Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
Hate Crimes
Well, Obama has added the LGBT community to the people protected under hate crime laws. That is all fine and dandy, but I am not sure whether this does more harm or good.
To me this more or less is just something that points out some sort of arbitrary difference between people and says "you are too weak to protect yourself, which is why we will protect you for you". I am very much for equal rights and equal protection, but I am definitely not for special protection. A crime is a crime and the reason it was committed for should not necessarily factor into the sentencing. Differentiation due to gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, nationality or what have you should not be granting special protection, even if it was cause for special disadvantages in the past.
To me this more or less is just something that points out some sort of arbitrary difference between people and says "you are too weak to protect yourself, which is why we will protect you for you". I am very much for equal rights and equal protection, but I am definitely not for special protection. A crime is a crime and the reason it was committed for should not necessarily factor into the sentencing. Differentiation due to gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, nationality or what have you should not be granting special protection, even if it was cause for special disadvantages in the past.
Comments
If I kill someone why should my punishment be any different based on whether or not that person belongs to a protected class?
Murder, like any other crime, is defined, differentiated, and stratified by mental state. How is that any different from your feared "thought police"?
Obviously there's a difference of intent between murdering with a plan, a fit of rage, or an accident. But hate crime doesn't examine presence or lack of intent, it examines the reasons for the intent. Should it really matter if I plan to kill someone because of racism, money, a personal dispute, or what have you? Planning to murder someone I think is equally bad for any reason. Why should we punish people more who plan to kill gays or jews because of homophobia or anti-semitism than we punish someone who plans to kill for financial gain or political reasons?
In my opinion, sentencing should not be dependent on the motive. I am sorry, but declaring one group of people more off limits, with more severe punishment for crimes motivated by hatred against that group, is special protection of that group. Equality is not created by putting one group of people above all other groups.
I do apologize though. My usage of "in the past" wasn't meant to convey that there is no longer any discrimination against gays. I am well aware and have witnessed enough of this unfounded discrimination.
If we're going to have hate crime legislation at all, then LGBT should be included. The point of these laws is to send a message. For the average citizen, this sort of message is far more powerful, inciting, and effective than the government simply making the statement without the backing of law.
I would personally argue that hate crime implies some level of premeditation, at least to the point that a proven hate-related murder should be handled somewhere between second and first degree.
Nothing is helping the anti-conservative cause more than the increasing craziness of the right in America today. I say Obama should step it up and incite them into a frothing fury. If he came out strongly for gay marriage, say, the right might just explode into total irrelevancy.
What makes mutants as a victim class different? If you are a politician, you know that you may be targeted and you can take steps to prevent it. If you are in a bad domestic relationship, you might see violence brewing. But what if you're a mutant, just walking down the street, and a mutant hater decides to kill you for no other reasaon than that you are a mutant? How would you as another mutant feel reading that story in the newspaper? "Wow, I could be killed just because I'm a mutant. I can't help being a mutant, but people want to kill me because I'm a mutant."
That being said there's little point in consequences at all. Asshole-stupid violent racists/homophobes/whatever won't be deterred by possible consequences anyhow.
Murder isn't the only way that a hate crime can be committed. Those guys would (allegedly) not have raped that woman if they hadn't known she was a lesbian. They did it not just to break her, but to break her for being what she is. As far as I'm concerned, that deserves extra punishment. By that logic, I guess Obama should let some of those extra Secret Service agents go. :P
Seriously, though. Isn't establishing the motive also establishing how dangerous the offender is, to some extent? Wouldn't it make sense to sentence him according to that?
If someone killed Adam our of hatred for his race or out of a dislike for him personally, I honestly think both situations should be treated equally under the law because the murderer's opinions should be irrelevant. Moreover, how can one prove why someone does something with any level of certainty. A person who is anti-Semitic might kill a particular Jewish person for a myriad of reasons either related or unrelated to the his/her hatred.
This also creates a vast inequity based on motive. Should a murderer that kills Adam for a reason completely unrelated to hatred of a social group have a lesser sentence?
However, I do like the public message this sends. Should we be altering law for a PR point, though?
I've just gotten into a number of arguments on this forum due to having a different definition of a word than other forum members. Agree on the terms used in the debate, and then proceed.
Talk about a fate worse than death. :P
Of course, in the instance of preventing/stopping a murder or other serious crime, law enforcement should still have the ability to use lethal force. The possibility of death is one of the risks of engaging in violent behavior.
EDIT: If someone is too violent, then work within the prison, let alone the general public, may be out of the question. I am right there with you on the issue of the death penalty.
If Sam killed Jack because he hated Jack for individual reasons, what reason does Sam have to kill anyone else? Jack is gone. However, if he killed Jack merely because Jack has the X-gene, shared by a significant portion of the population, I would be very concerned that Sam is going to go looking to kill more people with the X-gene.
BTW, why would anyone kill Adam? I know art critics can be harsh, but does he really need to fear death for being an artist?
I used him as an example because he is Jewish.