Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Yep. Unarmed My Behind...

Obviously this story is wrong. We've been treated to over a year's worth of "innocent little 8 year old Trayvon Martin was unarmed". "Unarmed" people cannot possibly hurt other human beings, right mainstream media?

62-year-old NYC man dies after punched in possible bias attack; upgraded charges possible
NEW YORK – Authorities say a 62-year-old New York City man has died less than a week after he was assaulted by a man who threatened to "punch the first white man" he saw.

Jeffrey Babbitt died Monday. Police say the attack happened Wednesday in Union Square Park in Manhattan. After Babbitt was struck, he fell backward and hit his head.
Yet, interestingly enough, not a single person is calling this a hate crime. Apparently LaShawn had nothing but love in his heart when he struck a man twice his age hard enough to knock him to the ground where he hit his head and died. How much would you want to bet that if - after hearing this story - a white man went up to an older black man and beat him so hard he died, the media wouldn't be SCREAMING hate crime at the top of their lungs? That's one of those rhetorical questions, but you knew that.

It is positively mind-boggling how one-way this is. A man beat another man so badly that he died, and not a single media outlet is identifying it as a hate crime. Despite there being witnesses who said that race was, in fact, a motive in the beating, which is absolutely the underlying definition of what makes something a hate crime. Since the race wasn't one of the "protected" ones, this apparently falls under the "love crime" category.

You kind of have to wonder what, exactly, is at work here. Is this just some misguided "we're going to correct the past 200 years of wrongs" thinking on the part of the media? Or are they actually hoping to incite a race war? We've seen quite a few stories of white people beaten to death for the crime of being white - all, ostensibly, because a hispanic man shot a black man in what was judged to be self-defense. Where's the justice in allowing other black people to beat (older) white people to death over this? At some point, there *are* going to be shootings of *truly* unarmed people because of race, and the backlash to that is going to be terrifying.

Then again, if it bleeds, it leads, and nothing bleeds like a good old-fashioned race riot, right MSM?

That is all.

Another dispatch from...
(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

3 comments:

Matt W said...

"Possible bias attack"? If it was a "bias" on race, age, gender, or any other protected class it was a hate crime. If it wasn't race, what bias was it?

And the fact that he is only being held on assault charges is also laughable. When your assault causes the death of someone else, that is at the very least manslaughter.

Jay G said...

I'm hoping that more charges are forthcoming, that it's a case of "do we charge him with manslaughter or murder 2?"

If there are no murder charges - even an involuntary manslaughter - then they're essentially declaring open season on certain classes of people.

And it's only a matter of time before that *unprotected* class starts taking steps to protect themselves (and, in fact, we already have).

Which leads to more Zimmerman/Martin interactions. Feed the cycle.

This can't end well. The race baiters and professional agitators are going to push this into something really ugly, I fear.

Armed Texan said...

There should be no confusion about the charges. This is a clear-cut case of murder 2.