The Horror of Hate Crimes

@firefly,

I think the biggest problem with the "abuse excuse" is where do you draw the line? Remember the "twinkie defense"? Sure the defendant may have had a rough childhood but hurting others because you hurt will never be the right thing to do.

1 Reply

Talk about irony! I am now watching "Shadow of Chinatown". Here is the synoposis:

Quote:

Victor Poten (Bela Lugosi), a Eurasian mad scientist who hates both whites and Asians, is hired to ruin the tourist trade in San Francisco's Chinatown. Before long, however, his boss, Sonya Rokoff, soon realizes that he has become an unstoppable monster and is beyond her control. Poten's evil activities soon draw the attention of newspaper reporter Joan Whiting and her novelist boyfriend Martin Andrews. Together they begin to investigate the mysterious and frightening events unfolding in Chinatown.

Victor Poten (Bela Lugosi), a Eurasian mad scientist who hates both whites and Asians, is hired to ruin the tourist trade in San Francisco's Chinatown. Before long, however, his boss, Sonya Rokoff, soon realizes that he has become an unstoppable monster and is beyond her control. Poten's evil activities soon draw the attention of newspaper reporter Joan Whiting and her novelist boyfriend Martin Andrews. Together they begin to investigate the mysterious and frightening events unfolding in Chinatown.

It seems hate crimes have been around a loooooooooooooooooong time.

0 Replies

@Arella Mae,

Quote:

but hurting others because you hurt will never be the right thing to do.

How about hurting others, badly, when you don't hurt at all, when you have everything you need in the way of creature comforts, when you lack for nothing?

1 Reply

@JTT,

I don't think there are any excuses for hurting others.

0 Replies

@firefly,

It certainly is true in the Court of Liberal Public Perception, and we would be foolish to think this hasn't had an influence on actuals Courts.

I thought I've made it clear that I don't think these sort of excuses for criminals have any bearing on justice.

0 Replies

@Arella Mae,

I've argued elsewhere in this forum that whether or not life is actually black and white, it must be considered so for society to flourish.

I've no problem with designating particular crimes as so heinous that they deserve enhanced punishment, I simply insist that there be a logical consistency to the designation process.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

May I assume that you believe that a member of any race can be guilty of a hate crime?

You may.

Quote:

Am I correct that you believe enhanced punishment for "hate crimes" will act as a deterrent?

Yes and no. And this is where it gets fuzzy for many people, myself included. I don't actually believe that the death penalty itself acts as a deterrent for most crimes, though it might. However in cases where life and the death penalty aren't on the table (ie: the example made earlier of someone burning a cross in a person's yard) I believe that it can act as a deterrent.

Quote:

Isn't it appropriate to similarly impose enhanced punishment as a deterrent to the "allure" of crimes committed against children and the elderly?

Absolutely. However getting such laws and regulations approved through the political system hasn't happened yet as those issues don't have as much political clout as racially-driven ones. I have long held the opinion that our justice system is 1) utterly broken and 2) not severe enough with the sentences it dishes out for all crimes.

Quote:

I don't know you nearly well enough to make any assumptions about the origins of your opinion, nor will I, however I do know a number of people who agree with you that crimes perceived to be motivated by a hatred for a minority are deserving of greater punishment, because it is the one and only crime for which they feel no compulsion to examine the motivation and circumstances of the criminal.

In this instance I believe they do for the reasons I've already stated. If the color of someone's skin or their religious beliefs or political affiliations motivates you to threaten, endanger, or flat out murder them then you get the maximum punishment allowed. Not because it's the one and only crime that I feel compulsion to examine, but rather it's the one and only crime that can be easily painted with a broad brush, and thus have a broad set of laws that reach farther and more accurately to the situations involved.

As loathe as I am to point out, sometimes someone is raped, and sometimes they claim to have been raped and then later admit their lie from shame. Sometimes a person is found guilty of murder only to later be found innocent by DNA testing. Hate is hate is hate. Hate is obvious, and it's typically VERY easy to find evidence of and prosecute.

Is that always the case? No. But it is in this instance, and in this instance the ruling of hate crime fits and is just and should be utilized for the maximum sentence possible.

Quote:

Virtually every other criminal's action are subject to mitigation based on the nature of their upbringing, their sense of personal persecution, or hopelessness, but not the Hate Criminal.

Yes, a reason why I consider our Justice system to be broken. However I believe you'll find if you read court case transcripts that those other factors play into the defense as well.

Quote:

Believe me, I'm not arguing that murderous skinheads should have their crimes viewed in the context of their personal experience and the general experience of their "clan."

I just don't understand (and I realize that since you may not share the opinion you may not be able to explain it) how so many folks who are loath to harshly judge any number of different varieties of heinous criminals are right there and ready to throw the book at the Hate Criminal.

I appreciate the benefit of the doubt. For the record, I am not loathe to harshly judge heinous criminals. I endorse the Hate Crime legislation solely because it allows us to achieve a greater punishment for each instance and makes doing so considerably easier.

If only the System were fail-proof I would endorse the death penalty for all murder cases regardless of intent or design short of self defense. It is not, so I can't.

As for others, I can only assume that emotions rule their decisions, but obviously can't answer for all.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

@Bill

I agree with you 100% on "hate crimes" laws. They should be done away with. Murder is murder, assault is assault. Motivation should mean nothing.

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

@Bill

I agree with you 100% on "hate crimes" laws. They should be done away with. Murder is murder, assault is assault. Motivation should mean nothing.

more impotantly when we are going for equality and when we hold to position that we are all created equal there is no way to value the transgresions against some higher (worse) than the transgressions against others. Hate crime law is a violation of one of our most sacrid claimed core beliefs. It is also a violation of our Constitution and as such should be struck down by SCOTUS immediately.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

How is it a violation of the Constitution?

1 Reply

@Arella Mae,

I would think it would fall under the equal protection clause. One murder is not more tragic then another. They are equal because they are dead.

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

I don't see how that is not equal protection. No one said they weren't going to prosecute or would not prosecute unfairly or unequally. There are different degrees to crimes. Take murder for instance, first degree, second degree, manslaughter, etc. The FACTS of the case are what determines the degree of the crime. Motive is part of the facts. Surely, you would not say THAT is a violation of the constitution?

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Quote:

I would think it would fall under the equal protection clause. One murder is not more tragic then another. They are equal because they are dead.

No more opinions on the constitution until you've completed Ican's Constitutional History course.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

more impotantly when we are going for equality and when we hold to position that we are all created equal there is no way to value the transgresions against some higher (worse) than the transgressions against others

Some groups need stronger protections of law--that is the case with children and the elderly who can be physically weaker and more vulnerable to becoming the victims of various sorts of crimes--so enhanced punishments may be added to provide a stronger deterrent factor for these groups. For instance, after an increase in the number of muggings, assaults, and robberies of very elderly people, some of which were captured on surveillance videos and shown on the news and generated public outrage, the legislature in my state increased the penalty for some crimes when the victim is above a certain age. This wasn't done because the "transgressions" were worse when the victim was elderly, it was done to provide a stronger deterrent factor because a physically more vulnerable group was increasingly becoming the target of certain kinds of crimes. And, for that reason, many states now have enhanced penalties for certain types of crimes when the victim is above a certain age.

The same holds true for "hate crime" and bias-related crime statutes. The primary groups victimized by bias-related criminal acts are minorities. Enhancing the penalties for criminal acts committed as the result of bias strengthens the deterrent factor which helps to better protect more vulnerable minority groups. But, bias crime statutes help to protect everyone from bias-related criminal acts, there is nothing unequal about them.

Quote:

Hate crime law is a violation of one of our most sacrid claimed core beliefs. It is also a violation of our Constitution and as such should be struck down by SCOTUS immediately.

On the contrary, bias-crime statutes uphold the idea that everyone is entitled to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" without being targeted for a criminal act on the basis of group identity factors--race, religion, gender, etc. These statutes uphold basic civil rights--for everyone.

The Supreme Court has already upheld bias-crime laws. They are not unconstitutional.

You really don't understand the bias-crime or hate crime laws currently in effect--probably because you haven't read them--so the conclusions you are drawing really don't make sense. These laws do not refer to motive, or anything going on in someone's mind. What makes a crime a bias crime has to do with the selection of the victim(s) for a particular crime--whether discriminatory factors or group animus influenced the choice of victims. And, what must be proved at trial in a bias-related crime is that, not only was a crime committed, but the selection of the victim was done on the basis of bias or because of bias.

Your problem is that you don't bother to educate yourself about bias-crime laws, and their exact wording, before you jump to all sorts of erroneous conclusions.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Some groups need stronger protections of law--that is the case with children and the elderly who can be physically weaker and more vulnerable t

WOW, do you really want to go on record arguing that blacks, asians, fags, women and all of the other "special" people are weaker than normal people??

I dont think so...

Quote:

The Supreme Court has already upheld bias-crime laws. They are not unconstitutional.

The Supreme court is wrong, wildly wrong, and this error greatly diminishes the court.

Quote:

Your problem is that you don't bother to educate yourself about bias-crime laws, and their exact wording, before you jump to all sorts of erroneous conclusions

The definition of "erroneous" being as it always is with you, a view other than yours....

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

Quote:

I agree with you 100% on "hate crimes" laws. They should be done away with. Murder is murder, assault is assault. Motivation should mean nothing.

Is vandalism just always vandalism?

What is the difference between someone who spray-paints his initials on the outside of a building and someone who spray-paints a large swastika on the outside of a synagogue? Are these really the same acts/crimes of vandalism?

I'd argue that while both are acts of vandalism, the second instance may be an act of vandalism as a bias-related crime, or hate crime, since the swastika suggests that the synagogue was deliberately chosen on the basis of bias, and the criminal act itself is a reflection of the targeting of a particular religious group on the basis of bias, and, for that reason, vandalism as a bias-related crime should warrant an enhanced penalty over non bias-related vandalism because it is property damage, as well as a form of intimidation, directed specifically at an entire religious group, in addition to just being vandalism.

People are entitled to freedom of religion, and to the freedom to practice their religion without harassment, or intimidation, or incurring property damage to their religious institution due to bias. The enhanced penalty for vandalism as a bias-crime is helping to protect religious liberty--the enhanced penalty is meant to have deterrent effect.

And the same is true for any other bias-related types of crime, including murder. The enhanced penalties for those who select crime victims mainly on the basis of bias are meant to protect basic civil liberties--everyone's basic civil liberties--by providing a stronger deterrent against bias crimes.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

What is the difference between someone who spray-paints his initials on the outside of a building and someone who spray-paints a large swastika on the outside of a synagogue? Are these really the same acts/crimes of vandalism?

Yes, they are.

Quote:

People are entitled to freedom of religion, and to the freedom to practice their religion without harassment, or intimidation, or incurring property damage to their religious institution due to bias

You realize I am sure that bias is nothing more than a belief that you dont approve of. In the land of the free we were supposed to have gotten rid of the thought police. We certainly failed.

Quote:

And the same is true for any other bias-related types of crime, including murder. The enhanced penalties for those who select crime victims mainly on the basis of bias are meant to protect basic civil liberties--everyone's basic civil liberties

It does not matter what you want to do, it matters what you do...the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Proving that you dont believe in equality or free thought more than counteracts any positive effect of your hate crime efforts.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

You realize I am sure that bias is nothing more than a belief that you dont approve of. In the land of the free we were supposed to have gotten rid of the thought police. We certainly failed.

Right, you don't like it that blacks have a right not to be killed simply because of the color of their skin. Saying that people are entitled to religious freedom, without harassment or intimidation, is something you don't like to hear. Your idea of a "land of the free" apparently doesn't include the right of others to be free from becoming the victims of crime simply because of their race, religion, gender. etc.

And you certainly aren't about to protect the civil liberties of "fags" are you?

Sitting under that white sheet with the pointy hood really suits you.

Your bigotry comes across loud and clear.

1 Reply

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

Sitting under that white sheet with the pointy hood really suits you.

Your bigotry comes across loud and clear.

Is that the best you can do?? Not a single defense of your beliefs is to be forthcoming?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Is that the best you can do?? Not a single defense of your beliefs is to be forthcoming?

I don't have to defend my beliefs--particularly to someone like you. You're not even capable of understanding or discussing my opinions without grossly distorting them. Sinking to your level of discussion is like wading in the gutter, and I do prefer higher ground.

Go wash your sheet, it's got mud splattered all over it.

1 Reply

The Horror of Hate Crimes

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know