But here is what bothers me Bells, Hate Crime Laws do not deter hate nor bigotry nor does it prevent violent crimes against minorities, it just gives longer sentences for said crimes. The same crime without bigotry receives a longer sentence, my point is that if crime is crime it doesn't really matter if the motivation was motivated by bigotry. If there is legislation against violent crimes against persons then why have a special law? Unless we consider set groups as somehow 'special'. What's wrong with simply prosecuting violent crimes?
Mostly because in the past, homosexuals and African Americans, as on example, were not protected duly by the criminal legislation. Hate crime laws force the legal authorities to prosecute and it gives the federal law enforcement the ability to investigate such crimes. That is what many of you don't seem to be grasping. In recent times, beating up a homosexual or a black person would result in little to now punishment. Now if a hate crime is reported, the law ensures that it needs to be investigated.
For example, were you aware that Shepard's killers were not tried under a hate crime? Do you know why? Because during that time, killing a homosexual was not deemed a hate crime. Nor was beating a homosexual with intent to harm or kill because the individual was a homosexual.
Violent crimes would normally be prosecuted. But until quite recently, crimes against racial minorities and homosexuals were not prosecuted or even reported. Your country has had hate crimes for a long long time. However it was not enough. It has come back into the limelight after the Shepard and Byrd killings, and the laws now do the following:
The bill also:
* removes the prerequisite that the victim be engaging in a federally-protected activity, like voting or going to school;
* gives federal authorities greater ability to engage in hate crimes investigations that local authorities choose not to pursue;
* provides $5 million per year in funding for fiscal years 2010 through 2012 to help state and local agencies pay for investigating and prosecuting hate crimes;
* requires the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to track statistics on hate crimes against transgender people (statistics for the other groups are already tracked).[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard_Act
The second point is quite important. There are many local authorities who will not investigate and have not investigated hate crimes in the past.
You need to look at motive. Yes, it is not a deterrent, but the laws that were passed recently in the US is a reflection of the horrors that your country faced when confronted with the brutal slaying of two people, simply because of their colour and sexual orientation.
The Act was supported by thirty-one state Attorneys General and over 210 national law enforcement, professional, education, civil rights, religious, and civic organizations, including the AFL-CIO, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and the NAACP.[12] A November 2001 poll indicated that 73% of Americans were in favor of hate-crime legislation covering sexual orientation.[13]
A crime is a crime is a crime. However hate crime legislation looks at the motive behind that crime. Let me ask you a question. Do you think an adult who rapes a child should be charged merely for rape or should paedophilia also be a crime?
Baron Max said:
So you agree that discrimination should be used by the law and the courts so as to make one group different to another group under the law?
Quite the contrary. Hate crime legislation offers protection for all against crimes committed against a person motivated by bigotry. Do you see that protection as being discriminatory?
No, Bells. I think if I should murder a nigger or a queer, then I should be convicted of murder and serve the required term in prison or be executed according to the law. But I don't think, however, that that punishment should be different if I'd killed a white guy or a heterosexual man.
Ooops, oh, wait, Bells. Are you saying or implying that blacks or queers are somehow different or more important than white guys or heterosexuals????
You simply just don't get it do you?
"Blacks and queers", along with whites, hispanics, asians, jews, Muslims, hetrosexuals, abled and disabled, etc, are protected under the legislation.. equally. If a crime is committed against any individual and the motive is bigotry, then it is a hate crime.
But regular ol' crimes SHOULD be tolerated by the justice system and society?
In the past it was, if the crime was against a racial minority or those of a different sexual orientation. And in the past, killing a black person or a homosexual resulted in no punishment at all under the justice system.
Racial minorities and homosexuals were only protected from violence against their person if they were voting or going to school. That was the only time where attacks against them were to be prosecuted. That was the only time where they had protection against attacks or murders that was motivated by bigotry.
And, Bells, how can one write a law against thinking something? Hatred and bigotry are simply thoughts about different people, that's all. You might not like it, but what the hell, people have thoughts about other people all the time. Some of it is good, some of it is neutral, some of it is bad.
You can think it as much as you damn well like. When you cross the boundary and commit an act of violence because of your bigoted thoughts, it becomes a hate crime. Quite simple really. You might not like it, but that's the way it is. So, suck it up Princess.
And, Bells, if you hate bigots so much, aren't you doing the very same thing that you claim to hate ....being a bigot?
I don't hate you.
