The reason there are "hate" crimes is to add an extra level of punishment to an existing crime statute. So if you beat up someone and would normally face a maximum penalty of 2 years (for example), tagging it as a "hate" crime allows extra punishment.
Why do we need extra punishment? Just prosecute the crime - seems silly to tack on hate - as an additional measure to prove. A crime is a crime, seems stupid to me to say "Hate crime" if you beat someone up that is assault - what does it matter if you hate them or their culture - seems excessive and overly judicious to me. DD
If the sole or compelling reason you are the victim of a crime by a person of another race is simply because you are white, you don't think the perpetrator deserves a harsher sentence than is legally permissible without the hate crime add-on?
I have seen no reasonable argument that would make me think just because it is driven by hate would require you to be sentenced longer. I mean a crime is a crime, it is not ILLEGAL to hate something, or someone, or anything. Seems excessive to me. Assault is assault. DD
an assault on a person because of their race/gender/orientation can be a threat to others of that race/gender/orientation. So it's a greater crime. It a crime against more than the individual involved.
Posting a source is basic etiquette on this board. The fact that you refuse to post it is indicative of how much of a garbage post you've made. If it happens every day why are you posting three year old photoshops from an Internet hack? Riddle me that one. You people think all cases of discrimination are racial hysteria. Boring.
Thank you. Case 1: I'm at a sports bar. Zradic and I are drinking. We argue about the Rockets and he beats me up b/c I don't want them to make the playoffs and he is a DMo fan. Zradic is prosecuted but I testify on his behalf so he just gets probation and the Rockets make the playoffs anyway. Case 2: I'm at a sports bar and Zradic attacks me and beats me up because I have no slavic blood. So now, society must consider that Zradic is a possible threat to anyone with non-slavic bloodlines. Totally different animal at play here than a sports bar fight based on personalities and interactions. This is pretty easy to comprehend.
What is wrong with you? Why do you continue to hate students... They are your doctors, lawyers, engineers, innovators and people you'll be looking to the next time you eff up. Hating on the educated youth makes you look dumb. Especially considering that you had to dig up an old article.
I used to agree with you here. That there shouldn't be an add-on for someone murdering a person. Isn't murder bad enough? But my thinking is that the hate-crime is also meant as an act to intimidate a group as well, and strike fear in them - so the add-on is justified because of that. The hesitancy I have is that it's hard to know if someone committed a crime out of hate unless there is very tell-tale evidence.
If someone kills a gay person and writes epitaphs all around him - it's a clear message to the wider group. Technically, you could argue it would fall under a domestic terrorist act. Just like bombing an airport isn't just about killing the people with the bomb, but there is a larger crime being committed.
You could argue that the event qualifies as harassment/threats/etc - essentially another crime in itself - rather than call it a "hate" crime.
Justin Bieber has just put himself in the crosshairs of the SJW's. He has done the unthinkable. He has gotten a hairstyle with dreadlocks: The outrage, the name calling, the bullying and the racially-charged hysteria by the racist SJW's has begun. What he is obviously doing is trying to create publicity for himself. This is a lot better than him street racing his expensive car at absurd rates of speed or publishing naked selfies, that is for sure. But the SJW racists just cannot restrain themselves from missing an opportunity to become hysterical and make a scene. Clearly, they have not here. And Justin is ringing the cash register to the tune of their selfish wailings. The joke's on you, fellas.
Sure - that's all semantics. The point being that when someone is committing a crime with the additional intent of intimidation/harassment there should be some sort of additional penalty. I am not sure what is wrong with calling that extra a "hate" crime as it does have to do with hate, but I am not particular.
