[karajorma]

The reason for a separate law is because the word terrorism denotes a certain image to people. If you tried to charge people who committed a lynching with terrorism pretty much any lawyer could talk the jury out of it by going on and on about how the defendants didn't plant any bombs or blow themselves up.

The fact that so many people on this board still don't get the terrorising effect of a hate crime even after having it explained to them is why you need to make special provision for it under the law. Yes, all it is doing is giving another name to a crime very similar to one already on the books but that's not something wrong or unknown. There are plenty of crimes on the books that are simply more specific names for more general crimes. If you want to make the argument that the charge of hate crime is unneeded for legal reasons then you're also arguing against having a separate charge for crimes like embezzlement which after all is basically theft or fraud.

[Warlock]

I can see the reasoning behind it all, but I think the method is flawed. Unless of course it's a good thing to have to update the "Hate Crime" grand list every couple years.

Example: Typical white male has his car break down late at night and has to talk through an area of town that's mostly minorities. Call it a getto or what you will, that's not my point here. Now while walking to a gas station/payphone he's confronted by the local gang and gets his assaulted and or rubbed for being "In the wrong part of town".

If caught those that assaulted/robbed him get charged for assault and robbery.

Flip the same situation. Black/asian/Latino gets caught middle of the night in an area by a white gang of thugs. They get charged with assault/robbery AND have Hate crime as well.

Call it what you will, but it's a fact of life both examples will and have happened. In both examples if the victim were the "correct color" they'd more than likely have been left alone.

So my point is, where do we draw the line with adding "hate crime" laws and just having a judge use common freaking sense?

Honestly I think we're (U.S.) are far past lynching mobs. Not because people wouldn't do it, but because modern technology wouldn't allow it to get to the levels they used to when it was a problem. It's a bit difficult for a large group of people to maintain a normal lifestyle by day and lynch mob by night without getting caught. Then again I can very well be wrong, as I said, this is my opinion.

I just honestly think the more laws we add the more loopholes we begin to create. But then again, 90% (percentage randomly pulled from sky) of laws are written to help prevent the stupid from being stupid, and to punish them when they give in and be stupid anyways.

[karajorma]

I can see the reasoning behind it all, but I think the method is flawed. Unless of course it's a good thing to have to update the "Hate Crime" grand list every couple years.

Update for who exactly?

You planning on genetically engineering new minorities every few years?

[Warlock]

So you're saying that white people, wiccans, pagans, nerds, can't possibly be hated and attacked by anyone? Why do only minorities get special treatment? Equality ? where?

[Blue Lion]

So you're saying that white people, wiccans, pagans, nerds, can't possibly be hated and attacked by anyone? Why do only minorities get special treatment? Equality ? where?

Who said it was minority only?

Every law I see says "based on race". I don't see anything that says "unless you're white"

EDIT- 3 of the groups you listed fall under current hate crime legislation.

Whites for race, wiccans and pagans for religion.

Nerds is such a weird grouping I don't think it will ever be included (how do you define a nerd in a legal sense?)

[iamzack]

Also, if you look at the statistics, while a minority is less likely to be charged for a hate crime, they are also more likely to get a heavy sentence.

But typically, a gang made up of minorities isn't going to assault a guy because he's white. They're going to assault him because he looks like an easy target and like he might have something good on him. Sure, they might attack him because he's white, but whether they get charged with a hate crime or not, they are likely to get a pretty harsh sentence compared to a group of whites assaulting a black guy for the same reason (that is, because he looks like he has money.)

[Warlock]

Also, if you look at the statistics, while a minority is less likely to be charged for a hate crime, they are also more likely to get a heavy sentence.

But typically, a gang made up of minorities isn't going to assault a guy because he's white. They're going to assault him because he looks like an easy target and like he might have something good on him. Sure, they might attack him because he's white, but whether they get charged with a hate crime or not, they are likely to get a pretty harsh sentence compared to a group of whites assaulting a black guy for the same reason (that is, because he looks like he has money.)

Hence my entire point about not truely needing more laws and merely needing a more competent legal system. A crime should be dealt with on it's issues case by case.

[Blue Lion]

Hence my entire point about not truely needing more laws and merely needing a more competent legal system. A crime should be dealt with on it's issues case by case.

It is dealt with on the issues. A hate crime does not make a person more or less guilty. Most hate crime legislation takes the form of additional sentencing.

[Warlock]

  I just plan old fashion don't see the point. *shrug* Good thing I'm not in the buisness of making laws I guess I'm more of the thought that you are punished for the crime and your reasons for committing the crime effect the judge/jury's verdict. If assualts/murders/robberies are becoming more and more of a problem against all these various groups, just up the punishment for those crimes as a whole. God knows we could use less of them over all as much or more than less of them -agaisnt a certain list of groups.

[General Battuta]

But remember, hate crimes are targeted against specific groups, and that targeting is part of the crime.

It's not just a mugging when it's specifically targeted on a gay individual and he's beaten, humiliated, and called a fag. It's a mugging PLUS an act of terror against all the gay people in the community.

A mugging of a white male in which he's singled out for his race and told that whites aren't welcome would ALSO be a hate crime. They're just far less common.
 
So you're exactly right, the punishment should fit the crime. Which is why hate crimes get more severe sentences.

[Blue Lion]

The point is

"People who commit crimes against people based on their race/age/gender etc etc get more time"

There really is no hidden message or meaning.

If you beat the **** out of a guy because he's different, guess what? Hate crime.

[Warlock]

By that logic though we'll need to arrest thousands of middle school students.

[Blue Lion]

By that logic though we'll need to arrest thousands of middle school students.

Are these middle school students being arrested on assault or murder charges? No? Then what does any additional time they could get if they were matter?

[Warlock]

lol

Actually, from bits and pieces of news I've heard over the last few years, some have been arrested. Seems of late any fighting in a school gets the cops called instead of detention.

So then, if/when a child/teenager gets arrested for beating up the "different kid", and that difference applies to a listed protection under hate crimes, is it good that they too get a few extra years for it? Or does someone realize, "Hey,....**** happens?" and deal with the crime for what it is,..someone got assaulted?

No things would never get out of hand with legislation like this....

[Blue Lion]

lol

Actually, from bits and pieces of news I've heard over the last few years, some have been arrested. Seems of late any fighting in a school gets the cops called instead of detention.

So then, if/when a child/teenager gets arrested for beating up the "different kid", and that difference applies to a listed protection under hate crimes, is it good that they too get a few extra years for it?

Yea, yea it is.  If you're going to argue that they get charged as an adult for the crime, all the adult things come with it.

Or does someone realize, "Hey,....**** happens?" and deal with the crime for what it is,..someone got assaulted?

No things would never get out of hand with legislation like this....

I was unaware that bigotry qualified as "**** happens".

[Warlock]

ok better put as "People do stupid **** for all kinds of stupid reasons".  People are bigotted in thousands of ways. I just don't happen to agree that tacking on a few years for committing a crime to a "listed group". Doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, just means I don't agree with it.

But fear not. My lack of agreeing won't have any effect of the out come.

[iamzack]

Do you realize that you don't have to actually BE black/gay/etc to be assaulted for it? Like, assaulting and murdering someone because he LOOKS gay. He's not gay, but you still get the hate crime. See? It's not "they just happen to be special."

[Warlock]

Actually I would assume one would have to be black (at least in part) in order to be attacked for ,....being black.

But yes I can certainly understand that someone acting/looking gay might be attacked for it. Though I haven't heard of many cases of roaming anti gay lynch mobs in about 10 or more years.

[Blue Lion]

ok better put as "People do stupid **** for all kinds of stupid reasons". 

And if the stupid reason is "bigotry" you get extra years.

Just like if the stupid reason is "I was text messaging when I was driving" you probably won't be charged with 1st degree murder.

There is a scale, not only in the crimes you get charged with but even the sentences that come with them.

Bigotry just happens to get top billing. There are reasons that get you less time, this is a reason that gets you more time.

People are bigotted in thousands of ways. I just don't happen to agree that tacking on a few years for committing a crime to a "listed group". Doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, just means I don't agree with it.

There is no such thing as a listed group under hate crime legislation.

There is no race, age, sex, sexual preference or ethnicity "left out".

If someone beats you up because you're white, it's a hate crime.

If someone beats you up because you're a guy, hate crime.

If someone beats you up because you're straight, again.... hate crime.

[Warlock]

 

Ok my bad.....having heard all week about maryland adding Homeless to those protected by Hate Crime legislation I obviously became stricten with confusing stupidity.

The reports I heard made it seem as if it's "Minoritys, gay-lesbian, homeless, people wearing kilts, Trekkies, etc." Instead of race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation and NOW Homeless.


Argh. Remind me to stop attempting to think rationally after Weds while working 15 hour days .....