Hate Should Not Be A Crime!

[bbsam]

bbsam,
To further clarify ----you are confusing motive with the crime.
Revenge, Spite, jealousy,Anger, hatred ---are not crimes --they are MOTIVES !!!!!!
Or Intents ---do we have seperate revenge or spite or other motives listed as crimes ----Diesel you already stated the different degrees ----"Hate crime " ??
Muder 1-2- 3- manslaugter etc etc etc -----has it covered --why overkill so some liberal monority groups can say politicians are working for them ?
Lets see --I am gay ---I want different laws for me regarding murder --but I want the same laws regarding marriage -----Gee I am really confused !!!!

Yes, we agree. You are really confused. Motives are always considered when bringing criminal charges. You could google "hate crimes" and enlighten yourself. Or you can push it off as "liberal" crap. I for one and happy that people who associate themselves with gang violence, anti-black violence, anti-jew violence, especially in association with groups (KKK, skin heads, Latin Kings, Cryps, Bloods) will be held accountable and such actions. Translation: You are free to believe whatever you want and hate whatever you want. That freedom to hate and the violence associated with it have consequences.

 

[island1fox]

Sorry, I am not really confused --it is rather simple ---look in a dictionary !

Crime is a Crime

Hate is Hate !!!!!

Really very simple

True I will believe what I want and you are free to believe what you want ---this is getting rather boring !!!

 

[bbsam]

Sorry, I am not really confused --it is rather simple ---look in a dictionary !

Crime is a Crime

Hate is Hate !!!!!

Really very simple

True I will believe what I want and you are free to believe what you want ---this is getting rather boring !!!

Black and white is simple. Law, juries, history, politics, all do become boring but hardly inconsequential. I like this and I like that is easy. Grasping concepts and following juris prudence is not.

 

[Jones]

I like the Southern Avenger, but I disagree with him on this one.
On the surface, a kid spray painting his name on a wall at his high school and a neo-nazi spray painting a swastika on the wall at a synagogue are both acts of vandalism, but are they really the same? I don't think so.

Likewise, a bunch of kids egging someone's house vs a bunch of racists sticking a burning cross on the lawn of the only black family in the neighborhood. Both are acts of vandalism, but are they really the same? Once again, I don't think so.

I think where the Avenger misses the point is when he focuses solely on the individuals directly involved, the perpetrator and the victim, as he does when he compares the beating his friend got for drunkenly "defending the honor of a woman" with a homosexual getting beaten up for being gay. The difference is that hate crimes have a larger target than just the immediate victim.
That burning cross isn't just for one family, it's for all black people. It says you're not allowed here because you're black.
The beating isn't just for that one gay man, it's a message to all homosexuals. It says this is how we treat your kind around here.
Same goes for the swastika at the synagogue. Every Jewish person knows what it means.
Hate crimes are different because they are a crime against an entire class of people, and criminalizing it distinctly gives the justice system and society a way to say specifically that it's wrong and we reject it.
jmho.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

BigA....Your making an issue out of comparing the two pieces of legislation. You totally missed the point, as usual. My comparison is between the mentality of the indivdual liberty supporters vs the equal protection and rights for all supporters. Try to stay focused.

You made this and issue. YOU brought it up. You attempted to make a comparison (a stupid one at that) between the two based on your own twisted interpretation of what a particular group believes. The two are not comparable.

Then you went on to say this :



Have you looked in the mirror ?
Your anti-Hate Crimes legislation and your also anti-Equal Employment protection legislation. So I think you need to get in touch with yourself.

You are talking out of your rear as usual. If you could "STAY FOCUUSED" then your overly emotional and sensitive liberal mind would understand that Hate Crimes legislation and special treatment for certain groups pertaining to employment rights are both unconstitutional. You know....that thing all those old guys signed all those years ago when they were starting something called The United States of America? So, sounds like you are the one that needs to get in touch. With reality.

 

[Catatonic]

Got some statistics on that?

Heard it on PBS one evening...so answer is nope, really ain't interested. Sorry.

 

[Jones]

Heard it on PBS one evening...so answer is nope, really ain't interested. Sorry.

 

[diesel96]

You made this and issue. YOU brought it up. You attempted to make a comparison (a stupid one at that) between the two based on your own twisted interpretation of what a particular group believes. The two are not comparable.

Not comparable...lol, I just proved they are comparable by using you as a role model. The Rt wing handbook instructs you against Hate crime Legislation and it instructs you against Equal Emploment Opportunities, and lets throw another comparison of Civil Equal rights for gays and lesbians . What's the problem? Why pretend Rt Wingers and Individual Freedom Lovers are something there not.

You are talking out of your rear as usual. If you could "STAY FOCUUSED" then your overly emotional and sensitive liberal mind would understand that Hate Crimes legislation and special treatment for certain groups pertaining to employment rights are both unconstitutional. You know....that thing all those old guys signed all those years ago when they were starting something called The United States of America? So, sounds like you are the one that needs to get in touch. With reality.

Emotional Liberal this, sensitive Liberal that....your Rep/Con handbook needs some new material BigA, it's out dated itself. Here's a touch of reality, hate crimes legislation, and EEOC/AA are in place, in the books, therefore are constitutional, until you can get the 9 members of the SCOTUS to change it, your just blowing smoke up people's rear as usual.

Debate over hate crime laws
Penalty-enhancement hate crime laws are traditionally justified on the grounds that, in Chief Justice Rehnquist's words, "this conduct is thought to inflict greater individual and societal harm.... bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest."
Some people object to penalty-enhancement and federal prosecution laws because they believe they offer preferred protection to certain individuals over others. There is less opposition to data collection statutes

 

[bbsam]

That's too logical ... the masses will never understand it.

You would leave crime and punishment to what the "masses understand"? Are you looking to start a "French Revolution" in this country? Been practicing you knitting?

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Debate over hate crime laws
Penalty-enhancement hate crime laws are traditionally justified on the grounds that, in Chief Justice Rehnquist's words, "this conduct is thought to inflict greater individual and societal harm.... bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest."[15]
Some people object to penalty-enhancement and federal prosecution laws because they believe they offer preferred protection to certain individuals over others. There is less opposition to data collection statutes

Oh sorryI forgot. All the whacko liberals have to do to get away with making laws that violate the constitution is, well, make the laws that violate The Constitution. You hit the nail on the head with that one. Once its in the books everything is just dandy right? Regardless of how many people get screwed over? And you don't have to worry about me getting a new "handbook." If idiot liberals such as yourself are allowed to keep running things in this country then that handbook I follow will be changed so much it will be a so unrecognizable it might as well be a new "handbook." That "handbook" is, or maybe I should say WAS The Constitution. How is that for blowing smoke up someone's rear? Now go put in your volunteer time at the local abortion clinic, purchase a carbon credit for all the times you passed gas today, or whatever it is your nutcases do to pass the time between working and sleeping.

 

[Dis-organized Labor]

You would leave crime and punishment to what the "masses understand"? Are you looking to start a "French Revolution" in this country? Been practicing you knitting?

Does one "practice you knitting" or "knit"???

 

[bbsam]

Does one "practice you knitting" or "knit"???

I believe one practices knitting. One may also practice weaving or crocheting, but neither would have the same literary reference to Madame De'Farge. Wouldn't want to irritate the ghost of Dickens with such a slight.

 

[Lue C Fur]

Oh sorryI forgot. All the whacko liberals have to do to get away with making laws that violate the constitution is, well, make the laws that violate The Constitution. You hit the nail on the head with that one. Once its in the books everything is just dandy right? Regardless of how many people get screwed over? And you don't have to worry about me getting a new "handbook." If idiot liberals such as yourself are allowed to keep running things in this country then that handbook I follow will be changed so much it will be a so unrecognizable it might as well be a new "handbook." That "handbook" is, or maybe I should say WAS The Constitution. How is that for blowing smoke up someone's rear? Now go put in your volunteer time at the local abortion clinic, purchase a carbon credit for all the times you passed gas today, or whatever it is your nutcases do to pass the time between working and sleeping.

The carbon credit passing gas thing was a gutbuster....thanks. he he

 

[diesel96]

Oh sorryI forgot. All the whacko liberals have to do to get away with making laws that violate the constitution is, well, make the laws that violate The Constitution. You hit the nail on the head with that one. Once its in the books everything is just dandy right? Regardless of how many people get screwed over?

And you don't have to worry about me getting a new "handbook." If idiot liberals such as yourself are allowed to keep running things in this country then that handbook I follow will be changed so much it will be a so unrecognizable it might as well be a new "handbook." That "handbook" is, or maybe I should say WAS The Constitution. How is that for blowing smoke up someone's rear? Now go put in your volunteer time at the local abortion clinic, purchase a carbon credit for all the times you passed gas today, or whatever it is your nutcases do to pass the time between working and sleeping.

Wow, you bring such strong arguements BigA...... whackos, idiots, nutcases, abortion clinics, and carbon credits....OOOh Such intelligence oozing out into your debating skills BigA. Seriously, why aren't you capable of keeping your composure in a public forum. Your post are a direct reflection of your maturity level and your obsession of resorting to namecalling and sterotyping when someone challenges you...
Please share with your minute array of conservative knowledge, what part of the Hate Crime Expansion Bill is un-constitutional ?
But before you do, are you aware that hate crime laws were enacted after the assassination of Martin Luther King, probably before your immature @ss was born.
The expansion of the Hate Crime Bill has long been sought by civil rights and gay rights groups. Conservatives groups naturally opposed it, as well as any other minority, gender, or gay issue, with a bogus arguement that it creates a special class of victims. There's also paranoia, that it could silence clergymen or others opposed to homosexuality on religious or philosophical grounds.
Statistics show 45 states have hate crimes statutes, and this bill will not change current practices where hate crimes are generally investigated and prosecuted by state and local officials.
So tell us BigA with your volunteer time, where do you spend it ? In a Mnpls airport restroom with a wide stance?

 

[chev]

So now that you know where he stands on these issues, does it make him a bad person? Does everyone here, at work, or even in this world have to agree with what you believe diesel? If we don't believe as you believe are we to be subject to ridicule?

Big props steve. This crap is getting old. Borderline flaming if you ask me

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

The carbon credit passing gas thing was a gutbuster....thanks. he he

No problem. I'm sure he was offended by that as well. Probably has bad gas and has reported me to the thought police so I can be processed for a hate crime.

Big props steve. This crap is getting old. Borderline flaming if you ask me

Flaming is the appropriate word since the air coming out of liberals mouths is usually flaming hot.

 

[bbsam]

Oh sorryI forgot. All the whacko liberals have to do to get away with making laws that violate the constitution is, well, make the laws that violate The Constitution. You hit the nail on the head with that one. Once its in the books everything is just dandy right? Regardless of how many people get screwed over? And you don't have to worry about me getting a new "handbook." If idiot liberals such as yourself are allowed to keep running things in this country then that handbook I follow will be changed so much it will be a so unrecognizable it might as well be a new "handbook." That "handbook" is, or maybe I should say WAS The Constitution. How is that for blowing smoke up someone's rear? Now go put in your volunteer time at the local abortion clinic, purchase a carbon credit for all the times you passed gas today, or whatever it is your nutcases do to pass the time between working and sleeping.

I am impressed that someone on the right even remembers how to spell "Constitution" after ignoring it for 8 years. But you are right. The words "Hate Crime" do not appear in the Constitution. Of course neither does "extraordinary rendition". Or "manslaughter", "rape", "drunk driving", "tax evasion". See how silly your argument becomes?

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

I am impressed that someone on the right even remembers how to spell "Constitution" after ignoring it for 8 years. But you are right. The words "Hate Crime" do not appear in the Constitution. Of course neither does "extraordinary rendition". Or "manslaughter", "rape", "drunk driving", "tax evasion". See how silly your argument becomes?

Are you serious? You've got to be kidding me. They aren't in The Constitution but they are in the individual states' constitutions and/or law books. Nice try though. Actually....no it wasn't. It was rather "silly." But since you seem lost on the very issue you attempted to use against me I'll help you. Try studying up on the 10th Amendment.

 

[JimJimmyJames]

It is correct that at times motive needs to be established to correctly apply the law.

I don't think this translates to a need for hate crimes legislation.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

It is correct that at times motive needs to be established to correctly apply the law.

I don't think this translates to a need for hate crimes legislation.

I hate when you say stuff like that, oops!