Posted on Mar 21, 2015
Are we seeing the proof of a devaluation of life when a pair of 16 year old punks beat and kill a WWII veteran?
1.55K
11
7
1
1
0
Disgusting, we lost a World War II Veteran to what is evidently a random robbery - just senseless. Quite possibly three lives ended in this senseless act.
Should the teens be charged as adults?
Would this justify as a hate crime?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/teen-beating-death-world-war-ii-vet-arrested-article-1.1437109
Should the teens be charged as adults?
Would this justify as a hate crime?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/teen-beating-death-world-war-ii-vet-arrested-article-1.1437109
Posted in these groups: 
WWII World War Two
WWII World War Two
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
3
3
0
2
2
0
1
1
0
CSM Michael J. Uhlig, without knowing any further details than what are shared in the article I think no, this is not a hate crime. This is just another senseless crime on the streets of America. Further information may come to light that changes my opinion on that.
I understand why the family would mention it, because he was family and what he did in his life is important to them that the world know; so I understand including the sister's comments in the article, but that being said, there is really no reason for the article headline to tell us that he was a veteran, other than to spark inappropriate levels of controversy.
I do not know if it's in your thread title in the same vein, but what follows are my thoughts on that.
Unless further evidence shows that somehow his veteran status was involved in this crime, this is fundamentally no different than the other 154 people killed in Washington state in 2013. (number from http://www.statista.com/statistics/195331/number-of-murders-in-the-us-by-state/)
I could not find any data about 2014....I assume it's not tallied and/or published yet, but that would be where we can determine if the phrase "proof of a devaluation of life" has any applicability.
To address that facet, we as veterans, are not officially afforded nor do we deserve any special treatment from the general public. I believe that anyone serving who thinks otherwise is probably serving for the wrong reasons. We are shown special treatment in some circles and by some people, but that is not our right. In this light his murder a) was no different than any other murder in the US, and b) should not highlight his veteran status...especially since these articles were released prior to the suspects' trial, and likely poisoned the jury pool. I am sure that there will be plenty of people who think that's a good thing, and those people have no business ever being jurors (meaning the good, community and world improving parts, not the annoying, time sucking parts...they deserve those) and do not understand how the system is supposed to work.
I understand why the family would mention it, because he was family and what he did in his life is important to them that the world know; so I understand including the sister's comments in the article, but that being said, there is really no reason for the article headline to tell us that he was a veteran, other than to spark inappropriate levels of controversy.
I do not know if it's in your thread title in the same vein, but what follows are my thoughts on that.
Unless further evidence shows that somehow his veteran status was involved in this crime, this is fundamentally no different than the other 154 people killed in Washington state in 2013. (number from http://www.statista.com/statistics/195331/number-of-murders-in-the-us-by-state/)
I could not find any data about 2014....I assume it's not tallied and/or published yet, but that would be where we can determine if the phrase "proof of a devaluation of life" has any applicability.
To address that facet, we as veterans, are not officially afforded nor do we deserve any special treatment from the general public. I believe that anyone serving who thinks otherwise is probably serving for the wrong reasons. We are shown special treatment in some circles and by some people, but that is not our right. In this light his murder a) was no different than any other murder in the US, and b) should not highlight his veteran status...especially since these articles were released prior to the suspects' trial, and likely poisoned the jury pool. I am sure that there will be plenty of people who think that's a good thing, and those people have no business ever being jurors (meaning the good, community and world improving parts, not the annoying, time sucking parts...they deserve those) and do not understand how the system is supposed to work.
U.S. homicide: number of murders by state 2013 | Statistic
This graph displays the number of murders in the United States by state. In 2012, the number of murders in Alaska amounted to 29 victims.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSgt (Join to see), It has been my experience that you rarely, if ever, offer anything of substance to any discussion I've been involved in, and merely insult me and/or re-state your opinion. From this point on I will do everything in my power not to reply to you directly (it's possible that you could change, or say something I cannot ignore). I will, however, still see what you say and possibly address it in my comments to others.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
PO2 William Allen Crowder , you provide zero frame of reference for your comment, yet it is derogatory to me. Nice. I assume you refer to a comment made in my own post regarding stolen valor. However, in that post SSgt (Join to see) said "...and by the way, your picture is disrespectful and that right there tells me about you and your agenda." and "You act like a punk in your uniform and I am thinking stolen valor on your part."
I would like to point out at this time that then, like now, the commment had zero bearing on what was being discussed.
and SFC (Join to see) asked if it was a gang sign I was flashing (so, you don't even have who said what correct).
At that time I said...
"I agree that it may not be 'professional'. While this is a military oriented website, I wasn't aware that on here I am 'at work' (separate from 'on duty', which we always are). I debated about using this particular one, but after looking at the examples of what was and wasn't acceptable I thought this was probably OK. I wonder about your people skills if this makes you think "gang sign". It's peace signs, and it's something a LOT of people do in photos. "
and
"...maybe it does look like a gang sign. I don't know about gang signs and I assure you that was not the intent."
I don't know if I changed his mind, and we never agreed on the valor thing, but our interactions afterwords were cordial.
As a result of your comment I conducted some further research. I mean, I am not familiar with gang culture. Maybe you, SSgt L Ol, and SFC Pakenham knew something about it that I didn't and I had inadvertently been flashing gang signs. Turns out NOPE.
Here (http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~haralds/htmlfiles/gang-signs.html) it shows what is referred to as the "normal" peace sign as a gang sign meaning "Victory".
And here (http://northtownmud.org/docs/IPTM_Basic_Street_Gangs_Hand_Signs1.pdf) there are many more signs shown and neither the "correct" nor the other peace sign are shown.
About the actual topic (what constitutes hate crime, was that involved here) and about your side note comments, how about doing some research before spouting off.
Very little about the real world revolves around how you FEEL. That's reality.
I would like to point out at this time that then, like now, the commment had zero bearing on what was being discussed.
and SFC (Join to see) asked if it was a gang sign I was flashing (so, you don't even have who said what correct).
At that time I said...
"I agree that it may not be 'professional'. While this is a military oriented website, I wasn't aware that on here I am 'at work' (separate from 'on duty', which we always are). I debated about using this particular one, but after looking at the examples of what was and wasn't acceptable I thought this was probably OK. I wonder about your people skills if this makes you think "gang sign". It's peace signs, and it's something a LOT of people do in photos. "
and
"...maybe it does look like a gang sign. I don't know about gang signs and I assure you that was not the intent."
I don't know if I changed his mind, and we never agreed on the valor thing, but our interactions afterwords were cordial.
As a result of your comment I conducted some further research. I mean, I am not familiar with gang culture. Maybe you, SSgt L Ol, and SFC Pakenham knew something about it that I didn't and I had inadvertently been flashing gang signs. Turns out NOPE.
Here (http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~haralds/htmlfiles/gang-signs.html) it shows what is referred to as the "normal" peace sign as a gang sign meaning "Victory".
And here (http://northtownmud.org/docs/IPTM_Basic_Street_Gangs_Hand_Signs1.pdf) there are many more signs shown and neither the "correct" nor the other peace sign are shown.
About the actual topic (what constitutes hate crime, was that involved here) and about your side note comments, how about doing some research before spouting off.
Very little about the real world revolves around how you FEEL. That's reality.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google