Hate crime laws do what?

[Futuramatic]

This is an INQUIRY on my part. No flames please, as I am trying to find information.

What exactly do hate crime laws do? How do they impact a murder for instance? Assume it is racially motivated. What would be the effect? What do hate crime laws provide?

Again, I am uncertain as to their purpose, and would like some feedback.

 

[DanC]

Get votes. Nothing else

 

[DesignDawg]

I think hate crime laws tend to inflame matters more than they help anything. There certainly needs to be punishment for crimes, but punishing one crime more than another equally as heinous just because the motive may be different is ABSURD. If punishments were bad enough in the first play, there would be no need for hate crime legislation.

Ricky
DesignDawg

 

[PistachioByAzul]

Hate crime laws make the lives of people in special groups worth more than anyone elses. Basically it's just more feel good legislation from the people who do it best, the Democrats.

 

[Shuxclams]

It would be the same as "special circumstances". Meaning If I murdered someone in a fit of rage, then it would be murder in the first or second degree. If I planned to kill them and waited for them to come home and murdered them, then that is a special circumstance which is Murder in the First Degree with special circumstances, making them eligable for the death penalty in california, if I murder a black man because he is black that should be a special circumstance, if I murder someone who was gay because they were gay that also should be a special circumstance. Now the penalty for a special circumstance crime is much harsher than the "regular" crime. I don't understand why anyone would be against that, other than they don't think that gays, blacks, hispanics, etc... are as human as they are. or they just don't comprehend that "hate" to the point of death is the same as planning.



SHUX

 

[PistachioByAzul]

No reason for killing someone is a good reason. That's the whole point.

I don't understand why anyone would be against that, other than they don't think gays, blacks, hispanics, etc... are as human as them.

Ugh, don't make such ignorant implications.

 

[DirkBelig]

Hate crimes only exist for one reason: To criminalize THOUGHT!

ALL crimes are "hate crimes". If you beat someone up, drag them behind a truck, tie them to a fence in winter to die, etc., that's certainly not a sign of love.

What these horrible laws seek to do is divide us into "protected" and "oppresor" groups. If your white, male, straight, Christian and someone kills you, it'll never be hate, even if it was a black guy screaming, "KILL WHITEY!!!!" while he bashes your skull in.

However, if someone is gay, black, whatever and the attacker isn't, it'll prolly be called a hate crime and the penalties increased. Basically, politicians say, "Vote for me and I'll punish Whitey for ya!"

All men are created equal, but some will get special treatment.

Funny thing: The NAACP is running illegal ads (they're supposed to a non-partisan group) that try to imply that Bush killed James Byrd because he refused to be bulldozed on the issue. BUT...the NAACP wants a moratorium on executions so on one hand, they want stiffer penalties and on the other, the don't want those animal rat-bastards put to death for the heinous crime. Which is it? Huh?

If we're all people, we must NOT allow certain "classes" to become more "valuable".

 

[Futuramatic]

Okay, the reason I asked was this:

The dragging death in Texas (let's leave GWB outta this... I am not focusing on him). People screamed that there was no hate crimes law. What would that law have done in that instance? 2 of the 3 convicted got the death penalty.. I think the other testified, thus saving his butt from execution (I could be wrong). What else would this law have done?

Should this hate crime law be applied when a WHITE guy is killed because he is white? That would sure kill the "black rage" defense I have heard scattered around.

It seems that the law could not be applied uniformaly (sp). No offense intented to any minority, but it seems that blacks have these built in "excuses" for crimes because they are black. Would a hate crime law dispell these defenses?

 

[DesignDawg]

<< I don't understand why anyone would be against that, other than they don't think that gays, blacks, hispanics, etc... are as human as they are. >>

Way to give people the benefit of the doubt. Because people have different views doesn't make them racists, you nearsighted beautiful being.

Ricky
DesignDawg

 

[etech]

I think this may be interesting to you.

Larry Elder Black Racism

Hate crimes laws to me are a way for politicians to have something to point to and say &quot;see we did something&quot;.

 

[Shuxclams]

Futuramatic
Well according to the &quot;angry white men&quot; here at ATOT it would, but I don't think it would, last time I ever heard of a black man going on a killing spree of &quot;white&quot; folks was that mental patient in philly. Besides the point, a pre-meditated crime should be punishable with a heavier sentance, and that should include so called &quot;hate crimes&quot;.

DirkBelig,
You are the ultimate in retarded backasswards dipshiits I have seen short of H8tank.

EngineNr9,
Don't call me ignorant.

<< Hate crime laws make the lives of people in special groups worth more than anyone elses. >>

When you say crap like this, loser, get a life.




SHUX

 

[PistachioByAzul]

If you don't like being called ignorant than maybe you shouldn't be so quick to label people as racist.

<cut>

 

[Futuramatic]

I think everyone involved in this conversation should read the article etech posted. It give a unique perspective on this topic, from a black man none-the-less.

PLEASE PEOPLE!! No more flames (at least not personal attacks). This was meant to be a spirited debate, not a fist fight.

 

[Shuxclams]

<< Because people have different views doesn't make them racists, you nearsighted beautiful being. >>



And these are views you support?



<< Hate crime laws make the lives of people in special groups worth more than anyone elses >>




<< if we're all people, we must NOT allow certain &quot;classes&quot; to become more &quot;valuable&quot;. >>



It has nothing to do with making anyones life more or less valuble, it adds special circumstances to an already awful crime, read my post and please point out where it says, blacks, hispanics, asians women gays etc are more valuble then anyone else. :| why don't you fvck off and die while your at it.


SHUX

 

[Shuxclams]

<< maybe you shouldn't be so quick to label people as racist. >>




<< Isn't it hilarious how all the liberals, with all their preaching of love and equality are so quick to start labeling people and calling them names. >>


[/b]Look a$$wipe, where the hell did I call anyone a fvcking racist? I think its your own fvcking baggage and guilt and Liberal? HA-HA-HA-HA! Trust me shltstick I am not a Liberal in the sense you think of so you can fvck off and die too.


SHUX

 

[DanC]

Anyone notice what a lovely day it was today?

 

[MrChicken]

All hate crimes do is point out that the current laws are not strict enough. If they were strict enough, as in the Texas dragging case, then there is no need for a hate crimes law.

As examples:
battery: >1yr
Hate/battery: 5 years

see the problem?

IMHO, the punishment should be the same whether it is race/gender/sexual-preference related or not.

<Should this hate crime law be applied when a WHITE guy is killed because he is white? That would sure kill the &quot;black rage&quot; defense I have heard scattered around.>

I dont remember the specific case, but one of the first hate crimes convictions was a black on white case, where the black defendants were convicted of a hate crime. More interesting is if a same race murderer uses racial slurs during the crime, can they be convicted of a hate crime? Oh well, back to my original statement, IMHO, if the punishment is severe enough, there is no need for a hate crime law.


What is more important, IMHO, is leveling the way minorities are targeted and convicted and sentenced by the &quot;justice system&quot;. As long as whites are treated differently in the courts by judges, then it really doesnt matter much what laws are on the books, as far as racial fairness is concerned. Senytnces should be dealt out based on the case, not on the color of the defendants skin.

 

[etech]

Would another law change the sentence of the idiots in Texas who drug the black man to death? Would 20 more laws change their sentence. How about 40 or a hundred?

The 2 were sentenced to die.

End of story.


Can Shuxclams now be charged with a hate crime?

 

[PistachioByAzul]

<paste>
Isn't it hilarious how liberals, with all their preaching of love and equality, are so quick to start labeling people and calling them names.

 

[Futuramatic]

I can see my plea will most likely be ignored.

Shux

Not all hate crimes are premeditated. What do you do about the good ol' boys out drinking, who beat the hell outta a homosexual or a black person?

If a murder IS premeditated, then there is no need for such a law, except to put another label on the crime.

Are you suggesting another &quot;definition&quot; of felony murder? That I might be able to see, however, is it really necessary? Is someone going to be deterred from beating that black person because, as a hate crime, it carries an extra year or two in jail? Again, I am asking, not flaming

 

[JellyBaby]

Sheesh, people, order in the court! *bang, bang*

If this thread is an example of how people react to &quot;hate crime laws&quot;, then I say forget about them.

I believe DanC and etech are correct. An awful crime is an awful crime. And how to you determine when a crime is a &quot;hate crime&quot;? Who makes the determination? Cops? Judges? (gasp) Lawyers? Ugh.

If an orange man breaks into my home and I shoot and kill him in self-defense, do I suddenly get a &quot;hate crime&quot; stamp on my forehead, nullifying the self-defense reasoning and giving me the death penalty or life in prison? Pretty scary idea isn't it?

 

[DesignDawg]

<< More interesting is if a same race murderer uses racial slurs during the crime, can they be convicted of a hate crime? >>



INTERESTING INDEED. Very interesting. I definitely think they should, regardless of the race of the criminal involved. I don't know the laws on it though. I do DEFINITELY still hold that hate crime laws are a senseless cure for the SYMPTOM, NOT THE DISEASE. If punishments were strict enough in the first place, hate crime punishments would also, by virtue of being A CRIME would be bad enough. No, I do not think hate crimes should be considered special circumstances. A murder or assault is ALWAYS the result of the SAME THING. --Rage. And whether that rage comes from a prejudice or a lack of self-discipline or a bad home life doesn't matter. If the result is the same, the punishment should be the same. Simple.

Ricky
DesignDawg

 

[Tripleshot]

I thought the hate crime tag was to provide the courts with more leeway in prosecuting and exercising justice on perps who commit crimes with a specific malice of forthought in there criminal act. Didn't this come from the church bombings and swastika paintings on synagogue walls? I'm sure it has to do with giving prosecuters more ammunition to nail hate mongers and bigots.


Hmmmm. Might not be such a bad idea after all.

 

[Futuramatic]

That very well could be the reason 3shot. Does it make sense?

If I read your post correctly, you are saying that prosecutors are given this distinction as a means of prosecuting a criminal easier? Meaning they do not have to make as good of a case? Maybe I am misunderstanding your post, but that is what it sounds like. In that case, I disagree. A prosecutor should have to make his case regardless of the motive (motive by law is not an element of the crime). If your interpretation is that it should affect sentencing, I ask again:

Will it really make a difference? In a murder case, no, because the highest punishment is typically given. In lower crimes (battery)? Perhaps, but likely not since in the heat of the moment (or after 9 drinks) people do not often consider consequences.

 

[Shuxclams]

Futuramatic,
I am sorry if your thread went south on you, For me it would make a difference, if a black shot a white person while screaming &quot;die beloved patriot!&quot; then that would be a hate crime, if a strait guy goes to a gay bar and finds a gay guy and kills him then the guy went out of his way to kill someone based on their sexuality, I O.J. was waiting for nicole to come home and he slashed her throat that would be pre-meditated. IMO they should all be eligable for the death penalty. These 3 examples show a total and complete disregard for life because each example shows forthought of commiting that crime &quot;because&quot; each had a particular belief that was &quot;right&quot; in thier minds enough to take a life based on thier belief.

MrChicken,
I agree on some points with you and not on others. I think that alot of attention is given to the white black issue, most folks seem to think that blacks will get sometype of privilage that they don't have and therefore are against it. It just doesnt work that way, read Larry Elders article and see the facts he quotes, black against white crime is high, is it racially motivated? I don't know kinda hard to prove, just like pre-meditated murder, its hard to prove. Die Ni@@er! Die beloved patriot! Die Fa@@ot! would be a little easier to prove.



SHUX