[godshumbleson]

Read a news report that stated people who murder transgender or disabled people will receive a minimum sentence of 30 years. The reason behind this is they say is because that crime is a 'hate' crime, so it should be treated differently to other murders.
Why the need to single out certain groups in society and say their life is worth more than another member in society, why not treat all people who murder the same and impose equal sentences on them?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16089715

[Pants-of-dog]

The reason is simple: hate crimes are terrorism for lack of a better word. The point is not only to attack the targeted individual, but the targeted community as well. The idea is to frighten and intimidate the targeted community so that they continue to feel marginalised.

[Wolfman]

Why the need to single out certain groups in society and say their life is worth more than another member in society, why not treat all people who murder the same and impose equal sentences on them?

If I killed you just because, I would get the normal punishment. If I killed you because you're white, that would be a hate crime. It is not about one person being worth more then another, it's about the motive.

[Bubba]

The reason is simple: hate crimes are terrorism for lack of a better word. The point is not only to attack the targeted individual, but the targeted community as well. The idea is to frighten and intimidate the targeted community so that they continue to feel marginalised.

There is something to say for this. Motive should play a role, but we should be careful with this. Not every murder of a minority is bigotry-motivated, bigotry can also work the other way around (a black panthers member killing a white man) and some murders that don't qualify as a hate crime have another motive that is just as bad as a hate crime.

[Decky]

The reason is simple: hate crimes are terrorism for lack of a better word. The point is not only to attack the targeted individual, but the targeted community as well. The idea is to frighten and intimidate the targeted community so that they continue to feel marginalised.

It's nonsensical. If I kill you because you support a different football team than me it's a hate crime. If I kill you because you are gay it is a hate crime, if I kill you because you slept with my girlfriend it's a hate crime, if I kill you because you were looking at me funny it's a hate crime.

There is no such thing as a friendly violent crime. Why put crimes against different people on a different level?

[Pants-of-dog]

It's nonsensical. If I kill you because you support a different football team than me it's a hate crime. If I kill you because you are gay it is a hate crime, if I kill you because you slept with my girlfriend it's a hate crime, if I kill you because you were looking at me funny it's a hate crime.

There is no such thing as a friendly violent crime. Why put crimes against different people on a different level?

The reason is simple: hate crimes are terrorism for lack of a better word. The point is not only to attack the targeted individual, but the targeted community as well. The idea is to frighten and intimidate the targeted community so that they continue to feel marginalised.

Now, since football team fans, cuckolds, and funny looking people are not historically marginalised communities, it would be difficult to show that someone murdered someone else because they belong to such a community and that the murderer did hold a prejudice against someone from such a community.

[Decky]

Now, since football team fans, cuckolds, and funny looking people are not historically marginalised communities, it would be difficult to show that someone murdered someone else because they belong to such a community and that the murderer did hold a prejudice against someone from such a community.

Nonsense. Take the football team example.

it would be difficult to show that someone murdered someone else because they belong to such a community

Maybe you live somewhere more civilised but in Britain people are beaten up all the time for what team they support. That is no different from beating up someone because they are gay. Both are violent crimes and should be punished harshly.

[Pants-of-dog]

Nonsense. Take the football team example.



Maybe you live somewhere more civilised but in Britain people are beaten up all the time for what team they support. That is no different from beating up someone because they are gay. Both are violent crimes and should be punished harshly.

For the last time, football team fans do not belong to a marginalised community.

[Decky]

For the last time, football team fans do not belong to a marginalised community.

Firstly you are wrong.

If I walked around Aston in a Birmingham city top I most certainyl would be pat of one.

Secondly even if you were right how is the marginalised community part even relevant?

[Pants-of-dog]

Firstly you are wrong.

If I walked around Aston in a Birmingham city top I most certainyl would be pat of one.

Do you know what a marginalised community is?

Secondly even if you were right how is the marginalised community part even relevant?

Please reread my first post in this thread. Thank you.

[Decky]

The reason is simple: hate crimes are terrorism for lack of a better word. The point is not only to attack the targeted individual, but the targeted community as well. The idea is to frighten and intimidate the targeted community so that they continue to feel marginalised.

It isn't actually true Pants, sorry.

Most (non state) violent crime is not pre meditated, it is spur of the moment. There are no grand motives to intimidate groups.

[Verv]

Read a news report that stated people who murder transgender or disabled people will receive a minimum sentence of 30 years. The reason behind this is they say is because that crime is a 'hate' crime, so it should be treated differently to other murders.
Why the need to single out certain groups in society and say their life is worth more than another member in society, why not treat all people who murder the same and impose equal sentences on them?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16089715

There are people who murder children, and then there are people who may have committed a murder that was related to gang activity or perhaps a revenge killing.

This alone should tell you one thing: sentencing should be in the hands of the judges who should have some concept of justice.

Murderers should never be treated equally because their circumstances are very different from one another.

A dude who kills children? Kill him.

A dude who is 19 and believed his life was in danger from a rival gang member, and then in the heat of a moment pulls a knife and he ends up dead? Well, chances are that things need to be considered differently and perhaps this person can be reformed.

[Zagadka]

Hate crime laws are a good device when there is a disparity in social levels or acts of violence to systematically repress a minority that otherwise can not defend themselves. It should probably stop being used against blacks, but I think it should still apply towards homosexuals.

[Rancid]

If I killed you just because, I would get the normal punishment. If I killed you because you're white, that would be a hate crime. It is not about one person being worth more then another, it's about the motive.

The complication with this is that now we're effectively talking about thought crimes. So if I murdered you, now we have lawyers going back trying to prove that I killed you because you were white. In this case, the truth doesn't matter, and it's all about convincing a jury that I'm racist by picking apart my past history.

[Smilin' Dave]

This alone should tell you one thing: sentencing should be in the hands of the judges who should have some concept of justice.

I agree with the theory, but I think it practice this is difficult to achieve. I think we can both think of instances were justice has seemed heavy handed in some occasions and overly light in others. It often comes down not to the individual merits of the case but to the judge who happened to hear the case (there are other factors, but they might not be relevant in this particular area). So one argument in favour of this sort of legislation is that it attempts to ensure a just result, irrespective of the variability of the judges hearing the cases. From a more practical perspective the additional legislation also gives a judge so inclined the option to hand down a harsher sentence than might be possible under the normal criminal legislation. So hypothetically the maximum is one unit normally, but with the additional legislation the maximum might be the seemingly more appropriate two units.

[Oxymoron]

Hate crimes are abused by trigger happy prosecutors.

[Nets]

The complication with this is that now we're effectively talking about thought crimes. So if I murdered you, now we have lawyers going back trying to prove that I killed you because you were white. In this case, the truth doesn't matter, and it's all about convincing a jury that I'm racist by picking apart my past history.

The difference between murder and manslaughter is a thought crime. Physically, these are identical crimes but mental state is the key difference. If we can make this distinction, why not hate crimes as well?

[Rancid]

FIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine. I'll accept hate crimes then.

::say's ethinic slur under his breath::

[Far-Right Sage]

Once I begin hearing fashionable new buzz terminology such as "hate crime" and "human rights", it's an automatic signal for me to stop listening to the moralist drivel which is being spewed most likely by young and highly political social scientists and social engineers with a warped pathology.

"Hate crime" would have been about as recognized as "sad milkshake" when I was growing up. Once again, I don't blame the minorities for exploiting such stupidity as much as I blame the twisted class of people we refer to as white men today for accepting and promoting it. Those loathesome ideas have driven this country into the shitter in a minute.

And applying it not only to the immigrants and their offspring who burned down north London last year, but to fake minorities such as "transgendered" loons is a case of adding insult to injury.

[Wolfman]

Hate crimes are abused by trigger happy prosecutors.

Such as?