Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
[Hate Speech]: how America (and the world) deals with it
Posts
Safe would constitute not being drug behind a pickup truck, beat to death due to sexual orientation, harrassed in public, harrassed by politicians on television, etc.
That seems to be the general goal of these laws, right? A chilling effect, a cooling off, keeping the airwaves clean of hate mongering. If I go on Google and pick a country to research that has these laws in place then it should be incredibly difficult to find instances of these things, but my gut tells me it'll be pretty damn easy.
Outliers exist, but I'm willing to bet the UK, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Germany have less hate speech and hate crimes than we do. Those are all nations that have instituted hate speech laws to a varying degree, and free speech therein hasn't cratered as a result.
Just off the top of my head I'm willing to bet there is a lower amount of LGBT teen suicides in countries with hate speech provisos, as opposed to our own.
Some random guy on the Internet said they're good to have, off the top of his head. Case closed, guys. Lets lock this thread and make up some poorly written and ill conceived hate speech laws.
During 2011-12, England and Wales reported 44k hate crimes. During the same time period, the USA had about 15k.
So I know we can pick these apart but man it ain't lookin good.
As someone who is undecided, I'd love to discuss these things, but so many of the comments in this thread are just so fucking snide, ignorant, and embarrassing that I am not sure it is possible. @saint2e, for example. That is a YouTube level of comment. Youtube!
One thing we think about with new laws is need. Forget the US constitution, and the practical difficulties. Just talk about whether they are needed or not. Germany was a country tremendously damaged by certain kinds of speech, and so they took steps to change that.
Is the US being damaged by the hate speech that goes on in it? By the homophobic speech, the racist speech, the anti-Islamic speech, and so on?
It's hard to know. Definitely a big part of the problem is the reluctance of some Americans to countenance the idea that America has any significant problems. That's going to be a recurring problem, and I'm not sure it's a solvable one. Here's an article that elaborates on this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/02/praise-vallaud-belkacem-hate-speech-twitter
Perhaps if we talk about other countries, that works better?
LGBT suicides in UK five times as likely as heterosexual.
http://www.galyic.org.uk/docs/coc.doc
USA, 3.5 times as likely.
http://www.utb.edu/sa/shs/suicideprevention/Pages/LGBT.aspx
There goes that theory.
England and wales have broader definitions of and are more likely to pursue hate crimes than the US, so that number doesn't really surprise me. But good on you for giving me unsourced numbers!
Wow, could it be that they're more likely to commit suicide because they're more often the target of hate crimes and hate speech than hetero teenagers? What a notion.
Yeah, but the UK has all those fancy pants hate regs you keep talking about.
And their rate is higher.
Sooo...
This whole thread is unsourced. I don't feel like Googling it again.
Does England have hate speech laws?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
You're right; if anything, it sounds like they need stricter laws, being as there's an epidemic of hate going on there. Perhaps Orwell was wrong after all.
At this point Poe's law has kicked in and I cannot tell if you're serious.
"Hate speech laws will reduce suicide rates!"
"Not really."
"They must be more hate speechier!"
Could just be that these things don't fucking work? Gasp, I know.
Gasp, no you don't.
We should make the hatiest speechiest laws ever and it will completely obliterate racism.
Or you know, hate speech laws don't change shit. There's no evidence they do, and I provided some evidence that shows they don't.
Go ahead and do the Wanker.gif so you can just avoid replying to anything in a discussion thread. Good form.
I agree!
Given a complete lack of evidence, why?
Goosefeathers.
bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hcv0311.pdf
Bureau of Justice Statistics shows 217,640 hate crimes in 2011, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey; 195,500 were violent crimes. (0.8 violent hate crimes per 1,000 persons 12 or older.
I'm no more in favor of these laws than you, but I'm really starting to get tired of this shit.
Edit: typo
Tired of what? Using the numbers from the FBI?
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2011/narratives/incidents-and-offenses
In 2011, 1,944 law enforcement agencies reported 6,222 hate crime incidents involving 7,254 offenses.
◾There were 6,216 single-bias incidents that involved 7,240 offenses, 7,697 victims, and 5,724 offenders
2012 was a similar year to 2011, so 7500 or so times 2 equals 15k.
Using what is probably the best source for crime figures to give figures? Well I never.
Having gone through those links, the FBI one specifically mentions that its data comes from:
(a) Voluntarily participating law enforcement agencies;
(b) Where the said law enforcement agency has identified at least 1 source of bias.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, using Hate Crime statistics specifically is a shitty data source because it depends on the legal definition of Hate Crimes within that jurisdiction. The simple matter of introducing a Hate Crime law where none previously existed will cause Hate Crime statistics to jump 100%!
65% of the victims of hate crime in the US between 07-11 were white(p7). 53% of hate crimes were committed by whites, 54% of hate crime were motivated by race.
I'm not entirely sure of the Venn-diagram of this, but don't those numbers guarantee White-on-White race motivated hate crime?
e: also england and wales pop: 62.64 mill US 311.59m 4.97 times larger. 4.95*44k=218,870. So fairly comparable rates, with the US's being a bit lower actually.
e2:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hate-crimes-england-and-wales-2011-to-2012--2/hate-crimes-england-and-wales-2011-to-2012
has it as 43,748, so 217,427 is the correct scaled value. Looks like those UK speech paws managed to prevent 213 hate crime per 312 million people. .0068 crimes per 100k people Ooooooo Ahhhhhhh
e3: If I take the Pop ratio to 3 decimals it goes to 217602....4 decimals...217615... So not seeing a lot of effect here.
No.
ETA - To elaborate:
Assume that 100% of all non-racially motivated hate crimes had a white victim. That means that roughly 20% of racially motivated hate crimes had a white victim ((65%-46%)/54%)
Assume that 100% of all non-racially motivated hate crimes had a white perpetrator. That means that roughly 13% of racially motivated hate crimes had a white perpetrator ((53%-46%)/54%)
Under these (extreme) conditions it's perfectly possible for the 20% and the 13% to never overlap within the 100% of racially motivated hate crimes. Obviously the assumptions are almost certainly inaccurate, but to answer your question, those numbers don't guarantee White-on-White race motivated hate crime (and even if they did, go ask those Northern Irish and English how much they love each other).
That would be the Bureau of Justice Statistics. It pretty much does what it says on the tin. So I will see your statistics from 1,944 enforcement agencies and raise you another 16,000 and change.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf
And I know there is some snark on this page, but the wank gif is the exact opposite of debate and discourse.
It may include things like whites committing hate crimes against Jews, people in interracial relationships, or other people considered "race traitors." Not that surprising.
Well, that little graph on the right side of the thing talks about hate crimes attacks being motivated by gender and sexual orientation too.
So, probably a lot of white people beating the hell out of gay white people in there, unless I am missing something.
Click here for a horrible H/A thread with details.
Do the UK numbers include hate speech offenses? Because we shouldn't be counting things that are criminal in one, but not the other.
As for the stats, hate crime goes beyond race. It also includes religion, gender, orientation, etc. so yes, there are white on white hate crimes, but they aren't racially motivated.
I'm not saying that they aren't, but we don't exactly have a lot of people out there advocating for the extinction of a race by screaming "FUCK ALL THE BITCHES!". Even though a lot of the white power sect believes that's happening.
Looks like its same as the US. Violence/Property Damage/ and a smattering of theft + sexual assault which they seem to put in other rather than as violent crime.
I know the stats part. But if 65% of the victims are white, 53% of the perpetrators are white, and 54% of the crimes are race motivated, I'd think that would get really close to where there must be white-on-white race motivated hate crimes, just because of the group sizes. Which makes the estimate pretty odd. Even the 65% number I find somewhat questionable. Or I guess that Blacks(13%) are only the victim of hate crimes at exactly their share of the country by race seems really odd. You'd expect a disproportionate % of hate crimes to be against minority groups. The US is 63% white-non Latino. Whites are disproportionately the VICTIMS of hate crimes?
Regardless, I think this is as good a point as any to recuse myself from the thread indefinitely.
Whites had a victimization rate of 0.9/1,000. Blacks and Latinos were each at 1.0/1,000.
Also, the motivation's aren't mutually exclusive; the percentages of that table tally to more than 100%. Additionally, some crimes have multiple victims (or multiple perpetrators).
From my previous edit which you may have missed:
If the FBI percentages are representative of the greater (non-reported) Hate Crimes, 16.7% of racially-motivated hate crime victims are white. Assuming the likely over-representation of white victims for Religious and Sexual Orientation (anti-Jew is around 68% pretty high for Religious, and it depends on if you classify the victim's race as "White") then those combined numbers could still mean whites are disproportionately victims (or, technically, proportionally since that's roughly equivalent to their proportion of the general population).
Trends are better for analysis, and general crime rates with minority victims are a better base than varying definition of "Hate Crime".
In the US at least the majority of minority victims have minority assailants. Go Go Ghettos! And I still think you need to define a hate crime, to relate it to hate speech.
Geth, infract @jungleroomx for posting uselessly
Actual Play: Mage: the Awakening - At the Edge of All Things
Infracted @jungleroomx (2 points for 30 days) for "posting uselessly"
Geth, infract @Hacksaw for posting uselessly
Actual Play: Mage: the Awakening - At the Edge of All Things