Hate crime..What is a hate crime?

L

Lawrence Keeney

New member
If someone beats another to death with a louisville slugger,does it matter one bit he he(or she) did the murder for reasons of racial prejudice?
How much more can the state punish you if you murder someone? I mean..they can't give you the death penalty TWICE...
Murder is murder...

And is anyone besides me alarmed that our country seems to be moving toward criminalizing stupid,hateful speech?

comments?
Lawrence Keeney
Contest entry..
 
R

rod

New member
An article in yesterday's Washington Post by George Will illustrates
the fallacy behind special punishments reserved for crimes of "hate".
Some of the points he makes however translate well to all manner of
behavior that is purposely demonized by the state for political
purposes. What follows is an excerpt from his 10/15 article which can
be viewed in its entirety at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1998-10/15/010r-101598-idx
.html

---
Congress continually uses the criminal law as a moral pork barrel, for
indignation gestures. Compassion is today's supreme political value,
so politics is a sentiment competition. It is less about changing
society than striking poses: Theatrical empathy trumps
considerations of mere practicality. [An effect we have all witnessed
time and again as pertains to firearms] But the multiplication of
hate-crime categories -- statutes stipulating that some crime victims
are especially important -- is an imprudent extension of identity
politics.

In their book "Hate Crimes: Criminal Law & Identity Politics," James
B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter define such politics as individuals
relating to one another as members of competing groups defined by
race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disability and so on. In
such politics, it is strategically advantageous to be recognized as
victimized or otherwise disadvantaged.

Hate crime laws are, Jacobs and Potter argue,
"morale-building legislation" because they confer
such recognition. But does the competition for
special government-conferred status for particular
groups advance the aim of hate crime laws -- a more
tolerant society?

Such laws mandate enhanced penalties for crimes
committed as a result of, or at least when
accompanied by (can juries be counted on to
distinguish causation from correlation?), particular
government-disapproved states of mind. Granted, law
has the expressive function of stigmatizing
particular conduct. However, should government
plunge deeper into stigmatizing thoughts and
attitudes?[A question that could well be posed to those who would
seek to demonize the "gun culture"] The consequence will be more and
more crimes presented by prosecutors as especially wicked because
the defendants had odious (but not illegal) frames of mind. ---

Aside from one particularly distasteful article written by Will
expressing his desire that the Second Amendment be repealed, I think
he has a great insight into the excesses and hypocracies of the
politics of the "New Age".

=rod=
 
M

Mike in VA

New member
Calling murder a "hate crime" is basically an excuse for the Feds to get their nose into what is normally a state issue. It's also a lot of "politically correct" (my favorite oxymoron) crap that plays to what Will was calling "identy politics" and feel good self-esteem legislation to pander to the various 'minority' groups so they feel they're 'special'. Wrong is wrong, but if you carry this idiocy to its(il)logical extreme, they the only way you can do murder without it being a hate crime is if you kill someone of your own age, gender, sexual persuasion, religion, race, politics, and socio-economic class, unless, of course you suffer from self-loathing and self-hatred. I'd allow as how it may be worse to kill someone over a triviality (e.g. race, a parking space, etc.), but there is no good reason to kill, jsut a few 'acceptable' ones like war or self-defense. It's all just too stupid. M2
 
E

Ed Brunner

New member
A lot of people oppose hate crime legislation simply because they dont think that an emotion should be against the law.

Dont they know that thoughts are dangerous and feelings are the basis of all crimes??

We have to learn to control feelings because some people continue to have them even after we point out how dangerous it is.

Until we have a really effective method of eliminating a persons feelings while maintaining his productivity all we can do is to legislate against it.

Its a start!
 
K

Kodiac

New member
Hate Crimes can be the most ugly examples of human existance. Like the homosexual guy who was killed in wyoming by a couple of dudes. That was ugly... just because of his... well... I don't advocate that stuff - but I dont see why he was selected for torture and be left for dead because of it. Hate crimes are a product of ignorance... I tolerate that even less than homosexuality. I'ld rather spend the day working next to a homosexual than next to a bigotted idiot... Bigots ussually run off at the mouth while the other guy will probably be quite and not want to talk to me... that way I wont have to listen to either one.
 
M

Mike in VA

New member
Gee, Ed, control your emotions? It's called adulthood (maturity), morality & ethics. Tare lots of things I don't like (and in some case, abhor), but I understnd I don't get to lash out and act like a petulant 4 yr. old. I ferget who said it, but 'When values are sufficient, laws are unnecessary. When values are insufficient, laws are irrelevant.' We don't need more meaningless laws, we need to promulgate and live by meaningful values. Can't control your emotions? Wanna try electroshock, heavy sedation, padded cell, or a lobotmy? Itsa start? Crap. M2
 
D

DC

Moderator Emeritus
Mike..

I would have written you privately had you provided an e-mail address.

Ed is exercising an old respected writing technique...its known as satire.

(moderator duty; does not count towards contest tally)
 
E

Ed Brunner

New member
Golly DC,You saw right through that one!

But when you think about it I pretty well defined hate crime leglislation.



[This message has been edited by Ed Brunner (edited 10-21-98).]
 
M

Mike in VA

New member
Well, I feel like a putz. My apologies, Ed, but it just didn't sound like satire, hence the sarcasm. I guess I'm too close to Washington and the minions of the 'politically correct', as I clearly stepped into that one, big time. The shame is, I actually know people who would say something like that sincerely. I think I'll go check the connection on my ground wire. Please pardon the unintentional gunshot wound to the foot, unfortunately foot was in mouth at time of AD. (BTW, my e-mail is now exposed). M2
 
K

Kodiac

New member
It would seem the best emotional control is to count to ten, breath deep, and have a moment for rational thought. I am glad to see every one playing nice again.
 
D

DC

Moderator Emeritus
Mike...

We have all heard people speak exactly as Ed wrote, even further out there. The frightening thing is that they both truly believe it and believe that government has the right and moral authority to control our emotions. Thus your outrage is understandable.
What I find satisfying is that folks on "our side" such as yourself, courteously recognise a mistake and remain civil....unlike "they". You do yourself honor Mike.
 
M

Mike in VA

New member
Still, I'm usually pretty good at spotting satire (the highest form of comedy) and am fairly agile at out wise@**ing a wise@** (all insport, of course)in my own right, but occasionally find my foot planted squarely on my dong without noticing for a while (age is a helluva price to pay for maturity). I guess we're all in violent agreement here, I just get so frustrated with all the whiners that take no responsibility for their lives and want the govamint to do everything or blame it all on 'gawd's will', I perhaps should have had more faith in my 'brothers in arms', but sometimes trolls are where you find them and I chumped myself. Pax vobiscum, M2

[This message has been edited by Mike in VA (edited 10-21-98).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top