Hate crime laws -- do we need them?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
This was a recent debate that I remember was started anew back when that man was dragged to death in Texas. Everyone started clamoring for hate crimes legislation, and it was also a central theme to the murder of that gay guy in the Midwest.

My feeling is that does the motive for the murder really matter all that much in these cases? First degree murder is first degree murder, whether it is motivated by racial hatred, religious hatred, or just a general disregard for human life. Does the death of a black man at the hands of a white man mean more than the death of a white man by the same murderer?

I can understand legislation that plugs a hole and increases the penalty in certain cases that might otherwise allow a racist criminal to escape with a light sentence, perhaps assault with minimal physical injury (not battery). Murder, however, is already punishable to the maximum extent allowed -- how do you further criminalize it?

Anyway, I just wonder what others think of that.
 
M

Marty

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
1,534
0
0
No we don't. Murder is murder, no matter who you kill. It doesn't make sense to punish the death of a minority more severely, that is equivalent to placing more value on their life. I think its wrong.

Marty
 
E

extra

Golden Member
Dec 18, 1999
1,947
7
81
murder is murder, no matter why/how/what
i mean, think about it...all murders are a result of "hate" right?
...so isn't "hate crime" is kind of redundant.
 
Y

Yeeny

Lifer
Feb 2, 2000
10,848
2
0
Hate crime legislation AFAIK is not just for violent crimes. It is also to help deter groups like the KKK from doing the cruel things they do, or at least make it easier to prosecute them after the fact.
 
B

Blain

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
23,643
3
81
Can anyone really determine what motivates people to commit crimes?
How far will this intrusion into the mind of a criminal go?
Just about every law is a response to an "act" not a "thought" or an "intent".

Where and who will draw the line at what "thoughts" are criminal? :Q
 
kranky

kranky

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
21,019
156
106
I think blain has touched on the problem. Hate crime laws are just "thought police" - a dangerous thing.

It is not a good idea to be able to convict people of crimes based on what someone decides a person was thinking. It's then a small step until punishment becomes out of proportion to the actual wrong that was committed.

There is no need for hate crime laws, and I think they will be eventually overturned as unconstitutional.
 
D

Dan

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,080
0
0
Like someone else said, murder is already murder, etc. We most certainly do not need "hate" crime laws. (Ever notice how unevenly the existing ones are applied?)
 
ElFenix

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,405
8,585
126
i think that juries whoa what are all these buttons up here?!? anyway, that juries should decide whther to give a harsher punishment based on motive, that it shouldn't be legislated. of course, harsher penalties should be for violence of the act. the dragging death and the one in wyoming were extremely violent/torturous, so they should be punished harder for that, and maybe for motive.
 
J

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
"Hate crime laws"? Geez haven't these nutcase politicians got anything better to do? Making up a new title for an old criminal activity, spending god knows how much money "researching it" and force feeding down Joe Q. Public's throat is a dis-service to us all.

Also I agree with kranky. :)
 
vi edit

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
Many of you are thinking soley of murder. I'm pretty sure that murder is a very small percentage of the total amount of "hate" crimes. It's just that they receive the most amount of attention.

I'm personally for them. If somebody has a problem with homosexuals, and he runs up and spraypaints "god hates fags" on a gay persons house, then it's more than a simple vandalism case, and should be treated with more stiffness than a normal vandalism case.

It's things like this, that far outnumber violent hate crimes that I believe require some extra punishment because of the deliberate intent to strike out at a minority or whatnot.

Just my $.02
 
J

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
<< If somebody has a problem with homosexuals, and he runs up and spraypaints &quot;god hates fags&quot; on the persons house, then it's more than a simple vandalism case, and should be treated with more stiffness than a normal vandalism case. >>

What do you mean &quot;more than a simple vandalism case&quot;? Had &quot;god hates fat boyz&quot; been the message (and assumming the homeowner is obese), how should the courts treat that case? Add $500 to the fine because of obvious anti-flab sentiment?
 
vi edit

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
I didn't relay the message well. I edited it for readability.

What I'm saying is, if somebody has the intent of &quot;attacking&quot; someone because of race/sexual orientation, it should be treated different than a random case of vandalism.

Lets put it this way, lets just say you were black. If some kid came by and spraypainted &quot;JellyBaby has sex with goats&quot; how would you take it.

Now, still supposing that you are black, what if that same kid came by and spraypainted &quot;die great person&quot; on your front door? How would you react to that?

Don't you think that it should be treated different?

I do.
 
P

PistachioByAzul

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,132
0
71
Now, still supposing that you are black, what if that same kid came by and spraypainted &quot;die great person&quot; on your front door? How would you react to that?

How do you know he really hates black people? Racial slurs are often used as insults, the people who say them don't necessarily mean it. The kid vandalized your front door, that's all that matters.

Hate crime legislation is just more feel good liberal BS.
 
vi edit

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
are the people who are saying that we shouldn't have hate crimes white males?
 
K

Kjazlaw

Senior member
Feb 18, 2000
603
0
0
no. here's one Japanese male against hate crime legislation. it's nothing more than a form of censorship. bringing this hate garbage in is way too subjective. what if i spray paint &quot;die awesome people&quot; on a white person's house? vandalism is vandalism. (murder is murder, violence is violence, etc.) all it takes is a lack of respect for the victim. what causes this lack of respect is not up to us to decide.
 
J

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
<< Lets put it this way, lets just say you were black. If some kid came by and spraypainted &quot;JellyBaby has sex with goats&quot; how would you take it.>>

I would underline it. Then I would wonder how they found out. :)

It is impossible to accurately judge a &quot;hate crime&quot; as a &quot;hate crime&quot;. I for one would not entrust the police or judges to do so. A crime is a crime. A law is a law. Punishment should fit the crime. Punishment should not be changed based on the whims of lawyers and judges and certainly not politicians.
 
U

Underclocked

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,042
1
76
The whole point of MOST laws nowadays has nothing to do with anything other than lining the pockets of lawyers. This will continue to be the case until we make it impossible for lawyers to create laws.
Something terrible wrong with that situation, lawyers creating laws is like a funeral director killing people. Good for business.
 
dabuddha

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
i like what Dr. Laura said
about how our society charges criminals with &quot;attempted&quot; murder
why should the charge be less just because the person didn't succeed in killing the other person? :)
 
B

BlkDragon6

Senior member
Jan 7, 2000
270
0
0
Man shoots another person, kills him, can be hit with the capital punishment.

Man shoots another person, same intentions to kill this person, paralyzes him for the rest of his life, doesn't get hit with capital punishment.

Same motives, same capabilities of killing, and different punishments. Something to think about.

I wonder how off topic I am.
 
B

Blain

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
23,643
3
81
BlkDragon6,
In a way, you are not &quot;OT&quot; at all. You point out how (for the most part), society punishes the &quot;act&quot; and not the &quot;intent&quot;.
I say &quot;for the most part&quot;, because for instance, if you send a threatening letter to the Pres!dent of the United States, you will be punished for your &quot;intent&quot;. Even though you did not carry out any &quot;act&quot;, it makes no difference in this case.
 
B

brandc

Senior member
Nov 28, 1999
661
0
0


<< Three white Michigan youngsters hitched a train-ride as a teenage
lark. When they got off the train, they found themselves in the wrong
urban neighborhood, surrounded by a gang of armed black youths.
One of the white teenagers, Michael Carter, aged fourteen, was killed.
Dustin Kaiser, aged fifteen, who was brutally beaten and shot in the
head, eventually recovered. The fourteen-year-old girl (whose name
has been withheld) was pistol-whipped and shot in the face after being
forced to perform oral sex on her attackers. Though the six
African-Americans responsible for the deed were arrested and convicted, their attack was not prosecuted as a hate crime. More to the point, most of the nation never knew that the crime had taken place. >>


http://www.frontpagemag.com/dh/2000/david07-13-00.htm

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom