comes up to me and says "I'm going to fucking kill you", or leaves a sign in view of my house that says "you are going to fucking die", I sure as hell hope the cops would take that man to jail. It would be much more expedient than waiting for the incident to occur and then having to defend myself in court for shooting him.
Except this guy didn't say he was going to kill anyone. He burned a cross on his own lawn. You translating that into a death threat does not mean he said it. What if my idea of a death threat is your dog shitting on my lawn? Should you do prison time over my personal interpretation of an ambiguous act?
In order to legally be considered a threat there has to be a specificity that is lacking here- time/place/method, something. Burning a cross is known as an anti-black statement, and contains an implicit threat of violence, but if it wasn't for "mUh hATe cRiMe" he probably wouldn't have been charged with anything.
The just passingly mention that the neighbor might have shot and killed his dog! Now that should get a fine to a few years. Not just doing stuff on your own lawn with your own property, and saying stuff. I don't support racism, any form, but actions not words are what should be punishable.
Our society has a subset of offenses that can only be committed by white peoples, and which carry heavier penalties than murder or rape. This is our present reality. Raw, state-enforced anarcho-tyranny.
Edit: if it is, in fact, “just” 42 months, that is obviously way less insane. It is still a crime that is never enforced both ways. How many cases of black-on-white violence are refused a hate crime designation for garbage reasons? Hell, look at the “hate crime” stats that show non-whites are disproportionately victims and then the fbi crime stats showing non-whites are disproportionately perpetrators. How do you reconcile those two stats? Simple: “hate crime” is a bogus category specifically designed to attack whites.
Not only that he plead guilty! That was the "deal" What would have happened if it went to trial?l Life without possibility of parole? He was insane to accept that
Edit: I found an article from a local news source that says 42 months. AP may have made an error with this article. Still excessive of course.
Yahoo/AP have corrected it to 42 months now.
Still too much
Absolutely. Especially if the neighbors he targeted...killed his fucking dog.
And that gentlemen is why we always archive.
Yup.
I like how the URL still says 'years' though. Nice little cherry on top.
It would be funny if the local news source made a mistake because 42 years was so unbelievable.
Also the "mistake" by the AP could be click-bait. They'll often write one thing that sounds scandalous and change the headline later.
He would have gotten less time had he killed the family or molested their children. I could see this being part of a pattern of criminal harassment that would merit some punishment, but it's clear that he's being punished for sacrilege more than anything else.
...I...I don't even know man. If true, a cross burning and some bad words let them off really damn fucking easy. You kill my dog...yeah, I'm thinking I'm back.
It's also depressing how few people read past the headlines. I went to Yahoo, clicked "Show More Comments" nine times, and Ctrl+F'ed "dog" and got one results; the one from the article. Fucking read it, people.
Yeah, if true they killed a living creature, and he hurt some feelings. What kind of fucking clown world do they get no punishment and he goes to jail for 42 years.
It was a mistake in the reporting, and it's 42 months (3.5) years, but it's still insane. And not even for threats, but for some sort of 'housing discrimination' or something.
Bullshit abuse of power.
This is Progressives (i.e., Rainbow-Marxists) abusing the legal system to discourage opposing them. "Hate crime" as a legal category must be abolished.
How is porn free speech/expression but this is not?
Porn has done more damage to society than a burning cross ever has.
You just answered it yourself. Porn is one of the establishment's tools for social engineering.
inb4 Imp calls me woman worshipper now for being antiporn completely missing my point.
lotta cuck interracial and loli stuff being pushed.
Miserable degenerates. Why can't they watch midget clown porn like god intended?
When clown porn is more wholesome than most mainstream porn sites, you know society's days are numbered.
How is this not a free speech issue? Maybe misdemeanor harassment at the worst.
Muslim judge and Jewish journalist. Certainly not people who could be suspected of having an axe to grind with Christians.
Utterly absurd. Should've charged as a death threat at most.
If this isn't reduced on appeal, then something else needs to be burned on a lawn.
threats are not protected speech, and the case states that he did it in order to threaten and intimidate his neighbors. I agree the sentence is way too fucking high, but jail time is deserved.
Nah, jail time isn't deserved. Community service at most.
His "neighbors" shot his dog. They should be thankful that he did was peaceful protesting.
"Fiery, but mostly peaceful"
Why do you deserve jail time for threats? I could see escalating to that if other forms of punishment don't work.
if man comes up to me and says "I'm going to fucking kill you", or leaves a sign in view of my house that says "you are going to fucking die", I sure as hell hope the cops would take that man to jail. It would be much more expedient than waiting for the incident to occur and then having to defend myself in court for shooting him.
Except this guy didn't say he was going to kill anyone. He burned a cross on his own lawn. You translating that into a death threat does not mean he said it. What if my idea of a death threat is your dog shitting on my lawn? Should you do prison time over my personal interpretation of an ambiguous act?
In order to legally be considered a threat there has to be a specificity that is lacking here- time/place/method, something. Burning a cross is known as an anti-black statement, and contains an implicit threat of violence, but if it wasn't for "mUh hATe cRiMe" he probably wouldn't have been charged with anything.
The just passingly mention that the neighbor might have shot and killed his dog! Now that should get a fine to a few years. Not just doing stuff on your own lawn with your own property, and saying stuff. I don't support racism, any form, but actions not words are what should be punishable.