UK PETITION for rock/goth/other guys re: hatecrimes

[~K~]

Honestly "Hate Crime" should be defined and dealt with based on the premise itself and not specifics. For instance ... If someone gets murdered or beat for a specified bias then it should be elevated to a hate crime. White supremists for example target minorities, that should be prosecuted as a hate crime and dealt with in a tougher manner ...

[Bengal]

Kevin,
While I'm as liberal as they come, I can't get with that idea.

A crime is a crime. What we are doing is policing thoughts. Doesn't that sound a bit "out there" to you? It does to me. We can't legislate thoughts.

People have always been murdered in our society for pissing off someone else. Doesn't matter if it's because you look gay or because you said something stupid to someone. Muder is rich in our history.

But a crime is a crime. The act is the crime. The thoughts behind it don't really matter. Murder is murder. Assault is assault. Rape is rape.

EDIT: I have no real personal connection to this issue. I did use to get in fights because people didn't like my long hair or metal t-shirts or whatever. Just a part of growing up, I think.

[~K~]

I understand your premise, I don't disgree with the whole 1 life is no less important than another. The problem comes from societies bias against what is different and this causes people to lose jobs, denied medical , lost homes, and the the violence issues ..

Sometimes people get murdered for being different and the police turn a blind eye because they were gay or transsexual and it's wrong ..but without those protections people continue to use these types of people as a target

FWIW, I'm actually a conservative but I do have some very liberal points of view.

[Jason1212]

Kevin is 100% on point here. I had a friend in high school that got dragged behind a truck because he had long hair and was wearing a Ratt t-shirt. How did he know it was for this reason? They told as they held him down and tied the rope around his ankles. He had never seen the guys that did it or the truck they were driving. He got hurt pretty bad but was real lucky that the rope broke. Those guys didn't even get caught. Hate crime may not be a good description because of its racial connotations, but I strongly feel that if a crime is committed based on a personal prejudice that it should carry a different level of punishment.

[Bengal]

Kevin,
I see what you're saying. There should be zero tollerance for police turning a blind eye on anything. But I'm sure it happens. But I hope we are progressing as a society and that is becoming less and less.

So is being "anti hate crime" a liberal or conservative idea? I really have no idea.

[Bengal]

Kevin is 100% on point here. I had a friend in high school that got dragged behind a truck because he had long hair and was wearing a Ratt t-shirt. How did he know it was for this reason? They told as they held him down and tied the rope around his ankles. He had never seen the guys that did it or the truck they were driving. He got hurt pretty bad but was real lucky that the rope broke. Those guys didn't even get caught. Hate crime may not be a good description because of its racial connotations, but I strongly feel that if a crime is committed based on a personal prejudice that it should carry a different level of punishment.

Horrible story. I'm glad your friend got out of that with his life.

But aren't all assaults based on some kind of personal prejudice? Supposing robbery is not the goal but just assault. I don't think I've ever seen an assualt case that didn't have some kind of personal prejudice behind it. Even the after school fights in Jr. High.

[Spivonious]

I guess if anything, the normal punishments should be increased to match the hate-crime punishments. Shooting someone in the head is murder, regardless of why they did it.

[~K~]

Hate crimes protection tends to be a more liberal type of thinking. Generally conservatives don't like to bend because of the issue. They wont discount they crime but they don't think it deserves special concern ..

Take the gay issue. Most conservative view gay issues as an immoral idea because so many conservatives are based around their faith. I guess this is why I am slighly progressive in my thinking( I'm not very religous)

Anyway the idea that some conservatives seem to have is that it's an immoral act and if they weren't engaging in the bevaviour then they would need to worry about the violence.. again narrowminded.

Oklahoma just has a politician (Sally Kern)that gave a speech that was secretly taped. In it she makes the comment that homosexuals were much worse than terrorists. Hardly the case and a very irresponsible point of view. These are our leaders ..

So take that mentality in Govt then add what could be construed as a hate crime. She can justify it because of what she deems immoral behaviour and people like that turn a blind eye.. so does every crime get treated with equal justice?

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=us&q=Sally+Kern

[Bengal]

so does every crime get treated with equal justice?

I think the OJ case answered that.

And I'm talking more on the money issue and not the race issue. I believe OJ got off because he had the scratch to pay for the best lawyers around to confuse the jury.

Thanks for clearing up were the issue comes from. I've never researched it at all. I'm just going off what my thoughts are on the subject.

[CharvelRocker]

The problem with charging someone with a a hate crime is that it doesn't solve squat. This will be very politically incorrect and come off as racist but hang with me:

White guy shoots black guy. Black guy dies and his family says it was a race based attack. White guy gets longer than normal sentence/life in prison

Black guy shoots white guy. Black guy gets regular sentence, end of.

THAT is why hate crime laws now don't work, at least not in the US. They aren't two way streets. Even with hate crime laws, do people REALLY get treated evenly? Probably not.

I also have to agree with Bengal in that every crime committed against another person is caused by hate towards that person. EVERY crime of that nature is a hate crime. If you hate them because they are a different color, hate them because you feel they ripped you off, or hate them because you feel they disgraced you, when you attack someone because of that you did it out of hate.

[Mrs Tekky]

A crime is a crime. What we are doing is policing thoughts. Doesn't that sound a bit "out there" to you? It does to me. We can't legislate thoughts.

But a crime is a crime. The act is the crime. The thoughts behind it don't really matter. Murder is murder. Assault is assault. Rape is rape.

Our judicial system already has categories for every crime - it currently does not see every murder the same or every rape the same. Why not at least continue to refine how these crimes are viewed? Why not further define the seriousness of the crime? Why not say that killing someone because of some bias is worse than killing someone because they targeted someone in your family? Neither person is less dead but the motives are much different.

For example, if you rape someone without a weapon (only using yourself) you will get less time than someone that has a gun on them at the time - the victim is no less raped, but the crime is considered worse.

If you plan a murder you will get more time than if you just do it on the spur of the moment - the victim is no less dead, but the punishment is different.

The motive and means of a crime already get you a different punishment now so why not define these a bit more.

[StukaJU87]

so does every crime get treated with equal justice?

I think the OJ case answered that.

White guy shoots black guy. Black guy dies and his family says it was a race based attack. White guy gets longer than normal sentence/life in prison

Black guy shoots white guy. Black guy gets regular sentence, end of.

Perfect example is a case that just completed trial in NY. Group of white teens (4 or 5, I forget) show up at black kids' house to confront him about an incident at a party earlier that evening.

Black kids' father answers the door with an ILLEGAL handgun and blows one of the UNARMED white kids off the porch, killing him.

Black father gets 2-4 years for his crime.

Why this joker is not doing 25 years is beyond me. Reverse the circumstances and see what happens. Rev Al and his cronies will make sure you do hard time.

[Bengal]

Mrs Tekky,
Because the laws are already so diluted with explinations that it's getting hard to follow. I think rape is rape. I don't see a difference if a gun was involved or not. So I don't think that should be a bigger crime. It should be rape.

I understand that we have First Degree Murder and Second Degree Murder but I see that as a bit different. Pre meditated vs. spur of the moment. That is a difference, but if the guy had a gun on him when he raped the person isn't a huge difference to me.

I think we need to tone down the laws, not make them more complicated. The more complicated means people like Albert Schipero (sp) or Johnnie Cockran (RIP) can find more loopholes to get these guys off.

[Jason1212]

Exactly. Give the jury legal right to weigh circumstances of prejudice of any kind when deciding punishment.

[zeegler]

What I'm getting at, is that regardless of the "WHY", the punishment for commiting an act of violence on another human being should be the same. Call it a hate crime, or whatever the hell you want to call it. Everyone deserves the same level of protection afforded by the consequences of violent crimes. I believe all violent crimes should be punished far more severely than they are.