*Reminded of South Park episode where Cartman is sent to Juvy*

I think hate crimes are the same as normal crimes. Hating someone for being diferent is deplorable, but so is killing anyone.

Please put a little more effort into your posts, especially in the Debate section.

I can see the reasoning behind 'the punishment should be about the end result,' but I think that crimes, especially murder, need to be looked at circumstantially. As I mentioned before, I just feel that the increased punishment for hate crimes is just a deterrent to try and promote less discrimination and racism within America.

Though, I'm not too knowledgeable on the laws of other nations, so...are there increased hate crime laws in Britain, etc?

No. A large, resounding no. Also, Contra, your "deterrent" is simply another outlet for racism. If you acknowledge the difference in any way, even this way, you're advocating it.

I, of course, see that circumstances and motives should be a large part of murder cases, particularly things like the example of the beaten wife compared to the torturing rapist/murderer. However, and I'm still using the above examples, the beaten wife should have alerted the authorities. Now, I know you'll say "But he'd beat her more or kill her for that!" Yes, that is a possibility, which is why she should alert them and stay at a friend's house, or alert them and arm herself in case he does come. This is a self-defence case, we're talking about. If she were to kill him in her own defence, of course, go ahead and give her leniency!

The rapist, torturer, and eventual murderer should by tried like anyone else for typical murder (plus the rape and torture charges). That's just typical murder.

I believe that scenarios should have a sway in the punishment, but not circumstances of thought or existence, like religion, race, sex, or sexuality. As I said earlier, swaying a punishment for any of those four (and more, of course) only seeks to acknowledge the differences and breed more hate.

Just my two cents.

I think it's a bit unfair to put a 'racism' stamp on the fact that I called 'Hate Crime Punishments' a deterrent. Especially due to the fact that Hate Crimes can occur to people who aren't of 'different races.' For example, a hate crime against a Caucasian Homosexual by another Caucasian, as in the case of Matthew Shepard [Though it was more than one], Matthew Shepard was a homosexual, not someone of a different race. I don't want to stretch this out too far, but claiming that as a 'racist statement' means that you would file homosexuals, Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Hindus, or anyone of a different lifestyle, culture, or religion....a race. I do realize you mentioned later that you don't believe a person should be further punished for committing a crime against a person of a different race, religion, culture, etc., but I feel that crimes that are motivated by discrimination, should receive a harsher punishment, because, it IS their motive.

Also, just to follow up to what Erythritol had said about the beaten-wife example...not only is it nearly impossible for most battered wives to escape their husbands...in the example I gave, it is VERY LIKELY that she would have GONE TO JAIL.

Killing someone after the fact, is retaliation. Retaliation, is a crime, and gets people jail time. If that battered-wife stabbed him in the back, or shot him in the back [as would be the most likely event, because, as a battered wife, she is afraid of him, and wouldn't attack him head-on], it shows that it WAS NOT in self-defense. He could not have avoided her attack. That's retaliation, and even though many would sympathize with her, it's likely that she would still be given jail time.

To follow up with an example, in my Criminal Law class, my Professor, who is a defense attorney, told us of one of his most painful cases. A client of his, who used to do drugs with her abusive boyfriend, and finally quit in order to get a job, had returned from work one night to see her boyfriend, high on meth, holding a beer bottle in one hand, and a hunting knife in the other. There was a history of abuse between the two, but she was too afraid of him to leave him. He came up to her, and told her to do some drugs with him, and to spend time with him. As he came closer, she moved back towards the door. He suddenly moved forward, and as a reflex, she held her hands out, and ended up smacking the wrist that held the hunting knife. As a result, the knife was plunged into her boyfriend's chest, and killed him almost instantly.

She explained her case in front of a jury, and told every detail...and they decided that the accidental killing of a drug-addict was worth sentencing her to TWENTY YEARS OF PRISON.

All I'm trying to say, that even though many would agree that battered-women should get a 'get out of jail free card,' it's not how it ends up.

To end with the topic at hand, I still see no problem with harsher punishment for hate crimes, especially if that's the motive that ties the killer to the victim. Though, it is not necessary in a court trial to prove or discuss motive, it is a rather critical component for a jury. But, keep in mind that people can 'claim' it was a hate-crime all they want, but unless they have facts to back it up, a 'hate crime charge' can hold just as little water in court as any other evidence of motive.

A crime is a crime, all hate crimes do, is prove that we are all different(physcially) by separating us. I think its law that if you commit a crime in the heat of the moment(aka passion) you get a lighter sentence, because at the time you weren't mentally stable.

As such it will turn into John killed Bob because hes 1/4 Cherokee, when in fact John killed bob because Bob was cheating with his wife, or if Bill kills Steve whos 1/2 Hungarian, when in fact Steve killed his dad. Lame examples ftw

See where it gets ridicolous? We are all equal, all hate crimes will do is prove that statement otherwise, plus some people will try to turn it into a political agenda.

And Contra, I can see where your coming from, but bear in mind good intention always go sour, look at GreenPeace, now its an Anti-Capitalism group.

- Kuja

I never said thats how the law works, i merely stated that it will create racial suspicion, and in response to the judge thing, Nowhere in my post did I make any indication such a thing would occur. >.>

Now your just taking what I said out of context. You can call your example a hate crime, or an expression of hate. Again what i said made no indication thats how I thought, as such. Anyone with logical sense would catagorize these arguments as one more severe than the other. As such I fail to see, how you'd assume I see these as the same? Oh wait because I don't support hate Crime? Your example is a bad one in support of Hate Crime legistlation. And btw the racist of people of jewish ancestry obviously deserves a more harsh punishment.

Again I think your argueing too much on emotion, just because I dont see eye to eye with you, doesn't make me the bad guy. Personally what Contra said I agree with, however like I said hate crimes can also be hijacked into a political game, and not be what it was intended to be.


- Kuja