The articles describe clear examples of lynching. Obvious cases. Yet you claim there is not data.
Well you can lead a horse to water....
Ridin' with Biden
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
The articles describe clear examples of lynching. Obvious cases. Yet you claim there is not data.
Well you can lead a horse to water....
No, it doesn't. It absolutely doesn't. From the article:
The NAACP defines lynchings as “the public killing of an individual who has not received” due process under the law.
By this definition you can attribute murders in NYC to lynching. Or does the victim have to be black each time?
Is it any time a black person is killed (and black only) there is a suspected lynching? If that was the case, don't we already have laws against murder on the books? What good does this do?
If it is not a lynching, then the definition being so liberally applied here is worthless.
This is one of those "obvious cases" you mention:
Raynard Johnson was found hanging from a pecan tree in his front yard in Kokomo, Miss. The Mississippi Bureau of Investigation called the hanging a suicide, according to records. But his family believes Johnson was lynched, Jefferson said.
Oh yeah, real obvious. No proof, and the MBI says it was a suicide, but its somehow obvious that they were lying. And you have proof, right? Err...no, sorry. We just know it. But the people calling the 2020 election a fraud are crazy, by the way, for the exact same belief. Or Florida hid COVID data. Or...
You're a sham.
What stocks are tanking.....the guy is nuts. Market is up double digits last two years.
Let's read what the law actually does --- rather than the tiny snippet you cut and pasted from the NAACP. Every murder is not a lynching -- the murder must involve a hate crime. A robbery where a black guy kills another black guy is not a hate crime.
The Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act, which Congress passed on March 7, enables the prosecution of crimes as lynchings if they are done during a hate crime in which the victim is injured or slain.
The new law carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison and fines for anyone conspiring to commit an act of lynching that causes death or injury.
All I did was show what the NAACP defined as lynching. That's it - from your own article.
You still haven't proven that lynching is a problem anywhere. All you're doing is trying to redirect towards the "law".
Just curious, but what is the maximum sentence when you murder someone? Is it less than the new "lynching" law?
Murder is typically handled by the state. Hate crimes and now lynching are handled by the Feds. There are numerous examples of murderers being given state sentences of less than 30 years. Now they can serve a 30 year term (maximum) in federal prison (on top of the state prison) either serially or concurrently if convicted of a federal lynching crime. Two different courts and systems.
I didn't ask you if there were cases of people getting less than the maximum for murder. I asked you what the maximum was.
If the maximum for lynching is 30 years, that doesn't mean everyone supposedly guilty of this crime will get 30 years. More probably people will also get less. As for two courts and systems, it really doesn't matter. You can only be tried in one place.
So how does this law add to the severity?
And again - you still haven't proven that lynchings are even a problem that need to be addressed (this is not saying that a lynching, should it occur, is not a problem). How many lynchings in 2021? Not suspected lynchings, not believed lynchings. How many, GWB?
You can be tried in state court for murder and then tried in federal court for hate crimes. There are many examples of this -- including cops who killed minorities. What do you mean by "You can only be tried in one place." -- this is obviously false.
The new law opens the door for federally prosecuting murders for lynching even after they are released from state prison for murder.