Hate Crimes

[VanillaGorilla]

those that are against abortion but in favor of the death penalty, it must all be in the timing.

The thing is most people who are going to get the death penalty have done some pretty horrific things. Some people view it not as punishment but protection. If the guy manages to get out of jail he will prob. kill again.

[size]

Bump for an old discussion

[Y2Jversion1]

As mentioned earlier - A crime is a crime - whether driven by hate, greed, lust, or whatever - it's still the same - a crime.

In fact, that label (Hate crime) is biting people in the ass now. Now if anything happens, baam, pull the race card to try and get an easy off, even if the party crying 'hate crime' is guilty.

Anyone see the South Park episode where Cartman gets accused and jailed for a "hate crime" against Token? That show's the best because it shows how flawed and "pussified" our North American social system has become.

[Jayhawkk]

It comes down to motive because motive plays a part in the punishment.


Would you agree shooting your wife's lover when you caught them in bed together is different than shooting a guy because he's gay?

Both are murder. However, under US law they are different in their punishment.

[size]

Would you agree shooting your wife's lover when you caught them in bed together is different than shooting a guy because he's gay?

The crime is still the same, murder. Hate/anger/etc is still the driving force for the action, so if the driving force is the same should they not be treated the same?

Example A:
Mr.A catches his wife having sex with a man. He is angry at the action of the man and kills him. Murder.
Example B:
Mr.A sees a gay man with a man. Jo is angry at the action of the gay man and kills him. Murder.

[CDB]

It comes down to motive because motive plays a part in the punishment.

Would you agree shooting your wife's lover when you caught them in bed together is different than shooting a guy because he's gay?

Both are murder. However, under US law they are different in their punishment.

True the law treats them differently, but I disagree with that distinction. Or perhaps I should say I don't think it's the correct distinction. I would say the question should be: Is there a difference between killing someone because they are gay or killing someone because you feel like it, or killing someone because you want their money, etc.? That is, is there a discernable difference, or one that matters, between murders that are not crimes of passion?

If that's the question then hate crime legislation is self defeating. If you want people to stop hating each other and to value each other equally it is contradictory to enact a law that will put a higher value on one person's life than another based on the same arbitrary criteria upon which people discriminate now. And that will be the end result of such legislation. I see no difference between two idiots randomly killing a guy and lashing him to a fence and the same idiots deciding to do the same thing to a gay guy. Both acts are equally arbitrary and brutal and deserve the same punishment. Malice and brutality towards other people for any reason is just that. They don't need their definitions parsed for reasons of political correctness.

[glenihan]

the government shouldn't punish you for what you think ... if they are going to punish the action that's one thing but to punish someone for their thoughts is unconstitutional in my mind

[OmarJackson]

the government shouldn't punish you for what you think ... if they are going to punish the action that's one thing but to punish someone for their thoughts is unconstitutional in my mind

so are you saying that someone that accidentally runs over and kills a kid playing in the street should recieve the same jail sentence as someone who premeditated it and purposefully ran down and killed a kid?

[glenihan]

Omar there's a difference between intent to commit a crime v motive for that crime

[CDB]

so are you saying that someone that accidentally runs over and kills a kid playing in the street should recieve the same jail sentence as someone who premeditated it and purposefully ran down and killed a kid?

No, he's saying that one arbitrary and assinine motive is the same as another and hsould not be treated differently by the government. The examples you and Jay presented were off point, because there's a difference between an accidental killing, a crime of passion killing and a premeditated murder. In that latter category, premeditation, he and I are saying there should be no distinction drawn between motives. One, such a law would be applied unequally across ethnic lines and thuis racist in itself. Derrivative of that it places a higher value on some lives than others. Two, it punishes thoughts. Three, it parses premeditation when it shouldn't. There is no more or less justified reason for killing someone in cold blood. Doing it to collect the insurance, because they are gay, because they called you gay, because they are black or white or yellow or whatever is irrelevant. There is no 'slightly more justifiable' reason for killing someone in cold blood.