You are confused. You dont "add a hate crime on afterward." You dont add any crime/charges on afterward. You classify the illegal action as a hate crime after someone is already found guilty.
Its like this:
1) Somebody assaults another person.
2) The person is arrested for assault and charged.
3) A jury or judge finds the person guilty.
4) During sentencing, the crime is classified as a hate crime if it is determined that the victim was targeted specifically for being a part of a certain group. At this point, usually, a longer sentence is given.
This is already done informally-- motive is usually taken into account during sentencing right now.
And many hate crime sentence enhancements have been given out for attacks against white, christian americans.
oydave: why do you keep talking about free speech? Hate crimes dont make anything illegal that is currently legal.
hate crime rules work like this: AFTER somebody is found guilty of something illegal, it is then evaluated as a hate crime. If it is determined that hate against a certain class of people was the motive, then additional punishments apply and the case is classified as a hate crime. But it only comes in AFTER somebody is guilty of something that is ALREADY illegal. it has absolutely nothing to do with free speech. It doesnt make ANYTHING illegal that is not currently illegal...
PistolPete/oydave: Bush submitted the budget for FY2009. The president always submits the budget request to congress. And the rise in deficits wasnt because of increased spending but rather due to decreased tax collection due to the crash...
oydave: Bush's 2009 budget estimated a $1.3 billion deficit. Obama's 2010 budget has a estimated $1.5 billion deficit. So I dont know exactly where you get the "budgets tripled Bush budgets" line.
oydave: Read what I said again. A hate crime does not mean that 'hate' itself is a crime. Nobody proposes making hate alone a crime. Such a proposal would be absurd. That is not at all what 'hate crime' refers to. With the passage of hate crime legislation, nothing that is currently legal would suddenly become illegal.
This author is confused about what a hate crime is. Its not a crime against a minority. If you touch my girlfriend and I punch you in the face, it doesnt matter if you are gay or black or white or latino. Its not a hate crime. And I wont be punished any differently based on whether the guy was gay or black or latino....
What are you talking about? It doesnt make thoughts illegal. It simply classifies already illegal actions in another category based on motivation, just like we already do. And sets different penalties accordingly.
Its the difference between "possession of cocaine," and "possession of cocaine WITH THE INTENT to distribute." So I assume that, by your logic, law makes the "thought process" of thinking about distributing cocaine illegal? And you are against it?
All Comments »
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation