Hate Crime

[Radam]

My opinion is that the major issue to look at when judging a case is whether a person has committed a crime or has not committed a crime.

If it is determined that a person has committed a crime, motive is generally of little importance, and certainly, the nature of a person's motive should not be a crime in itself.

What are your thoughts?

[ERies7]

Ok this is why I am anti-hate crime;

If you damage a government building, does that show your hate for the government. If you burn a Detroit Red Wings jersey, wont that show your hate to the Red Wings? If you flip off a blond women, does that show your hate for blonds? Think about it.

[TheGiantPeach]

At 8/7/01 08:40 PM, Radam wrote: My opinion is that the major issue to look at when judging a case is whether a person has committed a crime or has not committed a crime.

If it is determined that a person has committed a crime, motive is generally of little importance, and certainly, the nature of a person's motive should not be a crime in itself.

What are your thoughts?

Well, you are right that motive has little to do with anything, besides proving he/she did it. And anyway isn't every murder a hate crime? I mean they dislike the person so much as to kill them. It just sickens me.

[Radam]

At 8/8/01 01:54 AM, SomewhatDamaged wrote:

At 8/7/01 08:40 PM, Radam wrote: My opinion is that the major issue to look at when judging a case is whether a person has committed a crime or has not committed a crime.

If it is determined that a person has committed a crime, motive is generally of little importance, and certainly, the nature of a person's motive should not be a crime in itself.

What are your thoughts?

Well, you are right that motive has little to do with anything, besides proving he/she did it. And anyway isn't every murder a hate crime? I mean they dislike the person so much as to kill them. It just sickens me.

That, or it's unmotivated psychopathic killing, but then the hate thing doesn't apply in either way.

[Slizor]

Yeah ok now call i what it's called in england. Racism. Of course intent is important! That is the difference between man slaughter and murder.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

If it is determined that a person has committed a crime, motive is generally of little importance,

This is Compeletly and TOTALLY false, no offense. Ifyou are charged with manslaughter, the accidental murder of a man, that means you had no motive, then you can get 5-15 years in florida. 2nd degree, murder without a precalculated plan or forethought you can get 10-25. 1st degree murder, where you have a motive and precalculated plan, is 20-life sometimes even death with Jeb bush... ugggh.

and certainly, the nature of a person's motive should not be a crime in itself.

That would also mean that conspiricy to commit murder wouldn't be a crime. Again I have to disagree.

I beleive hate crime is a crime. The act of assaulting an ethnic group, however this should NOT be added on to a sentance. If someone murderers a black man, they should be tried for murder. If a KKK member kills a black man in order to exibit a hate for his ethnic background, then he sound be tried for murder as well as hate crime, but not murder with hate crime. They should be seperate prosecutions.

[Radam]

At 8/8/01 06:45 AM, Slizor wrote: Yeah ok now call i what it's called in england. Racism. Of course intent is important! That is the difference between man slaughter and murder.

The issue at hand is not whether intent is present; it's the (I'll say it again) nature of the intent. If you kill a man because you find his voice annoying, is that inherently less evil than killing a man because of his skin color? I say no. Now, why is the latter more severely punished?

[Slizor]

The issue at hand is not whether intent is present; it's the (I'll say it again) nature of the intent. If you kill a man because you find his voice annoying, is that inherently less evil than killing a man because of his skin color? I say no. Now, why is the latter more severely punished?

It depends on how you view the system. The system views the system as one of rehabilatation, it doesn't want racism in society, so if they want you to stop being a homicidal manic and want to "cure" racism then they'll have to take longer.

[Radam]

At 8/8/01 06:10 PM, Slizor wrote: It depends on how you view the system. The system views the system as one of rehabilatation, it doesn't want racism in society, so if they want you to stop being a homicidal manic and want to "cure" racism then they'll have to take longer.

People are entitled to their views.

And, yes, I understand that they are not entitled to go around killing people, but that's why murder is a crime. Their reason for committing a crime should never be a crime in itself. That's like letting people vote for a Presidential candidate, but making it criminal to do so for reasons with which "the system" disagrees.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/8/01 05:47 PM, Radam wrote:

At 8/8/01 06:45 AM, Slizor wrote: Yeah ok now call i what it's called in england. Racism. Of course intent is important! That is the difference between man slaughter and murder.

The issue at hand is not whether intent is present; it's the (I'll say it again) nature of the intent. If you kill a man because you find his voice annoying, is that inherently less evil than killing a man because of his skin color? I say no. Now, why is the latter more severely punished?

As I said before, they are two seperate charges. One the murder of a man, and another charge, as I used the example if a KKK member kills someone to send a message to the black community. They should be two seperate charges. THis does not however mean, if any white man kills any black man, it's hate. Hate crime should only be charged if someone is attempting to extort a racial, ethnic or other type group, by means of violence.

[Radam]

At 8/8/01 08:00 PM, Anarchypenguin wrote:

At 8/8/01 05:47 PM, Radam wrote:

At 8/8/01 06:45 AM, Slizor wrote: Yeah ok now call i what it's called in england. Racism. Of course intent is important! That is the difference between man slaughter and murder.

The issue at hand is not whether intent is present; it's the (I'll say it again) nature of the intent. If you kill a man because you find his voice annoying, is that inherently less evil than killing a man because of his skin color? I say no. Now, why is the latter more severely punished?

As I said before, they are two seperate charges. One the murder of a man, and another charge, as I used the example if a KKK member kills someone to send a message to the black community. They should be two seperate charges. THis does not however mean, if any white man kills any black man, it's hate. Hate crime should only be charged if someone is attempting to extort a racial, ethnic or other type group, by means of violence.

Like people with annoying voices?

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/9/01 01:18 AM, Radam wrote:

At 8/8/01 08:00 PM, Anarchypenguin wrote:

At 8/8/01 05:47 PM, Radam wrote:

At 8/8/01 06:45 AM, Slizor wrote: Yeah ok now call i what it's called in england. Racism. Of course intent is important! That is the difference between man slaughter and murder.

The issue at hand is not whether intent is present; it's the (I'll say it again) nature of the intent. If you kill a man because you find his voice annoying, is that inherently less evil than killing a man because of his skin color? I say no. Now, why is the latter more severely punished?

As I said before, they are two seperate charges. One the murder of a man, and another charge, as I used the example if a KKK member kills someone to send a message to the black community. They should be two seperate charges. THis does not however mean, if any white man kills any black man, it's hate. Hate crime should only be charged if someone is attempting to extort a racial, ethnic or other type group, by means of violence.

Like people with annoying voices?

Well, there is no organization made to hate such a type of person, nor has their ever been an action taken directly to harm such a specific group. Your trying to make the issue funny, but it's not. If there acually was a group of people who gatherd together all becuase they had annoying voices, and someone malaciously and viciously by the use of violence tried to send a message to them that they are unwelcome in america and will be punished with violence, then yes, that would be a hate crime.

[Slizor]

People are entitled to their views.

And so is the system, that is why there is a sentance for doing something racist.

Their reason for committing a crime should never be a crime in itself. That's like letting people vote for a Presidential candidate, but making it criminal to do so for reasons with which "the system" disagrees.

I'm not saying it should, I'm just saying why it is.

[LaserBeamBandit]

There is almost no racism against blacks in America, especially in urban and suburban area in the north. This is what the law is really for. Pleasing the black community to get their votes. The blacks are the real racist ones calling every black man killed by a white man racist. A lot more white men are killed by black men. The reason you don't hear anything about this is because it's no big deal. The white community doesnt get up and start protestin about racism. I never had racism by whites (maybe becuase I'm white) but I sure have had a lot of racism by black. Blackes like that revern guy down in jail in Pueto Rico supports black claims before even having all the facts. They claim of being beaten and then a camera that was taping didn't show no police beating on the arrested black shit (he's shit because of what he did not his crime). The black protester leader didn't apologies or nothing even when asked to. It is Politically incorrect for whites to say what I said and am saying, but is okay for a black to say this. If I was going to go look for a drugh dealer or someone seling guns or pimps, I would go out looking for a black man becuase most of these places are filled by blacks.

[Radam]

At 8/9/01 05:35 AM, Slizor wrote:

People are entitled to their views.

And so is the system, that is why there is a sentance for doing something racist.

"The system" is a system for the people. It not an entity entitled to rights. It is not to curb any civil liberties granted to the people, and punishing a way of thinking (agreeable or not) is doing just that.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America, especially in urban and suburban area in the north. This is what the law is really for. Pleasing the black community to get their votes. The blacks are the real racist ones calling every black man killed by a white man racist. A lot more white men are killed by black men. The reason you don't hear anything about this is because it's no big deal. The white community doesnt get up and start protestin about racism. I never had racism by whites (maybe becuase I'm white) but I sure have had a lot of racism by black. Blackes like that revern guy down in jail in Pueto Rico supports black claims before even having all the facts. They claim of being beaten and then a camera that was taping didn't show no police beating on the arrested black shit (he's shit because of what he did not his crime). The black protester leader didn't apologies or nothing even when asked to. It is Politically incorrect for whites to say what I said and am saying, but is okay for a black to say this. If I was going to go look for a drugh dealer or someone seling guns or pimps, I would go out looking for a black man becuase most of these places are filled by blacks.

Those are some pretty big assumptions. Pretty much I consider it to be all flase until you acually back it up, either show some evidence or your just ranting.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

To the previous post that " revern guy " I belive is Reverend Jesse Jackson.

As It stands now, hate crime as a prescutable punishment is flawed. That's is ok. Our legal system is made in such a way to let us correct out mistakes. How I propose to do this is to make hate crime, a completly seperate crime, than murder. For example anytime violence is taken to harm a group whether it be racial, ethnic, religious or not, the victim can press charges acordingly. Here would be an example, If someone ( regardless of race ) burns a cross in a black mans yard, this would be an example of a hate crime. If a KKK member burnt a cross in a public and made derogatory terms to describe jews blacks, whatever this would be another example. If someone burnt a cross in their own yard made deorogatory terms to describe an ethnic or racial group, this would not be an example of hate crime, becuase its on their own land, and therefore freedom of speach would negate this.

[reddeadrevolver]

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America, especially in urban and suburban area in the north.

This whole statement is nothing but racist remarks, therefore you contribute to racism in America

This is what the law is really for. Pleasing the black community to get their votes. The blacks are the real racist ones calling every black man killed by a white man racist. A lot more white men are killed by black men. The reason you don't hear anything about this is because it's no big deal. The white community doesnt get up and start protestin about racism. I never had racism by whites (maybe becuase I'm white) but I sure have had a lot of racism by black. Blackes like that revern guy down in jail in Pueto Rico supports black claims before even having all the facts. They claim of being beaten and then a camera that was taping didn't show no police beating on the arrested black shit (he's shit because of what he did not his crime). The black protester leader didn't apologies or nothing even when asked to. It is Politically incorrect for whites to say what I said and am saying, but is okay for a black to say this. If I was going to go look for a drugh dealer or someone seling guns or pimps, I would go out looking for a black man becuase most of these places are filled by blacks.

You like to stereotype people don't you? You have just labeled every black man/woman in america as racist. This is not true. I have many friends who are african american, and don't discriminate against white people. You just want to bitch and complain because things aren't how you want it. Yes, there are racist black people. Just as there are whites, asians, and hispanics who are racist as well. The color of one's skin does not determine their mentality. It is all in their homelife and upbringing. Think before you speak next time.
~~~~~~~
Concerning the Hate Crime issue, I believe that if a crime is committed, than obviously someone hated another enough to do it. But of course, it isn't always the case. Not all crimes stem from hate, but most do. I'm still rather undecided on the issue.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/9/01 03:38 PM, Anti-You wrote:

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America

In this such bullshit, I live in florida and not but about 30 miles to the north, a black man was beaten becuase he enterd a store that had a sign that said whites only. In georgia and Alabama there are ALOT of cities that really haven't changed.

[Slizor]

"The system" is a system for the people. It not an entity entitled to rights. It is not to curb any civil liberties granted to the people, and punishing a way of thinking (agreeable or not) is doing just that.

"The system" is a system in the interest of the people, not in the peoples interest.

[Blackmagic]

All crimes are hate crimes.

It does not matter. ALMOST ALL MAJOR CRIMES ARE MOTIVATED BY HATE.

[Slizor]

All crimes are hate crimes.

It does not matter. ALMOST ALL MAJOR CRIMES ARE MOTIVATED BY HATE.

Please read the whole of the topic before giving us your 1 and a half cents

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/10/01 01:14 PM, Slizor wrote:

All crimes are hate crimes.

It does not matter. ALMOST ALL MAJOR CRIMES ARE MOTIVATED BY HATE.

Please read the whole of the topic before giving us your 1 and a half cents

Well said.

[LaserBeamBandit]

At 8/9/01 03:46 PM, Anarchypenguin wrote:

At 8/9/01 03:38 PM, Anti-You wrote:

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America

In this such bullshit, I live in florida and not but about 30 miles to the north, a black man was beaten becuase he enterd a store that had a sign that said whites only. In georgia and Alabama there are ALOT of cities that really haven't changed.

I forgot to write down everything, The South still gots racism in it as does the North (at a much lesser extent of racism against blacks in the North). I was talking about the North and mainly New York City. And yes I would look for a black person if I was looking for a drug dealer as how I would look for a white male if I was looking for a biker

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/10/01 05:40 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote:

At 8/9/01 03:46 PM, Anarchypenguin wrote:

At 8/9/01 03:38 PM, Anti-You wrote:

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America

In this such bullshit, I live in florida and not but about 30 miles to the north, a black man was beaten becuase he enterd a store that had a sign that said whites only. In georgia and Alabama there are ALOT of cities that really haven't changed.

I forgot to write down everything, The South still gots racism in it as does the North (at a much lesser extent of racism against blacks in the North). I was talking about the North and mainly New York City. And yes I would look for a black person if I was looking for a drug dealer as how I would look for a white male if I was looking for a biker

Ohh ok, that's fine, I'd look for you If I were looking for a biggot.

[LaserBeamBandit]

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America, especially in urban and suburban area in the north. This is what the law is really for. Pleasing the black community to get their votes. The blacks are the real racist ones calling every black man killed by a white man racist. A lot more white men are killed by black men. The reason you don't hear anything about this is because it's no big deal. The white community doesnt get up and start protestin about racism. I never had racism by whites (maybe becuase I'm white) but I sure have had a lot of racism by black. Blackes like that revern guy down in jail in Pueto Rico supports black claims before even having all the facts. They claim of being beaten and then a camera that was taping didn't show no police beating on the arrested black shit (he's shit because of what he did not his crime). The black protester leader didn't apologies or nothing even when asked to. It is Politically incorrect for whites to say what I said and am saying, but is okay for a black to say this. If I was going to go look for a drugh dealer or someone seling guns or pimps, I would go out looking for a black man becuase most of these places are filled by blacks.

I apologies if this offended anyone. I didn't write it clearly enough and was just throwing words.

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/10/01 05:46 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote:

At 8/9/01 01:07 PM, LaserBeamBandit wrote: There is almost no racism against blacks in America, especially in urban and suburban area in the north. This is what the law is really for. Pleasing the black community to get their votes. The blacks are the real racist ones calling every black man killed by a white man racist. A lot more white men are killed by black men. The reason you don't hear anything about this is because it's no big deal. The white community doesnt get up and start protestin about racism. I never had racism by whites (maybe becuase I'm white) but I sure have had a lot of racism by black. Blackes like that revern guy down in jail in Pueto Rico supports black claims before even having all the facts. They claim of being beaten and then a camera that was taping didn't show no police beating on the arrested black shit (he's shit because of what he did not his crime). The black protester leader didn't apologies or nothing even when asked to. It is Politically incorrect for whites to say what I said and am saying, but is okay for a black to say this. If I was going to go look for a drugh dealer or someone seling guns or pimps, I would go out looking for a black man becuase most of these places are filled by blacks.

I apologies if this offended anyone. I didn't write it clearly enough and was just throwing words.

Okay.

[shorbe]

Murder or trespass, or whatever should be the charge. Hate crime is nonsense. It's a bit of the thought police really. It also says that if you were murdered just on the "boring old non-hate-crime" charge, then somehow, your death wasn't as important. Ooh...if I'm ever murdered, please let it be a hate crime so I can feel special!

Anti-You: Are your friends African or American, or do they hold dual citizenship for an African nation and also the United States of America? There's no such thing as an African American. It's like saying an Asian Antarctican. Even in a broad sense, an American must be from either North America or South America, but not from Africa.

shorbe

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 8/11/01 06:35 AM, shorbe wrote: Murder or trespass, or whatever should be the charge. Hate crime is nonsense. It's a bit of the thought police really. It also says that if you were murdered just on the "boring old non-hate-crime" charge, then somehow, your death wasn't as important. Ooh...if I'm ever murdered, please let it be a hate crime so I can feel special!

Well, As I proposed, hate crime should be seperate from murder trespass etc..., It's not the act of hating someone but the violence used as a means to get a message to a specific racial/ethnic/other group

[Radam]

At 8/10/01 05:33 AM, Slizor wrote:

"The system" is a system for the people. It not an entity entitled to rights. It is not to curb any civil liberties granted to the people, and punishing a way of thinking (agreeable or not) is doing just that.

"The system" is a system in the interest of the people, not in the peoples interest.

And you feel that punishing a way of thinking is in the better interest of the people?