Political Crossfire Forums

Not whether you love them or hate them, I mean what do you think about a crime being more than just a crime in and of itself, but getting this additional label?

The reason I ask is because in my state a couple of days ago a black woman was set on fire by 3 people who spray painted "KKK" on her car and other racial slurs. Right now, I haven't heard anything indicating the race of the people responsible or if they even know who did it. I think "attempted murder" is good enough. I just don't get why you would call it also a "hate crime." I mean, to me, anything could get that label. If you shoot at someone, you don't love them, so is it a hate crime? Setting someone on fire is absolutely absurdly disturbing to say the least, but it's already a crime. What if they discover the 3 people that did it were black, and were simply trying to set up the KKK? Is it a hate crime only if the people who did it are of another race?

Why do we need the additional label of "hate crime?" What purpose does it serve?

A little know fact is that the laws regarding hate crimes were negotiated behind closed doors as part of thinking behind separate but equal. A discussion came up about how black people were more likely to be jailed for any crime that they did including possession of marijuana, and the progressive senators wanted the states to be harsher on white people who use and distribute marijuana. However, due to the fact that many of the senators kin experimented with drugs, the do not want to pass such a law. So behind closed doors they decided to prosecute any crime against black people on a race base will be treated harsher and will involve the authority of the Federal government.

The theory is that such crimes have an added level of culpability since the motivation rests on something we as a society have found is unacceptable. Laws reflect societal norms and in this case the norm at question is anti-bigotry.

Granted, conservatives hate gay people so these laws don't reflect their sentiments. But it reflects the sentiments of the civilized portion of society, which is all i'm worried about.

I disagree with most hate crime legislation.

1. Because it makes a special case out of someone who is basically just an asshole. For the same reason I don't think terrorists should be tried by special courts, I don't think racists should be given the ability to martyr themselves. They are just criminals, nothing more.

2. Because I think the the sentencing for violent crimes needs to be much higher. Some guys get out of jail after 8 years for murdering people. If you murder someone, 20 years, solid, no parole, no easy-outs, no chance of getting out before than. If you commit seriously bodily harm, 10 years, no exceptions.

3. Because I think the means of killing people should be considered differently. Shooting someone in the head is different then lighting them on fire until they die. So crimes that are especially vicious should be given additional time. So, if you beat someone up, tortured them, and then killed them, that should be assault + torture + murder. Probably worthy of 25-30 years, no parole.