Hate Crime Is Charged in Attack on Sikh Boy

NY Times ^ | May 26, 2007 | CARA BUCKLEY

[Gideon Reader]

Mr.Hunter,
In the South Pacific it may be, not necessarily, but, just may be somewhat less of a violent urban confrontation area, where young men gather together as predators against those who are not so inclined, i.e., willing to become gang members.
This is NOT a new phenomenon, but a persistent one. At least in North America.(the ONLY place I was born and raised)The South Bronx, then and I suppose now, a violent and hostile area in one of the five boroughs of New York city, where the residents are members of the lowest socio economic class and crime is high to the extreme.
(Not a place to build that lovely little 3/2 with a pool hideaway for you the missus and the kiddies.)
The ideology of Alamo defense, wherein the attacker is the attacked with a furious moment of overpowering and disproportionate violence, placing aside survival a la Masada is not what most young boys consider. And certainly NOT within the context of the time and place of the subject.
That was then. This is now.
To be attacked by four or five young men then, when the victim is a heavy set boy not yet fully grown, whose main interest was reading history and world geography and Jazz music results in the theft of a pittance and shame and humiliation; the frustration of helplessness. But borne with patience.

The same circumstances now pitting four or five young predatory persons against that boy now fully grown six foot one man, vastly experienced in face to face and physical confrontations and very, VERY well trained and knowledgeable of the law and it’s finer demands, and always armed, could find a number of persons no longer with us, or no longer having any interest in such pursuits.
Life is a wonderful teacher. What is more satisfying that a victim who rises to a point wherein the confidence of superiority liberates. I love the Second amendment. It is the equalizing guarantor of freedom. Caution: Do NOT slip on the brass.

[DieHard the Hunter]

Mate, I *think*? we are on the same page. You write:

> In the South Pacific it may be, not necessarily, but, just may be somewhat less of a violent urban confrontation area, where young men gather together as predators against those who are not so inclined, i.e., willing to become gang members.

You have just accurately described South Auckland. Manurewa is a particularly ugly part of town, particularly at nite.

> This is NOT a new phenomenon, but a persistent one. At least in North America.(the ONLY place I was born and raised)The South Bronx, then and I suppose now, a violent and hostile area in one of the five boroughs of New York city, where the residents are members of the lowest socio economic class and crime is high to the extreme.

I have a passing familiarity with what went on in the Bronx back then, thru my affiliation with the Guardian Angels. NZ is about 20-25 years behind America in crime trends, so what we have happening here and now is the same as what was happening say, 1975-1980 in New York.

The “No Broken Windows” concept hasn’t yet caught hold in NZ. But I attended a Neighborhood Support meeting tonite and I have been confidently assured that it will be Real Soon Now...

> The ideology of Alamo defense, wherein the attacker is the attacked with a furious moment of overpowering and disproportionate violence, placing aside survival a la Masada is not what most young boys consider. And certainly NOT within the context of the time and place of the subject.

Definitely not — exactly as you say. It is counter-intuitive for most people because nobody is programmed by default to do things that will guarantee that they get hurt. This goes against all of our survival instincts. It is also precisely why boxers eventually train full-contact.

> To be attacked by four or five young men then, when the victim is a heavy set boy not yet fully grown, whose main interest was reading history and world geography and Jazz music results in the theft of a pittance and shame and humiliation; the frustration of helplessness. But borne with patience.

I was bullied from age 8-13, and it wasn’t pleasant. I was slightly built at the time, but with similar interests to yours (my favorite brand of Jazz was “Swing”). What you wrote resonated with me because I felt much the same way.

> The same circumstances now pitting four or five young predatory persons against that boy now fully grown six foot one man, vastly experienced in face to face and physical confrontations and very, VERY well trained and knowledgeable of the law and it’s finer demands, and always armed, could find a number of persons no longer with us, or no longer having any interest in such pursuits.

I’m never armed (Guardian Angels by definition are unarmed) but now 265 lbs and a bit more difficult to bash around than when I was 105 lbs. I could never succeed against four or five simultaneous assailants, but I can guarantee that at least one or maybe two of them would meet me in the Casualty ward with permanent life-altering injuries — most likely to their knee joints, shins or insteps.

> Life is a wonderful teacher. What is more satisfying that a victim who rises to a point wherein the confidence of superiority liberates. I love the Second amendment. It is the equalizing guarantor of freedom. Caution: Do NOT slip on the brass.

My liberating moment was an epiphany, when I discovered that bullies actually don’t like getting punched in the mouth. Sometimes they might even cry...

I wish we had the 2nd Amendment here in NZ, it would make life much safer. Enjoy your Freedom, not all of us have it to the same degree. Keep yer powder dry, ay!

Check ya mate!
*DieHard*