Hate-crime arrests in Quran desecrations at Pace University

[nightflight]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/w...ul27,0,6882662.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

NEW YORK (AP) _ A 23-year-old man was arrested Friday on hate-crime charges after he threw a Quran in a toilet at Pace University on two separate occasions, police said.

Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn was arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment, both hate crimes, police said.

He should have just burned an American flag or put a crucifix in a jar of urine and applied for an NEA grant.

I think that there should be a mass movement across this land where people purchase and then flush, burn or urinate on "the Koran". Just to p.iss of Ibraim Cooper. No way would the government be able to stop us all.

 

[BlueWidow]

Do it. To hell with the Koran, and these cops who are a disgrace to the badge. This is a travesty!

Tomorrow I will burn a Koran and put it on Utube, and if they come for me, I'll have something for them!

 

[notto]

From this version of the story, it seems that there is a good chance that it wasn't his Koran but the schools.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...student_in_koran_flush_freed_on_no_bai-1.html


He was busted after cops discovered a surveillance camera that filmed him leaving the meditation room where the Korans had been kept before the vandalism.

So, if he took a religious book that was not his out of an area of worship and flushed it down the toilet it certainly is not protected speech and is a crime. No different than desecration of a synagogue or church which are treated as hate crimes as well.


I can't see why anybody would defend this as 'free speech'. It certainly was not a protected act unless it was his own book .

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

So vandalising and throwing away a book (which – as far as we can tell from the story wasn’t stolen) when no-one was present, and which contained no racist taunts or threats now constitutes a hate crime? Wow – this thought police stuff just gets better and better.

Edit - Notto's link sheds some light. Still don't think it's a hate crime, though they should be adding break and enter and theft to the charge sheet.

 

[nightflight]

From this version of the story, it seems that there is a good chance that it wasn't his Koran but the schools.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...student_in_koran_flush_freed_on_no_bai-1.html


He was busted after cops discovered a surveillance camera that filmed him leaving the meditation room where the Korans had been kept before the vandalism.

So, if he took a religious book that was not his out of an area of worship and flushed it down the toilet it certainly is not protected speech and is a crime. No different than desecration of a synagogue or church which are treated as hate crimes as well.


I can't see why anybody would defend this as 'free speech'. It certainly was not a protected act unless it was his own book .

If it wasn't his property, then he should be charged with theft and destruction of property.

What bothers me is the "hate crime" aspect and the inconsistency of applying criminal charges. If someone burns an American flag, or desecrates a symbol of some other religion, its ok. Deface a Koran and its a "hate crime". (Though to be honest, I'm against ALL hate-crime laws.)

 

[notto]

So vandalising and throwing away a book (which – as far as we can tell from the story wasn’t stolen) when no-one was present, and which contained no racist taunts or threats now constitutes a hate crime? Wow – this thought police stuff just gets better and better.

Edit - Notto's link sheds some light. Still don't think it's a hate crime, though they should be adding break and enter and theft to the charge sheet.

What would you charge somebody with for burning a cross or painting a swastika?

Just curious.

 

[notto]

Deface a Koran and its a "hate crime".

No, steal a religious item from a place of worship and throw it in the toilet = hate crime.

You can deface your own Koran any time you want as long as you leave others property and places of worship out of it.

You are making a claim that is not supported by the facts.

 

[nightflight]

No, steal a religious item from a place of worship and throw it in the toilet = hate crime.

You can deface your own Koran any time you want as long as you leave others property and places of worship out of it.

You are making a claim that is not supported by the facts.

The act should be prosecuted. Not the intention or the thoughts of the perpetrator.

 

[nightflight]

What would you charge somebody with for burning a cross or painting a swastika?

Just curious.

Speaking for myself, if they defaced private property, I would. But it wouldn't matter if they painted a swastika or a smiley face. The law should protect lives and property, not "feelings".

 

[Peterk45]

The act should be prosecuted. Not the intention or the thoughts of the perpetrator.

Even the sight of a representive of some ideology/attribute can make some people more hateful. A person who just likes to kill "those evil darkskins" should face more harsher punishment than someone whose robbery/other cause just happens to have a killing/murder or a person of any ethnicity in it, because that person is far more dangerous. Ergo, more harsher punishment or at least keeping out of society. And for the other direction, I'm not fan of Mormons because some things they stand for, but I would hate to see someone harming a Mormon or his/her property because of his religion and be left with lesser punishment because "oh never mind, the perpetrator just hates Mormons it's all cool nevermind". That's just plain stupid. Equal rights and all, that's the point behind hate crime.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

What would you charge somebody with for burning a cross or painting a swastika?

Just curious.

Arson and/or vandalism plus trespass if it was on private property, with the motivation of the crime (intimidation) adding to the severity of the sentence. They should (as should all vandals) also have to pay for the full cost of the clean up and rectification.

 

[mayfly]

I cannot imagine a jury in New York City willing to anything less than pin a medal on him... for free speech.

I love Jesus Christ and as a Christian I will not slander another faith... even an evil or satanic one. I will confine my attacks on the issues of truth and falsehood etc. But I defend the right of people to burn my own sacred books in a non-threatening way.

I don't see a hate crime here.

For this same reason I don't make pictures of Mohammed etc. but I do tell people about how Mohammed had sex with a 9 year old girl in the Sirach - Islam's second holy book. Now that's worth burning!

 

[notto]

Speaking for myself, if they defaced private property, I would. But it wouldn't matter if they painted a swastika or a smiley face. The law should protect lives and property, not "feelings".

Hate crime laws do protect lives. That is what they are designed to do.

They provide deterrent to inciting violence against a community or population.

Do you really think that curbing cross burnings in a black community or arson of black churches by taking those responsible out of society doesn't protect lives?

Hate crimes are not about protecting feelings. They are about safety in a community and are designed to keep the peace.

 

[Conspiracy Theory]

Do it. To hell with the Koran, and these cops who are a disgrace to the badge. This is a travesty!

Tomorrow I will burn a Koran and put it on Utube, and if they come for me, I'll have something for them!

Don't waste your money.

 

[kermit]

Speaking for myself, if they defaced private property, I would. But it wouldn't matter if they painted a swastika or a smiley face. The law should protect lives and property, not "feelings".

Hate crimes do no protect feelings they protect people. If someone is burning cross the trespassing laws and local ordinances against burning would hardly cover the underlying threat of bodily harm or death.

Motivation is already a huge part of our justice system. Hate crime laws (which have been around for decades) just formalize definitions to keep it out the of the hands of judges.

 

[Billnew]

What would you charge somebody with for burning a cross or painting a swastika?

Just curious.

Burning on a cross on your own property=no crime.
Painting a swastika on your own building =no crime.
Burning or flushing a Quran, no crime if it is yours.

Burning the cross on others is intimidation.
Painting the swastica, malicious vandalism.

Burning or flushing a stolen Quran= theft and vandalism.

 

[Conspiracy Theory]

From what I understand, their case here, is mostly circumstantial evidence.

 

[jesuspickedmeup]

get ur Koran out I have to use the bathroom

 

[mayfly]

Why couldn't an art student bury pages from the Koran in a jar of urine as a work of art? Just to be even and fair.

I cannot imagine the angst a liberal must go through to justify his/her double standards.

 

[Vylo]

Funny when people vandalized a church near me it was considered a hate crime. I guess it doesn't count if its Islam now?