Hate crimes legislation revisited

Epidemic · October 23rd, 2009, 08:22 AM

should hate crimes be treated any differently than crime crimes?

If I yell fag and beat up a gay stranger or if I beat up a stranger while saying nothing should the penalty be different?

**GroundZero3** · October 23rd, 2009, 08:27 AM

Hate crime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Toadman · October 23rd, 2009, 08:31 AM

A crime is a crime regardless of motivation.

Epidemic · October 23rd, 2009, 08:31 AM

Ok? yeah and?

**GroundZero3** · October 23rd, 2009, 08:36 AM

A hate crime normally singles out something in a person that you do not agree with and resort to violence towards a person. This is considered a personal attack and a motive for violence.

Your example is a poor one because it simplifies why someone would attack someone else. Beating the shit out of someone because they are gay and arguing with a guy and getting into a fist fight because he accidentally bumped into you or talking to your girlfriend are two different levels violence. Both cause damage to the victim, but a hate crime is attacking on a personal level

Quote:

The primary difference between these types of crime is the motive behind the act. While there are no single, comprehensive definitions for hate crimes and terrorism, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) uses these working definitions:

* Hate crime (also known as bias crime) is a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against a race, religion, ethnic/national-origin group, or sexual-orientation group

Read more: Hate Crimes and Terrorism in the United States - Hate And Terrorist Groups, Hate Crime Legislation, Hate Crime Offenses, Terrorism, Anthrax Hoaxes

Hate Crimes and Terrorism in the United States - Hate And Terrorist Groups, Hate Crime Legislation, Hate Crime Offenses, Terrorism, Anthrax Hoaxes

Epidemic · October 23rd, 2009, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toadman

A crime is a crime regardless of motivation.

I do have an exception to that statment, perhaps you would agree.

Grafitti

if I am tagging Bill loves Sue that is youthful indescression

however a Swastika with kill all __________ (pick you target group)!

the intent is to scare and the crime does not fit current tagging rules. It is more than simple vandalism. It creates fear disharmony at way higher levels in the community than simple taggings punishments.

Perhaps the same is true of assault or murder fueled by hate but I don't see it.

Creatures · October 23rd, 2009, 08:49 AM

hate crimes attacks everyone from that group which causes more harm than just the assault

Creatures

Epidemic · October 23rd, 2009, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GroundZero3

Your example is a poor one because it simplifies why someone would attack someone else. Beating the shit out of someone because they are gay and arguing with a guy and getting into a fist fight because he accidentally bumped into or talking to your girlfriend are two different levels violence. Both cause damage to the victim, but a hate crime is attacking on a personal level

You are over complicating things

Why you choose to wrongly beat the shit out of someone is irrelevant.

If I beat you because you are gay or if I beat you because you are an unprotected category of wierd or wearing bell a plaid shirt is absolutely irrelevant. They are all attacks on a personal level.

Now if I beat you after you instigate a fight we all can agree there are are mitigating factors that may be worthy of a lesser penalty.

The problem with hate crimes legislation AFAIAC is that they are on the way slippery sloap of thought police. If I were to get into a fight at a movie theater because someone shoved their way into line and when challenged they began shoving... My chosen words fired in anger and designed to hurt them could be used to jail me. so If I held my tongue and punch them I am more than likely let off with self defense. but if I know the chick I am fighting is, jewish, Gay, Fat, Black and wearing plaid and i call her a Mother F'n Black whore whale lumber jack. I go to jail.

How bout we just punish me if the assault was unjustified

if the assault had mitigating factors then we judge based upon those.

Now If I began instigated the fight by calling her a diamond merchant Mother f'n black whore whale lumber jack and she punched me...

I could see mitigating circumstances!

Epidemic · October 23rd, 2009, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creatures

hate crimes attacks everyone from that group which causes more harm than just the assault

Creatures

In a sense you are giving the protected group a higher value than general population... That directly infringes equal protection!

Killing a protected person actually yields higher penalties! Hence said person is more valuable.

**GroundZero3** · October 23rd, 2009, 09:08 AM

Generally if the hate crime charge is brought up, the jury has to be convinced that you set out to attack/terrorize that person (or group of people) based on one of the categories of the hate crime stature. If you get into a random fight in a bar and call someone a faggot, that isnt considered a hate crime. Its when when you have a past of anti gay behavior and it has been shown that you attacked that person based on their sexual orientation is when it becomes a hate crime.

We aren't talking about random fights that you have in self defense or out in public, these are planned attacks to hurt/terrorize a person or group.