Does it prosecute thought rather than action?
is murder or any physical attack already not "hatefuL" in and of itself?In your opinion does hate-crime legislation give equal protection under the law - or does it give preferential?It is BS law that politicians can claim they support x or y group and use this as proof. The hate part of hate crimes is the CRIME itself, which is already punishable under current laws.
Think about it. The KKK or Nazi's (or any other racist group the like Black Panthers, Nation of Islam, Le Raza, etc etc) can get a legal permit and demonstrate in any park in the country, including on the steps of the US Supreme Court and proclaim any racist or religious epithet they want and they can not be arrested for it.
Yet, somehow, if they use the same racial or religious epithet while in the commission of a crime, it is supposed to be worse than the actual crime itself?
Under the USC you have the right to be a moron and if you want to be a moron and judge people by their skin color or religious beliefs, then fine, be a moron, but you are not allowed to step over that line and harm another. Punish the crime, not the thought.
whaleIn your opinion does hate-crime legislation give equal protection under the law - or does it give preferential?
It give preferential treatment to special classes of people.In your opinion does hate-crime legislation give equal protection under the law - or does it give preferential?I'm okay with preferential treatment of minorities when it comes to assault crimes. I believe it is a deterrent, and that is what it's for.In your opinion does hate-crime legislation give equal protection under the law - or does it give preferential?
No, I've never heard of a hate-crime law that gave preferential treatment. No, it prosecutes thought WITH action, not "rather than." No, not all crimes are automatically motivated by hate.In your opinion does hate-crime legislation give equal protection under the law - or does it give preferential?It gives preferential treatment to certain people and furthers the idea that certain people need special treatment because they are "different".
How is everyone supposed to get along and be treated equally when we have a judicial system that favors some and penalizes others because of a certain classification?In your opinion does hate-crime legislation give equal protection under the law - or does it give preferential?
I think it's adding in an element to crime that has never existed in our law. Although many assume motive is an element, it's not. Criminal intent is an element, but it means intent to commit a crime (such as premeditation with murder, for example). Now, I think we already provide an element of "hate crime" intent when we add "especially aggravated" to a crime. I also think we add in hate crime intent when sentencing is considered. But it's not focused on the status of the victim, it's focused on the horrific nature of the crime or intent. SO, all in all, hate crime is at best redundant. I think it does give preferential treatment to some victims, which is potentially a violation of the EP clause. What person wants to think they are "less than" when the victim of a crime just because they aren't in a special class.
No comments:
Post a Comment