Suspects arrested in home invasion cases.
From the story:
According to authorities, Davis and Humphrey had already told investigators they were “surfing” for Asian-American victims when they spotted the Middletown couple leaving the Springfield Mall in a black Mercedes-Benz.
Isn't ethnic profiling illegal? Nope, only for the government.
Note to Asian business folks: The ideal present for your spouse this Christmas; a firearm.
Sounds like they were "profiling" them as rich businessmen, rather than as hate crime against Asians.
ReplyDeleteAnother swing and a miss for Spencer.
The local Lib Media has expended a great deal of ink pointing out that the victims have all been targetted because they are Asian. While glarringly missing is the fact that all of the perps are black. These are black-on-Asian crimes. Period. And they are being targetted because of their race, which makes these race-based hate crimes.
ReplyDeleteBut blacks never draw the "hate crime" charge, no matter how deserving. Ever. The Hate Crime Statute was created to charge hetero white males. And stats like in these cases never make the hate crime roundups, thereby scewing those numbers to being worthless while creating a false picture.
Wake up, folks. The biased apologist Lib Media protectionism has crept into our justice system. Fighting this Racial Double Standard is the civil rights fight of our time.
Anon needs to get wax out of his eyes.
ReplyDeleteWe repeat -
According to authorities, Davis and Humphrey had already told investigators they were “surfing” for Asian-American victims when they spotted the Middletown couple leaving the Springfield Mall in a black Mercedes-Benz.
Not "rich businessmen," ASIAN-AMERICANS.
Sounds like? Wow.
Of course, in Anon's world targeting rich businessmen would be OK! See Bill Ayers and his apologists for more on this.
Um.. repeat this: "Mercedes-Benz"
ReplyDeleteThey were looking for the rich.
Targeting anyone (even ignorance blowhards like yourself) is wrong. But, I read the article and it didn't seem like a hate crime. The victims were NOT beaten, raped, mutilated, vandalized, etc.
Simple robbery for money.
If someone was hanging out to rob patrons of the a local country club, it wouldn't mean that they were targeting whites, but rather the rich folks (who are predominantly white). Or they could be targeting lawyers for their wealth (rather that for being like Mr. Shields).
Now, you're getting it, Dave.
ReplyDeleteMost alleged "hate crimes" aren't hate crimes. They are mostly crimes of passion or profit.
Even the most famous hate crime in recent history - the Matthew Shepherd Case - turns out to be less "hate crime" than robbery gone bad. See this story.
But don't try telling that to gay activists who'd rather play up their narrative of group victimization than get the facts of any particular story right.
Asians have, historically, been known to have large amounts of cash hidden in their homes. They also deal in businesses that use cash alomost all the time. They were targeted because the robbers hoped they were carrying cash, or had cash in the home.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the fact that some of these vermin got nabbed for using credit or bank cards, you would think that they would have stuck with just the cash.
So in short, they were targeted because the crooks suspected they had cash, they worked in areas close to where the crooks lived.
This was a crime of opportunity, only because of the habits of the victims.
When they drag a black man from a car in texas or burn down a black church or put up a burning cross: hate crime.
ReplyDeleteGuys like you promote racism and violence (not always intentionally) when you ignore real hate crimes and then try to mislabel non-hate-crimes as hate-crimes to dilute the issue.
Fortunately, you aren't the arbiter of anything more important than what socks you wear.
Apologists are funny/ pathetic when they get to a grasping!
ReplyDelete