Six Months Imprisonment For Hitting Someone With A Pack Of Bacon, Is That Too Harsh?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4653826/Racist-thug-hit-Muslim-teen-packet-bacon.html

While physical attacks of any sort should be condemned and punished, did this thug deserve imprisonment?

Interesting to note that it is reported that he was jailed for racially aggravated assault and then later the police vowed to crack down on race hate attacks.

Muslims are not a race.

[mikey4444]

As far as I can see, the sentence was entirely right.

[Barsel]

No, I don't think the sentence is too harsh. I'm not a Muslim and I don't wear Islamic clothing,but if someone came up to me and slapped a packet of bacon in my face, I would be quite happy for that person to get 6 months!

[anotheoldgit]

dannyk13

/// I did not say that Islam is a race. said that the attack was racial. ///

Please explain why this was a racist attack?

Is there proof somewhere that I have missed, that says he attacked the girl because she happened to come from a different race of people.

In his deranged mind the girl was attacked because he recognised her as Muslim, due I suppose by her dress and not by her skin colour.

[Mamyalynne]

I don't know all the law or the reason for the wordings, but these people do - have a browse it may help.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/racist_and_religious_crime/

[chelle7272]

A hate crime can be based on either race or religion. Sure the DM reported it correctly? ;)

[sp1814]

AOG

We've all given our responses - do you think the sentence was too harsh?

Or just about about right, or perhaps not long enough?

[anotheoldgit]

Islay

/// Are you saying then that they were justified in attacking this young girl because of what she was wearing? ///

I have never said anyone was justified to carry out such attacks no matter what they are wearing, but some white girls have been in some mainly Muslim areas.

If you had read my posts and not interpreted them into what you wished they had said. The girl was most likely chosen for the attack because the thug was upset at past terrorists attacks carried out in the name of ISIS, and he happened to have a bee in his bonnet, and that was the reason he chose bacon to attack the girl, knowing Muslim's hatred of pigs.

[Mamyalynne]

Strange he didn't chose a strapping bloke in his mid thirties isn't it?

[dannyk13]

Aog.I repeat read my link.

[Islay]

See again you seem to be justifing the attack by adding this little beaut of a quote
//no matter what they are wearing, but some white girls have been in some mainly Muslim areas. //
It appears that you are saying that as it has 'apparently' happened to a white girl because of what she is wearing then its tit for tat!
Pretty low in my opinion!

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814
I would wish to see all attacks on people or animals carry jail sentences or even worse, but now days such punishments are not allowed.

But one has to be both practical and even handed.

1/ Which has already been pointed out,the jails are overflowing already

2/ Sentences should be levelled at the seriousness of the attacks, a slap in the face with a pack of bacon, being amongst the least serious.

3/ Sentences should be equal for all, and judging by today's sentences there are plenty of examples where they are not, one being that women are treated more lenient than men.

[sp1814]

From your last answer, I'm guessing we are in agreement about this particular case, with the caveat that such sentences should be given out more frequently.

Sounds good to me.

[anotheoldgit]

Islay

/// It appears that you are saying that as it has 'apparently' happened to a white girl because of what she is wearing then its tit for tat! ///

"It appears" ?????????

Oh no it doesn't.

Why don't you scrap that crystal ball it's way past it's sell by date.

[naomi24]

No, it isn't too harsh. The man is an ignorant thug.

[sp1814]

AOG

You wrote:

//The girl was most likely chosen for the attack because the thug was upset at past terrorists attacks carried out in the name of ISIS//

I'll correct that:

//The girl was most likely chosen for the attack because the thug was upset at past terrorists attacks carried out in the name of ISIS, and he must've been pretty confident that a teenage girl would not be able to retaliate, as opposed to a big strapping bloke - because he's a coward"

I think there's a trend here with these thugs. They go for girls and women.

...apart from the bloke on that episode of '24 Hours In Police Custody' who randomly chose an Indian bloke to attack.

He waited for this chap to come out of a lift in a hotel in Luton and smashed him in the face with a fire extinguisher.

Did you see it?

The inside of the lift was covered in blood. I had to stop watching - it was too upsetting.

Oh, and the Indian bloke was a Hindu, not Muslim.

[Islay]

Well AOG I suggest that you are more careful in what you write, because is does look like you sympathise with the thug!

[mikey4444]

Naomi for BA.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

Add to it all you like sp, you are not telling me anything that I can't fathom out myself.

It is obvious that if a burly man attacks a girl, it is because he can't expect a retaliating attack.

Can't see the point of you introducing an episode of '24 Hours In Police Custody' doesn't add anything to the debate at all in my opinion.

And no I didn't see it.

[naomi24]

Crickey Mikey! I'm just about to pick myself up off the floor! ;o)

[anotheoldgit]

islay

/// because is does look like you sympathise with the thug! ///

"It does look like", "It does look like"????

What have I told you? Throw that damn crystal ball away, it's making you look silly.