How stupid and unconstitutional are hate crime laws?

Question

Very, in my opinion. How can liberals - the alleged defenders of the constitution - support laws which force you to spend extra time in prison for allegedly having thoughts or feelings deep inside of you? A crime is a crime in my opinion - doesn't matter why. In this country of "free speech" how can someone be punished for feelings inside of them? Senseless murder is senseless murder. No matter what the reason is. Doesn't matter if a guy doesn't like gays or doesn't like the shirt someone is wearing. And of course these laws cater only to minorities. Remember when the black basketball player clobbered the white boy and pounded him on the court? No mention of the words hate crime. Or when the older, bigger black boy beat the small white kid on the school bus after teasing him? No mention of hate crime. But, true story, when a local Polish restaraunt was broken into and money was stolen and a few tables knocked over - the media was asking if it was a hate crime. Hysterical.

OK, I hate the color green. I'm going to kill the first person I see wearing a green shirt today. That's not malice? Weak arguments. When you "act" upon feelings of thoughts, YOU GET CHARGED WITH THE CRIME YOU COMMITTED!!!!!! If I'm thinking of robbing a bank, and then act upon those feelings, I get charged with bank robbery. You people don't understand that?

Verm, you're correct. A person has no right doing that. That's why they're charged with assault, or murder, or whatever it is they did!

No validity in those answers. You still have the right to hate anyone you want in America. And a crime is still a crime. Go ahead and compare it with "intent" if you want, which is BS. In the scenerio I gave, BOTH were INTENTIONAL acts. There's not argument over that. The question remains, why is it okay to hate 'happy people' if I killed a person because they were too happy, or a person of a different race??? Both were intentional hateful act. Both are felony murder. But one gets extra time because you're not allowed to have feelings of hatred or dislike for minorities in America!!!!!!!

Answer 1

first of all coragraph is a commie dont listen to him.(by telling you this my answer will be deleted so read the rest of it quick)

they are unconsititutional. the act is what matters. if any part of it is constitutional it would not apply to homos because they arenot a protected class. this is really a waste of time and space if my house is burned down because i am an italian or because i slept with this dudes wife does it matter my house was burned down.

I honestly belkeive the way to stop this liberal garbage is to take it to the max. Make being rich a protected class so i robbed him cause i knew he could afford it means more jail time. reverand hymie town goes to jail when he uses interloper comments and then some clown burns downt he store hate crime accomplice never gets out.

Answer 2

I doubt that a claim they are Unconstitutional would have much traction, but I agree they are stupid.

If something is a "hate crime", then the sentencing is enhanced.

For example, A hits B with a baseball bat. B isn't happy, but A gets charged with Assault and will do time.

Now, if B happens to be in a particular minority, and A shouts an ethnic slur as he swings the bat, A will be charged with a Hate Crime and do more time.

Two problems with this that I see.

One is that A is already committing assault, and obviously doesn't like B. What difference does it make why?

Two, hate is hate, but treated differently under the law. If A were to shout "Death to Haberdashers!" and strike B (a haberdasher), this would not be a "hate crime".

Why not just leave people free to hate each other, and draw the line at physical violence, and not differentiate the motive?

I think they are stupid, but stupidity is not Unconstitutional.

Answer 3

Neither stupid nor unconstitutional -- and you apparently don't understand what constitutes a hate crime.

Hate crime legislation is a sentence enhancement to some other criminal act or statute.

The reason hate crimes are considered worse is a function of the mental state involved. Just like intentional murder can be treated as more severe than reckless homicide (manslaughter) or negligent homicide. The more culpable mental state allows for a greater punishment, even though the physical act and result (death of a person) is the same.

Similarly, where a crime is committed based on racial or gender or religious or other prejudice (thus being a hate-motivated crime), the mental state is not merely a desire to harm one person. It's a desire to harm or destroy everyone who exhibits a certain trait. The victim at the time just happens to be one of many who exhibit that trait. Thus, the the victim was attacked not for anything unique to that individual (as in most other crimes) but because the victim was a representative of some larger group.

That different mental state compared to other crimes allows for the sentence enhancement.

And yes, the cases you mention about the "white boys" getting attacked -- those should have at least been investigated to determine if they are hate crimes. But just because different races are involved, that doesn't automatically mean the actions were race-based.

Answer 4

I agree with you completely. The idea that the same crime is different depending on which words are used is insane. What sort of parameters do we as a society set on such laws? If someone beats up a another man because he doesnt like his attitude or political beliefs does he then too fall under Hate Crime laws? And if not why not? The thought process behind the crime cannot be used to set a degree of that crime. Only whether or not there WAS a thought process and planning behind it would factor in.

Answer 5

Morally there is no difference between a regular crime and hate crime....but there is a difference.

A regular crime... Say for instance I beat up 5 people at random.... That would not be as bad as the hate crime version....for instance I targeted homeless people and beat up 5 of them. The reason is that the hate crimes create more victims than just the 5 people that were beat up...because it instills fear into a specific group of people.

Hate crimes are crimes against a specific group of people and have the potential to cause panic, fear, and more hate in the greater community.

Also, a persons "feelings" are always a factor in almost every criminal court case... during the proceeding, deliberations, and at last the sentencing. Your state of mind is always a factor.

Answer 6

Let the white race go through 150 years of slavery and then another 100 of oppression where they are murdered for no other reason than the color of their skin and treated like 2nd class citizens and then see what you think. Let's have the government force your parents into the ghettos and mistreat them and see if you don't feel like they owe you something. Get over it and just don't do it. Most of our founding fathers had hoped that slavery would be abolished within their lifetimes. You have freedom of speech which allows people like the KKK to voice their opinion but when that opinion causes them to violently hurt someone, then that is not ok. Hate crimes are just one way that we can right the wrongs. AND LET'S BE HONEST, WHEN ARE WE AS WHITE MALES IN THE USA GOING TO REALIZE THAT WE'RE NOT OPPRESSED. EVEN WITH LAWS TO HELP MINORITIES, WE STILL HAVE SO MANY PRIVILEGES!

Answer 7

I agree completely with coragryph. A hate-crime is not the simple crime itself, it is an enhancer to that particular crime. When you target a person based on a certain characteristic and not for that person specifically, then you have, in theory, committed that same crime against anyone who carries the same characteristic of the person you committed the crime against. Its more about your "hate" for the characteristic than the crime itself.
Having a thought about committing a crime is one thing, but acting on that thought is another, which is why a hate crimes are important to understand and prosecute differently.
Do some research on what a hate crime and you wouldnt have to ask this question.

Answer 8

Free speech stops when it risks the safety of another. People who hurt other people not because of what they did but what they are - are sick and need to spend as much time in jail as can be justified because you can't really rehabilitate haters.

I'll admit there is a break down there. Sometimes people kill because the other person is rich and that isn't a hate crime. It's not the best of laws and they are misused, but getting rid of "hate crime laws" is not a good idea.

Answer 9

permit me start up by ability of asserting that i'm the two a Christian and an entire supporter of gay human beings's suitable to marry. the easy certainty of the situation is that it offends them. no remember if or no longer they have the the appropriate option to be indignant by ability of it or in the event that they're in any respect justified to be is a diverse remember completely. What concerns is they're. To them, it undermines the belief of marriage if it may contain something that offends them plenty. additionally, by using fact maximum human beings opt for human beings to evade sin, they desire that preserving it unlawful will discourage this actual sin. And the Bible does say that that's a sin. the rationalization it does not hardship me is that i think in unfastened will. God made them the way they're; it is not in basic terms a psychological venture or something like maximum Christians would have you ever have self belief. in the event that they opt for to act on their desires, that's none of my employer. maximum Christians, notwithstanding, do no longer see it that way. They see sin, and sin would desire to be wiped out.

Answer 10

There is a fascist term for what you are doing. It is called scapegoating. You are blaming ALL LIBERALS for things that some individualsare doing without offering any proof that the offending School Principal, or District Attorney is actually a LIBERAL.

When will the propaganda stop?