Portland Police Tell LGBT Couple to "Ignore" Man Yelling Homophobic Slurs at Them

Comments

2

It's possible for straight people to be the victims of anti-gay hate crimes. It's about the animus of the perpetrator, even if they attack someone not of the group they're targeting. As many Sikhs are painfully aware, the people who commit hate crimes aren't usually that good at identifying their targets.

3

Although I rarely do this, I feel like siding with the police on this one. The first incident wasn't one they were called to, they just happened to be passing by. They separated everyone and it appeared over. They still keep it on record though, so when they were called out there the next time, it's escalated and now they're going to take statements.

They are right, that you can't charge someone just for being mean to you. That goes both ways of course. You can be as mean as you want to them too, as long as you don't break any laws.

Too bad they didn't get video of the car speeding towards them. That could at least be a traffic violation and a ticket for reckless driving or endangerment.

4

I want a "gay pride-ass bitch" t-shirt.

5

Ah. Yes. Our name-changing shit-for-brains Troll is back.

No context? Look, you desperate for attention, gonorrhea sore, sock-puppet pile of shit, the context is a video of a dude threatening two strangers for the crime of existence.

This is a case where the internet shame machine is entirely justified.

Now go get a Mountain Dew and slime back down to your moms basement. I’m sure there’s some Manga out there for you to furiously jerk off to.

8

Yawn. I've ignored anti-gay verbal harassers throughout my life. Just move on and leave the cops to more pressing matters.

Save your energy and activism for the political arena.

10

Perhaps you more bus missed the part where he threatened them.

"He got out of the car and said something about 'Beating the shit out of fucking dykes,'"

So. But sure. Just wait until this shit bag does what he says and attacks somebody. This coming from the same sort of cowards who see a Muslim or black person at a park bench and immediately want them arrested.

11

Seems like PDX, like many places in america these days, has a pwt problem; a poor white trash problem. And poor refers to morals as well as finances.

America has too much pwt currently and that rot needs to be cut out.

13

@12: Honestly surprised no one pointed that out yet.

If you willingly walk over to someone, it is easy to make the case that you did not feel threatened, did not feel the need to defend yourself, and that you in fact were looking for a confrontation.

At least that is what the lawyers will say.

15

Lot of talk, not a lot of action. Where I grew up we call those dudes punks.

16

Placing my bet the dude has a domestic violence record if you look him up. They usually do.

18

@5

Who's that? Is it muffy?

19

@14: Or you could just read the article.

20

Teddy is considering a retort about how his ass being thought of.

21

@12 No, walking up to someone who is threatening you does NOT mean you give up your right to self-defense (even though some idiot courts and juries might find it so - as a result of their own blinders). A person, in no way, has a right to attack you BECAUSE you walked up to them and tried to reason with them - or spoke with them.That person is responsible for their own behavior. Speech is not an excuse for violence.

@3 You are incorrect here, too. You don't need a video of someone trying to run you down with their car in order to report it to the police and for the police to take it seriously. This is GREATLY illegal. Plus, the man's additional behavior, in and of itself, DOES constitute harassment - which is ALSO illegal. Furthermore, he couples his actions with their identity as LGBTQ and ALSO as women. He tells her that he can beat her up because she's a woman.

So the police officer's response here seems to way off. I'm not sure exactly how he's supposed to handle it - but he's not correct what's he doing or how he's treating it.

That being said, in the 2nd incident, when the cop says, how does he know you're LGBTQ - it's not clear in the story what, exactly, they communicated to this new policeman at that situation. So, consider the possibility that they didn't clearly communicate something to him about the prior situation. Or he really didn't follow her story - he's just coming into this cold. But again,, they may have - the story, as written, doesn't tell us.

Because - @2 - agreed you don't have to be a member of a given group to be victimized by a hate crime. It's moreso about the perception of the perpetrator. And, this includes situations where they're mistaken about the person's "identity" (for example, a man calling a darker woman "a sp*c" "hey senorita," even though they're not latino) - as well as situations where they're attacking a person as "an ally," let's say (for example, going after someone as a "n**ger-lover").

That being said, there are all those other situations where they don't couple their behavior with these terms or words. For each of these incidents where they do, as in the case of this man, there are 10 million more where they don't. And there are those situations where they involve members of minority groups - or bring them into their relationships in some way - so they can hide the reasons they are harassing or harming another person/s (i.e. because their bigotries).

22

@19: You're dumb.

23

@22

I'm probably dumber, because he suckered me into rereading the post, which of course says nothing about whether walking over to someone is typically interpreted as a sign that you have ceded your right to self-defense by becoming an aggressor or a mutual combatant.

24

@21 That being said, it's a judgment call, what they chose to do. If someone tries to run you down with their car - might be best to just try to get their license (and in this case, they had the address) - and just call 911. What if she went up him - and while they were unloading their vehicle, he pulled out a gun? You're dealing with people who are angry and disturbed - not rational. I think they were quite brave - and I can't get the video to load - so I'm just going by the report.

26

@9: Oh, I meant to say anti-gay harassment against me. Not that I would expect you to believe that.

27

Officer is correct, just being mean, and vulgar isn’t a crime.

She chooses to confront him, she’s choosing a course of escalation, and better be prepared for a potential fight. The social contract of men not hitting women doesn’t exist, so women better be ready to go toe to toe with a man.

Interesting thing is the further away from someone yelling bullshit you get, you begin to not hear them.

Our community doesn’t need to be coddled. The officer did the right thing.

28

Threats of physical violence can degrade your quality of life, especially when they are coming from your neighbor, because you cannot avoid them and they know where you live. These women have a right to live in peace - or at least to not have their personal safety threatened by bigots - in the state of Oregon. As long as their actions are not treated with the seriousness that law requires, the aggressors are the ones being coddled.

29

@28 She walked up to him, not the other way around.

If they feel unsafe then they need to own and carry a firearm for self defense. Or pepper spray if you’re down with a less effective self defense tool.

The guy said shitty things. You walk up to him you’re walking into his court, and you better be ready if shit goes south.

30

WTF people. Harassment is a crime. Threats of violence towards a particular minority group deserve more investigation by the police than just "play nice and get along". If someone is threatening bodily harm the police should investigate. Imagine how that would look: Oh yeah police chief he threatened them but we told them to ignore it. We didn't even talk to him or check him for outstanding warrants. How was I to know that he was going to kill them?" Pull your head out of your asses.

30

"At least that is what the lawyers will say."

HAHAHA. Yes. You'd know. Where did you get your law degree Teddy?

Ohhh. That's right you supposedly work for an "insurance company."

And by "work" you mean "post uninformed stupid shit all day long."

31

@29 Do you stupid fucks even know how to read? The harassment started when the shit bags you feel compelled to defend were in a moving vehicle which then puled over in front of the victims.

Make up your minds you assholes.

Half the time you whine about how liberals are pussies and then when liberals stand up for themselves you're all "Hey! These Libtards just went looking for trouble!"

32

@29, It's pretty twisted that you think gun violence is a better way to resolve conflict than people being held accountable for their unlawful actions

33

@31 Some Liberals are pussies. All Leftists are pussies.

They pulled up in front of the so-called victims because apparently that’s where the friend of the degenerate windbag lives.

They could have just told the guy to fuck off and continued on their way. It would be nice to have footage from beginning to end.

Listen, if you think every word a person sends out their mouth about LGBTQness is somehow violence and a hate crime, get a grip of yourself.

I’ve had situations where I’ve been called “you fucking dyke” by a passing car full of guys. I’ve been physically assaulted. I know the difference.

Like I said, you feel in danger enough there’s a solution for that, it called a fucking HANDGUN. Get one, and stfu.

35

@32 It’s twisted that you think LGBTQ people should respond to violence with effective self defense.

Mind you this situation was not a case of violence. It was certainly mean.

Fellow LGBTQ people, legally arm yourselves with self defense tools such as pepper spray, fighting skills, and even a handgun. You are responsible for your safety. Not the police. Not your neighbor. Not your elected officials. It’s all on you.

Don’t let these Leftists victimologists decide whether you walk around able to defend yourself or not.

Is my LGBTQ family worth fighting to defend when called upon. Hell YES. And it’s within my legal right to do so.

36

@32 “It’s twisted that you think LGBTQ people should NOT respond to violence with effective self defense.”

Be nice to have an edit button on here.

37

I guess it's a matter of perspective, but from my experience the kind of people who need to carry a gun to feel safe are the biggest pussies on earth. The good news is this isn't the American frontier. We can use the law to resolve disputes now, rather than killing people willy nilly.

38

@33:

I'm going out on a limb here and guess you're NOT LGBTQ, are you? So, what the fuck do you know about what constitutes "violence and a hate crime", having never, and being likely to never experience such violence and hate speech yourself?

39

38

I'm a transsexual. Are you saying cis and heterosexual people don't know what violence and hate crimes are?

Not every LGBTQ person agrees with Leftist bullshit.

I get why you would assume every LGBTQ person is a Leftist. I don't give you nor the Leftist movement permission to politicize my life.

40

37 I think it has more to do with both having one and making sure others know you have it. Basically talking about it all the time, or if they feel “naked” without a gun.

I have a friend who carries and didn’t mention it for years. No one blinked when he did.

38 They’ve claimed otherwise. I doubt I’d think very highly of that person but your subjective definitions of violence and hate crime don’t fly.

41

@37 So violence against LGBTQ people doesn't exist. Because it's not the frontier.

LGBTQ people who buy into your disempowerment are suckers.

Having the ability to defend yourself in the event of a violent attack is empowering. Why wouldn't it be. It's natural to want to defend your life and limb.

42

Best grow some thicker skin, folks. I grew up hearing a lot of ugly talk but it's not illegal to run your mouth like an ignorant SOB. If you run across one of these blowhards, just back away like you would from a rabid dog that you're not allowed to shoot dead (which would be a public service).

43

@21, 24,

It's definitely a difficult situation for the cops first on the scene. They don't exactly know what's going on, their primary duty is to calm everyone down and then get more information. Did they handle this one perfectly? Probably not, but it could have been way worse too. That said, I agree with your post @24. The women should have left the scene, called 911 and reported the attempted assault and harassment.

44

people who feel like they must be prepared to kill at a moment's notice are victimologists (lol good one btw) in its purest form from my experience

45

@44 Actually people who are prepared to defend themselves are the opposite of victims, they have chosen to not be helpless victims.

I get it rubs you the wrong way. Especially knowing there are LGBTQ people out there that believe in being equipped to defend yourself.

That's what's great about America, you can choose, like yourself, to be a victim, or you can choose to exercise your natural right to defend life and limb, and your constitutional right to carry a handgun as part of that defense.

46

@44 Bet you flipped your lid the other day when you read about the Ballard home owner shooting a suspect that broke into their house.

Must have been painful to read about someone choosing to not be a victim, and preserve their life and limb.

The good news is the LGBTQ community, as well as other communities such as the Black community are waking up to the fact that the State isn't going to save you, so you better be prepared, and ready to save yourself.

People ought to thank twice before breaking into a persons home. People ought to think twice before violently attacking another person, especially LGBTQ people like myself. Tell you what 9 times out of 10 the attacker wouldn't likely run into a LGBTQ person who is armed, but that 1 time out of 10 it's going to be a bad day for a gay basher. And it should be. People who violently attack other people have abandoned their opportunity in that moment to necessarily walk away from that attack intact.

47

@41: Daaaaang! You sound like you're itching to get in a gun fight when there are other options available.
I'd like to remind you that you live in Seattle, not Syria.
Oh and before you go all ballistic (Ha! "ballistic!") I'm a gun owner, and have been for over half my life, and I have my CWL.

48

@46: Holy crap you just high on the fantasy aren't you?

49

@47 that’s what I’m saying

@45 you seem unstable. If carrying a gun makes you feel safer then that’s your right honey, you do you, but the world is much less safer when people who would rather kill someone than press charges are packing heat.

50

@49: You and I, ( as is so often the case ) are in full accord.

51

@49 I don't carry.

52

@48 The fantasy of what?

I'm a transsexual. I've been physically attacked specifically for being a transsexual 6 times in my adult life. I know the difference between fantasy and reality.

I also know those 3-5 minutes-if you're lucky-it takes for the police to arrive on the scene feels like a lifetime when you have no way of defending yourself.

53

I don't have a problem with people waiting around for the State to come and save them when their life is on the line.

I simply choose to be prepared.

54

@51 and the world rejoices

55

@54 Autocorrect sucks. I DO carry. Guess I should stop posting for my phone huh.

Don't worry about me though, you get to remain a victim.

56

@51 & 53: Ok wait. You've been going on and on about being prepared includes being armed.........
But you don't carry..... ?
So my comment @ 48 was correct. Your whole "Home-invaders-robbers-gay-bashers-better-watch-out-I'm-armed!" is a fantasy.
Good, I'm glad about that. I mean I understand it, especially given your experience having been attacked, and I'm very sorry you went through that- it's fucked up, but I'm glad you're not galloping around Greenlake armed to the teeth looking for trouble.

57

You meant to type “I do carry”?

Like I said, you seem unstable. Good luck with all that.

58

@55: Cross post! Disregard my comment @56

59

@55: Well, I sincerely hope you never get to live out your fantasy of killing someone. Remember that you can't shoot someone because they're getting away, you can't shoot someone for stealing your stuff, if you do fire your weapon don't forget that that the bullet is going to keep going if you miss and if it hits someone else you're in a world of shit. Keep that in mind when you're playing out your street fighter scenarios in your head.
Good luck.

60

Roids, basically.

SIS, I’m genuinely not exaggerating or joking when I tell you watching the following will be as valuable as any other lesson you learn about combat.

https://goo.gl/qdXntu

61

@59 You obviously don’t know much about ccing. It’s called being aware of your backstop. There are a number of factors that come into play whether or not the round exits the perp.

A violent situation is dynamic, and there are a lot of variables unfolding within just a few short seconds. People really should make sure they train regularly so they are proficient.

Shooting someone while they are running away, in Washington State, is justifiable under certain circumstances. People should really know their local and state laws before ccing.

62

@61: LOL "perp" Listen to you. So adorable.
This ain't Florida. In Washington you have a duty to retreat, so no, you can't shoot someone if they're running away from the conflict.
Again Shirtless: Gun owner for more than half my life. Got my first CWL in 1990. Oh! And my father in law and brother in law were both state patrol! Oh! And the Husband shot competitively for years! And he's an NRA certified instructor! But thanks for telling me about, oh what did you call it? The "baaaahk stahp"? I'll be sure to let him know about that! I mean who knew?
Anyhoo have fun imagining how you're going to be fighting house to house in the hellscape of Beirut, sorry I mean Ballard! (So easy to confuse the two....) and hopefully you won't actually ever get a chance to shoot at somebody for real.

64

Why is anyone entertaining this

65

“This ain't Florida. In Washington you have a duty to retreat, so no, you can't shoot someone if they're running away from the conflict.”

You should have walked away from this conversation, because now I have to show everyone here you are full of shit, and don’t know what your taking about. If you do carry you better learn the fucking law, genius.

Wrong! You do NOT have a duty to retreat in Washington State. Washington State is a “stand your ground” State, not legislatively, but through court standing.

“The law is well settled that there is no duty to retreat when a person is assaulted in a place where he or she has a right to be.1  State v. Studd, 137 Wash.2d 533, 549, 973 P.2d 1049 (1999)”

And it’s been affirmed multiple times over the years.

I didn’t say you can legally shoot a person if they are running away from a conflict.

Your appeal to authority doesn’t mean shit. Why? Because you clearly have no fucking clue that Washington State is in fact effectively a stand your ground State. Court rulings are just as legit as legislative action. Sure, legislative action can neuter a court ruling, that is, if the legislation survives the WSC and/or SCOTUS.

In fact a few years back the legislature attempted to curb stand your ground here in Washington State and FAILED.

Just like your bullshit about knowing what you’re talking about FAILED.

You been carrying all these years and you don’t know what a back stop is. You clearly don’t know Washington State is a stand your ground State. Do you know what the 21 foot rule is? You know the difference between a clip and a magazine? You know the different between FMJ and Hydra-Shok JHP? Do you know what the reasonable person’s standard is?

Sure you’ll get back to me with your googled response...

66

@61 You have the nerve to label leftists "pussies"? You are a Vichy collaborator!

67

I never claimed anything close to you "giving up your right to self defense" if you approach someone. That is ridiculous.

I simply claimed that if you approach someone, it will be difficult to claim later that you feared for your life from them, or were only trying to get out of or defuse the situation. Lawyers thrive on that sort of ambiguity and doubt, that is all.

68

@65: Can civilians get Hydra-Shok JHP?

That shit is crazy.

69

@66 Is this the part where I declare “NO, I’m not a Nazi!”?

Then you come back and call me a Nazi again, or something along those lines. Then I respond back, “No, I’m not a Nazi!”

Anything right of a pussy Leftist is a Nazi? Well that still makes you a pussy.

And what’s the deal with you talking to Nazis?

70

@68 I question whether police should be allowed to carry hydra-shok. The purpose of the round is to maximize lethality. In a war setting it is banned, yet police in America are allowed to carry it.

71

@70: If memory serves, it was developed for hostage situations, so I can see why specialized units may have it available, but it does seem unnecessary for civilians and beat cops. Although, hollow points overpenetrate much less, so in a way do make sense for police to use in a way.

Then again, arguing on the relative lethality of bullets is kind of pointless. Bullets just kind of kill you.

72

@65: Ok, a lot to unpack.
1. Last night I felt bad about our interaction. I was thinking about your history, and the trauma you've been through and being armed makes you feel safer. So l got up this morning, fired up Slog, and came to apologize. Which I do. I shouldn't have been so mean, and I am sorry.

We misunderstood each other about you shooting someone who is leaving an altercation and I am glad to hear that I was wrong about that too. Thank you for the clarification. And thank you for all that follow up information! You must have been up all night.
I know, of course, what a backstop is, and from personal experience, that a bullet will keep on going until it hits something. Say, through the living room wall and on into the house next door. Let's just say that the owner of that gun, and all the rest of us present, will never forget THAT object lesson even after all these years. (Remember kids! Always treat a gun like it's loaded!) Thank god nobody got hurt.

As I've said I am a gun owner. What I am not is a gun enthusiast, so yeah I don't claim to be an ammunition nerd. I'm sure you know acres and acres more about it than I do, and I'm sure you and the Husband could have a long and involved conversation about it. He used be into reloading so I imagine there would be hours of casings this and grains of that. Me? I like the guns I like, and I like the guns I own, all Rugers, because I'm sentimental, (two of which have magazines btw) and when I carry, I carry my SP-101 because it's simple.

So, there you have it. We both own guns, we both carry them when we feel it appropriate, (you, one imagines MUCH more often than I do considering your history) and you know a shit ton about them because that interests you. That they don't interest me to the extent that they do you (or the men in my family) is fine with me.

73

@71 I agree, bullets do kill people.

It would be nice to see more a focus on development of a round that is more effective but less lethal.

74

@72 I'm a Beretta kinda person.

My wife loves revolvers, especially old school stuff. I swear to god she'd carry a model 500 if it was practical.

Would I prefer to live in a world where any tool of violence was not necessary. Absolutely. Shooting someone is a serious matter, and it changes both people. Not only because of the level of violence, even when it's self-defense, but more substantively in that moment a person comes to understand that not only are they equipped for that level of violence, but also capable of it.

75

@73: There is a lot of research going into such things (like the "Pogojet" gun), but obviously it is extremely hard to develop a general round that will stop people at range and up close without lethal force, and also very expensive.

Riot police have also had success with modified paintball rounds that contain pepper spray.

76

@74: Thank you for being so gracious, and I entirely agree with your last paragraph.

77

@75 I have carried and used pepper spraying 2 instances.

Once was late night in Northgate at QFC. I was shopping, and security was attempting to stop a guy who was trying to steal beer. He pulled out a knife. I walked over an doused him, well, and myself. It was like 1 in the morning.

He ran outside, and got hit by a car.

Officer at the scene asked me why I pepper sprayed the guy, and I said "He had a knife, and was lunging at people."

I think less than lethal force should be part of a persons overall self defense toolkit.

78

@76 Thank you for being so gracious.

79

@77: Damn, you have some bad luck, friend. I lived for years in inner city Baltimore, and I never had to use a weapon. Had to yell and threaten a lot though.

I had not realized this before, but people were really being dicks to you in this thread for no reason. Crazy how fast people turn on you when they assume you aren't "one of them." At least someone had the decency to come back and apologize.

80

@79 I don’t consider myself a victim, and I think that rubs some folks the wrong way.

I’m all about proactive self-defense. Only 2 of the times I was attacked the person made contact.

Never been attacked for being transsexual though. People either see me as a female or as a lesbian.

Every year there’s a trans Remembrance Day, never go to it. Trans people want to remember trans people murdered, make sure you don’t become a victim by being prepared. Some think I’m some violent crazed maniac because I believe a person has a natural right to use any force nevessar to preserve their life and limb.

I won’t be a martyr.

81

But really, after all this is the same advice that's been given to women for centuries when men make catcalls, obscene noises, and lewd remarks to them on the street.

I don't see how being gay makes harassment worse.

82

Purris I checked Linda Ronstand and even the cat of my husbands can mewling better than her!