News sources are reporting that the Oregon college shooter specifically singled out Christians to be killed.
Technically, is this sufficient to meet the definition of a “hate crime?”
yes, without a doubt
As I understand it–and accounts are being sorted out–no answer to the question “What religion are you?” resulted in someone not being shot.
I’m an atheist…and, yes, a crime based on an atheistic viewpoint would be a religious hate crime.
Damn that s.o.b. for giving atheists a bad name. All I can say is that most of us aren’t like that at all.
Most atheists aren’t maniacal mass murderers?
That’s not what I’ve heard.
I don’t know that the was an atheist. He self-described as “spiritual, but not religious”. But seriously, the guy was fucked up and I wouldn’t put him in any box other than “fucked up”.
There’s no such thing as an “atheistic” viewpoint, doesn’t exist. It is the absence of a viewpoint. If someone tells you they are an atheist it tells you no more than if someone tells you they are a theist. You need to know much more than that to understand what motivates them.
So lets just knock that silly line of thinking on the head straight away.
He may have been “anti-theist”, or anti-one specific flavour of theism, or communist, or anarchist or nihilist.
As to the OP, If he did choose who to shoot or not based on their religious affiliation then yes, clearly it would be a religious hate crime.
However if he was a grade one nutjob (official technical term) then I wouldn’t imagine his motivations are either logical or consistent no matter where they spring from.
Mentally disordered, attention seeker - if something else would have got him more attention he’d have done that instead. Must have been a tough call for him to go for Christian over white.
Maybe rather than a hate crime against christians, it was a calculated statement to add to his infamy.
I would like to hear about his first four days in that classroom. Perhaps some of the surviving classmates will speak to that in time.
But it’s not clear to me at this point that this was a religious hate crime.
The Klebold and Harris “She said yes” lies continue to be accepted as fact by a lot of people. Certainly would not surprise me if he decided that was a good way to get more attention.
But sure, if he specifically targeted Christians, I can’t imagine why it *wouldn’t *be a hate crime.
Why do you ask, Velocity? Are you looking for a “liberal hypocrisy” gotcha from someone?
I’m not disagreeing that this guy hated Christians. But it doesn’t appear that he singled out Christians. According to this source, he asked people if they were Christian to make an appeal to their belief in the afterlife.
He also apparently asked if they were “Christian, knew God, or had religion”. So if anything, he was targeting anyone with faith. Not just Christians.
It is clear that he hated just about everyone. He was a person full of hated, even towards himself. I think we should all just agree on this and stop looking for extra reasons to feel butthurt.
If someone had asked Muslims or Buddhists or Shintoists, etc. to identify themselves and then killed them, though, I think the motive would have been regarded as quite clear.
So to be clear, you’re not asking if this was a hate crime, you’re asserting it.
Not if that someone was a self obsessed narcissist and quite obvious nut job.
Really, there’s enough grief in the world without trawling around for more.
'Splain? I don’t recall anything of this kind from Columbine.
The mother of a female student killed at Columbine was told by some of the witnesses that Klebold asked her if she believed in God, then killed her. She’s made a ton of money off the story between a book and an upcoming movie (though I don’t doubt she believes it occurred).
Unfortunately, the girl who was hiding under the same desk as the one who was killed says it never happened, and none of the supposed eyewitnesses were anywhere near the library (IIRC) when she was killed.
Oh. [insert animated rolleyes smiley here]
Thanks.