Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those attackers committed a crime. That crime was teaming up to beat a guy. The fact that he's gay means absolutely nothing. You cannot legislate away hate. You have to prosecute the crime. The fact that they are gay doesn't make it any more significant that he was beaten up.
"Hate" laws are simply small-minded attempts at further retribution for beliefs which some do not condone. Is "hate" a bad thing? Perhaps. But to start legislating beliefs, and to supposedly prove what is inside the mind of another, is the height of arrogance and delusion.
The original intent of Federal hate crime legislation was to afford the federal government the opportunity to prosecute crimes against minorities which local officials either condoned or refused to pursue, as was the case of the three slain civil rights workers in Mississippi. On a state level, hate crimes legislation is geared to provide judges with additional sanctions, in terms of additional years of incarcerations, just as aggravated acts are weighted in other violent crimes, particularly capital murder.
As for the ability to assess what is in some one's mind, if that is the objection then we should throw out pre-mediated murder since, who could possible know what is in someone's mind. Personally, I think that is a load of BS, since juries delve into the mind of defendants everyday to ascertain unlawful intent beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt.
[quote=ovcatto;11272999]The original intent of Federal hate crime legislation was to afford the federal government the opportunity to prosecute crimes against minorities which local officials either condoned or refused to pursue, as was the case of the three slain civil rights workers in Mississippi. On a state level, hate crimes legislation is geared to provide judges with additional sanctions, in terms of additional years of incarcerations, just as aggravated acts are weighted in other violent crimes, particularly capital murder.
quote] Hate crime laws were passed in 1994 30yrs later.
The original intent of Federal hate crime legislation was to afford the federal government the opportunity to prosecute crimes against minorities which local officials either condoned or refused to pursue, as was the case of the three slain civil rights workers in Mississippi. On a state level, hate crimes legislation is geared to provide judges with additional sanctions, in terms of additional years of incarcerations, just as aggravated acts are weighted in other violent crimes, particularly capital murder.
As for the ability to assess what is in some one's mind, if that is the objection then we should throw out pre-mediated murder since, who could possible know what is in someone's mind. Personally, I think that is a load of BS, since juries delve into the mind of defendants everyday to ascertain unlawful intent beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt.
Thanks for the lesson. It is still delusional to try to prosecute thoughts.
A thought is not a crime. Even if some megalomaniac would like it to be so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
