Why are some people "more equal" than others in the eyes of many of our legislators? The hate crimes legislation being considered offers a higher level of protection from crime to some of us, but not all. Doesn't this violate equal protection? If not, why not.
2007-05-04 15:53:49 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Additional note: My adopted son is black. I am white. We love him as dearly as our natural born children. We face some racism. Why must the law provide him extra protection? Without hate crimes legislation, it is still illegal to discriminate against him based on race, to hurt him or to kill him. Why is his life worth more than the lives of my other children? Why does the government value him more? I don't want to hear about previous discrimination or even people who still hate blacks. The law deals with them appropriately without hate crimes legislation. These laws promote racism.
2007-05-05 01:41:01 · update #1
I agree with you here. A legislation like that seems, for one, unnecessary in that it wouldn't have the effect of changing the severity of punishments for the offenders. Rather, it would just set the nature of their crime into a different category. Also, if it did change the severity, it would be unconstitutional. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment prohibits the state from granting special treatment or dealing out harsher punishments to anyone because of race, religion, sex, etc. I agree with you completely. Committing the crime in the first place should be more than enough to warrent punishment . We need to spend less time thinking of how to punish them and just punish them...
Regards, Siekuto.
2007-05-04 16:27:31 · answer #1 · answered by _ 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is flat out discrimination. All crime toward others are really hate crimes. Unfortunately, due to the hate against blacks during the civil rights issues helped lead to this.
Truly if you hurt another, it's really a hate crime. We should all have the same protection under the law.
The other issue is that hate crimes add more of a sentence to those found guilty. This just allows the states to obtain more money from criminals, for no real reason.
When you hurt another person it's from hate. How many people really hurt for love? No matter what the race is of either people, it should carry the same sentence. This would help to reduce all crime and keep people from feeling that they are either special or not treated fair under the law. This applies to Blacks; Asians; Muslims; Hispanics; and Whites.
2007-05-04 16:01:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Equal only counts if you have money or Sacred Cow status. That any one person or group is targetted over another has no bearing on right VS wrong -- it should be equally as wrong. Should I as a white man get murdered, the perp. if convicted would get 15 years and probation. If I as a black man or a gay man should get murdered, the perp would get 25 to life without possibility of parole. If I'm REALLY good looking and loved by everyone, I'm worth more than if I'm ugly and unmissed. Equal.
2007-05-04 16:10:59 · answer #3 · answered by Doc 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It probably does, however, the Congress passes lots of laws that are unconstitutional, like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act of 2006!
Someone has to bring it to the US Supreme Court! Until they do, they get away with murder. That is what they count on. Even if someone had an action, it is cost prohibitive and it would take years to work it's way through the system. That is what they count on as most are never taken to court.
2007-05-04 16:00:12 · answer #4 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Against the Law.... the problem with making laws is that to many inappropriate laws water down or make insignificant what empowers law.... murder, hurt, steal these laws have victims but when people start making into laws how to dress what to eat, where to live who to love.... all these laws do is detract from the actual purpose of law itself..
2007-05-04 16:19:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it doesn't. Many groups of people are singled out for acts of hatred. Those groups need more protection than others just to live a normal life. Sanctioning something as a Hate Crime means that it carries a more severe punishment, and acts as a deterrent for crimes motivated by hatred. In turn, this equals the quality of life for all individuals.
2007-05-04 15:58:22 · answer #6 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
It does not violate the equal protection clause.
These hate laws always state terms in a neutral manner.
If a white person specifically targets a black person they are guilty....If a black person specifically targets a white person they are guilty.....How exactly are some people not protected?
2007-05-04 17:01:30 · answer #7 · answered by Dr. Luv 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Some of our legislators are unprincipled, and therefore confused when it comes to matters of right and wrong! Usually liberals and other PC junkies are the worst offenders.
2007-05-04 15:59:17 · answer #8 · answered by oogabooga37 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. It's common sense, but that's the point. Politicians are sucking up to special interest groups to get the votes. That's the name of the game.
2007-05-04 15:58:29 · answer #9 · answered by BERT 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The "most" equal of all are those with money. Our laws favor and protect them more than any other group. They just hide the fact better. I wouldn't worry about vulnerable minorities, they deserve to be looked after.
2007-05-04 15:57:44 · answer #10 · answered by Clueless 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋