Hate crime enhancement
In your view, should a hate-crime (or bias-motivated crime??) be punished more severely than "regular" crimes? For example, should a homophobic person who beats a gay guy to death receive a harsher punishment than if homophobia and gayness hadn't been relevant to the killing?
Why/why not?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I'm not fond of the whole hate crime angle, because it seems like much of it is to prevent or punish certain types of thought. It arguably moves the focus away from the actual crime, occasionally in an attempt to sensationalize the incident and/or punish the aggressor. A murder is a murder.
Well, no a murder isn't a murder, which is why we things like first, second degree murder, man slaughter, etc. I see no reason why homophobia or racism shouldn't be considered an aggravating factor.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Not that I particularly mind about these laws, but I can't justify to myself why someone who attacks a person because that person is gay or black deserves a more severe punishment than someone who attacks a person because they "look funny" or "looked at their girlfriend".
Hope is the denial of reality
No. I don't particularly care whether somebody murders somebody because they're black or because they're a republican or because they're kind of a dick. It comes down to, did he have a good reason for killing this guy? As long as the answer is 'no', I don't see any reason to give special punishment due to certain victims. It's perfectly legitimate to bring such things up when establishing motive, but I don't think it should matter once you get to sentencing. That said, I'm not really strongly motivated to fight against such laws.Originally Posted by Aimless
A murderer is a murderer regardless of their motivation. It takes extreme motivation to murder someone anyways, the bias makes no difference.
Praise the man who seeks the truth, but run from the one who has found it.
My apologies, I was referring to murder, 1st degree specifically.
I can see the point and need if a sentence was a method of rehabilitation, but thats hardly something our system is concerned with. murders from passion, greed, revenge, and hate can vary wildly on cause and mental "justification"
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
If the purpose was rehab, surely the prison sentence would be a function of the criminal's ability to stop committing crime, not the severity of the crime...
Hope is the denial of reality
Hate crimes are a version of domestic 'terrorism'. (Apologies for bringing up that term, when it's been used so broadly in recent times.) Historically, hate crimes were treated as "regular" crimes, and little distinction was made for motivation or intent. A KKK member could lynch and hang any black man, just for being black, and be charged/prosecuted the same as any other murderer. Maybe even without extenuating circumstances (use of a gun, during commission of a felony).
It's almost as if early hate crimes were treated as "crimes of passion", using the same defense as a married man coming home at lunch, surprised by another man boffing their wife, being enraged and shooting or beating the guy to death. Finding a black man in certain parts of town, or during certain hours, used to be enough to "enrage" white men, especially in the south. A "jury of their peers", at that time, meant predominantly white men who'd also feel threatened and enraged, just at the sight of a dark skinned man in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Today's hate crimes are more complicated than skin color, but they still involve a bias or prejudice that's the main motivating factor, and aren't simply an aggravating or extenuating circumstance. Now, if someone is victimized because they have dark skin, or because of their sexual orientation, or because of their religion...those are crimes based on nothing but Hate.
Yes, I think crimes motivated by hate, or a discriminating hatred, should be prosecuted and sentenced differently than other crimes. Just like we treat "terrorists" as a certain type of criminal, committing crimes that are more egregious than others.
No, because it's really a kind of thought crime, isn't it? (Not to mention, another example of the ridiculous double standards and stupid political favoritism that plague our system.)
And really, what's the difference if someone kills another person for being a nigger, or for disrespecting the wrong bitch, or for selling meth on the "wrong" street corner?
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
The argument I've usually seen advanced in favour of hate crime enhancement is indeed that they have a stronger impact on society or specific portions of society (eg. communities) wrt unrest, further and more violent conflict, eroding sense of trust and safety. I dunno if this is actually true, but I can sorta accept the notion that a crime with worse consequences may justify a stricter punishment (both as deterrence and as some form of restitution).
Some claim that these perpetrators are also more difficult to rehabilitate and that their risk of recidivism is higher. I haven't seen the numbers so I dunno
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I'm curious where this is going, american prisons are far from being crime free areas, and I didn't mention anything about severity.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
This is a very vague question. There's lot of different sorts of hate crime legislation and it's tough to sort out one thing from another. Some laws create a whole new crime from previously permitted activity (e.g. hate speech, making any bias-motivation and additional criminal charge, etc.). Other laws just enhance possible sentencing for the actual crime. Yet others allow for alternative legal avenues (e.g. civil suits) in the specific case of hate crimes that might not exist otherwise.
I think that in principle, some instances of the first are a good idea (criminalizing some hate behaviors). I find it challenging to find much justification for the second (increasing penalties), and I'm honestly not sure if the third is a good idea or not (allowing civil suits and the like). The only justification I can think of for increasing penalties for hate-motivated crime is that it may nip a potential escalating tit-for-tat between communities in the bud by coming down hard on bias-motivated acts. I would question whether the time frame of the judicial system would really allow for this kind of feedback, though, so in general I don't find much use for it.
I haven't given it much thought, but this reasoning isn't unreasonable.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Considering the sheer number of people who get attacked in bars, I'd be far more fearful from being inside a bar than if someone attacked a person who was the same race as me for their race.The argument I've usually seen advanced in favour of hate crime enhancement is indeed that they have a stronger impact on society or specific portions of society (eg. communities) wrt unrest, further and more violent conflict, eroding sense of trust and safety. I dunno if this is actually true, but I can sorta accept the notion that a crime with worse consequences may justify a stricter punishment (both as deterrence and as some form of restitution).
Some claim that these perpetrators are also more difficult to rehabilitate and that their risk of recidivism is higher. I haven't seen the numbers so I dunno
Hope is the denial of reality
I think a major difference is that you choose what type of bar you go to, if any (I've never been in a bar fight, and only witnessed two, while I do go to bars often), while you cannot choose your race.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Choosing the bar isn't going to make much of a difference when my odds of getting attacked are far higher at a bar than at any other legal establishment. How is one or a handful of individuals attacking people of my race going to drastically increase my probability of getting attacked (especially when those individuals get caught, or ply their trade in a different city or state)?
Hope is the denial of reality
If I had to choose between not going to bars and not walking outdoors/going to school I think I would choose the former. And while I'm at an increased risk of suffering harm in a bar, so's everyone else there. I may be at an even greater risk due to being brown of course. Btw, how obvious is your ethnic/gay nature?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Btw, what exactly are the odds of dying in a terrorist attack these days?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Motive.
Well since all murderers should be fried... how would you punish someone more?
Scrambled.
Anyway, judges already take motive into consideration when passing sentence - who here disagrees with the principle that racial/homophobic motivation should be among the factors that incur a higher sentence?
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Frankly, I'm more concerned about those who attack someone because the latter "looks at them funny". There are some steps you can take to avoid racists/homophobes (avoid certain bars, avoid people with certain tattoos, avoid people with certain hairstyles, etc.). You can't avoid someone who randomly attacks people.
Hope is the denial of reality
Hermits get all the fun
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Me as well.
Why should someone who assaults another person for being say, a nigger or a fag, get a harsher sentence than someone who assaults someone over... say road rage, or "disrespect" or any other petty reason?
Personally (if I had to choose), I'd prefer the company of a racist homophobe to someone who's just randomly violent or has a rage "issue." Being a straight white guy, I gotta figure the racist homophobe is the safer choice for me, don't I?
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
Me. Like I said, all murderers should be executed.
You never stop bashing America's elite fighting men, do you?
It's really quite sickening - even GGT never stoops as low as to suggest that all black ops operators should be put to death, but you do... truly despicable of you.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
lol don't be such a liberal.You never stop bashing America's elite fighting men, do you?
It's really quite sickening - even GGT never stoops as low as to suggest that all black ops operators should be put to death, but you do... truly despicable of you.
Exactly, you can't really avoid them, and everyone's in the same boat as you, so it's just a vague threat. And anyway, it's not like they'll go to very much trouble to fuck you up.
The most belligerent racists I've met haven't had any obvious tattoos and the like, nor have I met them in special bars. I guess that's just Sweden
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote