Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Opinions & Editorials
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Opinions & Editorials Discuss Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes at the General Forum; Kind of makes me wonder.... If one can be prosecuted/sentenced more harshly for a "hate crime", can one have their ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2018, 07:14 PM
Bat Bat is offline
Square Root Of Pi
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,406
Thanks: 63
Thanked 927 Times in 557 Posts
Default Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Kind of makes me wonder....

If one can be prosecuted/sentenced more harshly for a "hate crime", can one have their prosecution/sentence more limited for a "love crime"?

Just asking because the last time my house was burglarized, the guy that did it was doing out of love for his children and needed my property so that he could sell it for cash to purchase food for his children that he loved.
__________________
Slew flatten lueble istan belk weas bi icktal.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2018, 08:41 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,367
Thanks: 9,400
Thanked 5,660 Times in 3,812 Posts
Default Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
Kind of makes me wonder....

If one can be prosecuted/sentenced more harshly for a "hate crime", can one have their prosecution/sentence more limited for a "love crime"?

Just asking because the last time my house was burglarized, the guy that did it was doing out of love for his children and needed my property so that he could sell it for cash to purchase food for his children that he loved.
HA
it's pretty weird.


Here's another one to wonder about.
Since "HATE" is an emotion, coupled with a wrong belief.
Shouldn't the modern caring souls that hate HateCrime so much have the hate/thought criminal placed into mandatory counseling or "reeducation"... at the "dept of Love" maybe instead of prison? To change their beliefs so these hate filled creatures can conform to the modern social norms.

__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 02-27-2018 at 08:58 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2018, 10:33 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,386
Thanks: 10,022
Thanked 15,138 Times in 9,175 Posts
Post Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch907
A simple reading of the OP shows this to be absolutely false.
Ayers was charged with two crimes directly related to motive.

Don't let the logistics of the implementation confuse you.
The bottom line is that if he was found "not guilty" of kidnapping and assault with intent to maim -- plus simple assault, then he would have been completely innocent.

The way they label the sentencing modifier / the way they determine guilt / innocence for the sentencing modifier does not diminish the fact that it's a sentencing modifier.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
seems to me the only fair questions concerning motives of a crime are.
Was it deliberate or intentional?
If so it that's taken into account, as apposed to the offense being an accident or negligence.
Was it planned as apposed to a "crime of passion"?
If planned then it's "premeditated".
Is/was the person mentality ill/disabled that did the crime?
The details of the negative thoughts around those issues aren't important to the prosecution or punishment beyond framing answers to those questions.
If a man planned to shoot his female neighbor becasue he doesn't like her dog crapping in his lawn Or because she's a Jew Or because she won't go out on a date with him.
The punishment shouldn't change.
The shooter did it with intent, premeditated and he was perfectly sane.
Seems pretty strait forward. more than that and it just becomes ...wrong IMO
That is your opinion.
A majority support hate crime legislation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Man
I have heard that crimes against seniors, are worse than crimes against younger people. I guess that would be like a crime against the physically or mentally disabled. In my gut, I feel those crimes are worse, or maybe that the perp is a worse human being for picking on these people.
I would like to see extra punishment for these criminals.
And it's possible to put legislation on the ballot to add additional categories.
If there is support, they'll be added.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2018, 10:43 PM
lurch907's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Alaska, the greatest place on earth.
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,571
Thanks: 1,036
Thanked 2,914 Times in 1,701 Posts
Default Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post

Don't let the logistics of the implementation confuse you.
The bottom line is that if he was found "not guilty" of kidnapping and assault with intent to maim -- plus simple assault, then he would have been completely innocent.

The way they label the sentencing modifier / the way they determine guilt / innocence for the sentencing modifier does not diminish the fact that it's a sentencing modifier.
I'm not confused in the slightest, he was charged with at least two crimes strictly do to his motive. That is not a sentence modifier, its a crime.
BTW, you didn't answer the question.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2018, 07:06 AM
GottaGo's Avatar
Sanity is overrated.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Miles to go before I sleep
Posts: 11,518
Thanks: 9,329
Thanked 7,531 Times in 4,839 Posts
Default Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
People keep trying to reduce it to "people because they have a particular TRAIT".
That's an inaccurate assessment.

For example, hate crime laws cover race.
EVERYBODY HAS A RACE.

It's not the having of the race (or a specific race excluding others) which dictates it's a hate crime.
It's the motive.
If a white man is targeted because he is white, that can be a hate crime (pending judgment).
If a black man has a white man assault him because he wanted the parking space, that's not a hate crime.
The hate crime statistics run the gambit showing different races being victimized.

Even without hate crime laws, any judge on the bench can look at a lynching murder and decide it qualifies as more worthy of punishment than another killing.

Hate crime legislation provides citizenry input for sentencing guidelines on motive.



So it's okay to punish crimes against specific people more harshly than other crimes against other people, as long as you approve.
If you think that's an inaccurate assessment, then explain why it's false.

Traditionally, sentencing judges have considered a wide variety of factors in addition to evidence bearing on guilt in determining what sentence to impose on a convicted defendant. See Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U. S. ----, ---- (1991) (slip op., at 10); United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443, 446 (1972); Williams v. New York, 337 U.S. 241, 246 (1949). The defendant's motive for committing the offense is one important factor. See 1 W. LeFave & A. Scott, Substantive Criminal Law § 3.6(b), p. 324 (1986) ("Motives are most relevant when the trial judge sets the defendant's sentence, and it is not uncommon for a defendant to receive a minimum sentence because he was acting with good motives, or a rather high sentence because of his bad motives"); cf. Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137, 156 (1987) ("Deeply ingrained in our legal tradition is the idea that the more purposeful is the criminal conduct, the more serious is the offense, and, therefore, the more severely it ought to be punished"). Thus, in many States the commission of a murder, or other capital offense, for pecuniary gain is a separate aggravating circumstance under the capital sentencing statute. See, e. g., Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-703(F)(5) (1989); Fla. Stat. § 921.1415(f) (Supp. 1992); Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-101(5)(f) (Supp. 1992); N. C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-2000(e)(6) (1992); Wyo. Stat. § 6-2-102(h)(vi) (Supp. 1992).
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-515.ZO.html
Race is a trait. Everyone has a 'race', that's rather stating the obvious. Red hair, brown eyes, male, female, somewhere in between. They are all traits.

Does motive change the end fact that someone has been assaulted or killed? No. By inflicting 'hate crime' as motive, it says that someone is worth more then another, and I disagree with that 1000%.

Mr. Wonder's statement about accidental and premeditated are about all that should be considered, IMO.
__________________
Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.
If you can't laugh at yourself, you might as well get embalmed
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2018, 11:30 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,386
Thanks: 10,022
Thanked 15,138 Times in 9,175 Posts
Post Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Race is a trait. Everyone has a 'race', that's rather stating the obvious. Red hair, brown eyes, male, female, somewhere in between. They are all traits.
The reason I stated that is because some people are treating "hate crimes" like it's the victim belonging to a specific group which is the important part.
That's not the part that is relevant for hate crimes.
Hate crimes are defined by the motive being the offender is targeting the person because of that trait.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Does motive change the end fact that someone has been assaulted or killed? No. By inflicting 'hate crime' as motive, it says that someone is worth more then another, and I disagree with that 1000%.
And this is the part where you fail to grasp what hate crimes are.
It's not that "someone is worth more".
It's that some motives are more heinous (or more deserving of more punishment than others.

If Jack is killed by a man who wants his parking space, that's not a hate crime.
If Jack is killed by a man who hates people of Jack's race, that is a hate crime.

It's not Jack's race which makes him "more valuable".
It's the killer's motive which is reviewed for the heinousness of the crime.

And as I have pointed out, motive has always been considered for the penalty stage of crimes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Mr. Wonder's statement about accidental and premeditated are about all that should be considered, IMO.
Here's the thing about such complaints.
THAT HAS NEVER BEEN THE CASE.
And if tomorrow we would 100% eliminate all hate crime legislation from the lawbooks, IT WOULD STILL NOT BE THE CASE. Judges would still be considering a lot more than just that in their sentencing.
And you guys are quiet about that.

But you guys ONLY COMPLAIN ABOUT HATE CRIMES.
You guys fail to comprehend how myopic your approach is.


It would be like complaining about jaywalkers.
Except the complaint is ONLY raised about people wearing red jackets. EVERYBODY ELSE WHO JAYWALKS is ignored.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2018, 11:44 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,386
Thanks: 10,022
Thanked 15,138 Times in 9,175 Posts
Post Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch907 View Post
I'm not confused in the slightest, he was charged with at least two crimes strictly do to his motive. That is not a sentence modifier, its a crime.
You are doing that thing (yet again) where you ignore what was pointed out to you and blindly repeat yourself.


This line of thought you present has been rejected repeatedly up to and including SCOTUS. Hate crimes do not "criminalize" thought.


Quote:
Originally Posted by lurch907 View Post
BTW, you didn't answer the question.

You are not one to register this complaint.

I think you don't appreciate the real implications of your question...
Consider the following hypothetical scenario:
Jon and Mary are husband and wife. Mary is terminally ill with cancer and in the hospital, suffering in pain.
Jon kills Mary.

The defense argues that Mary wanted to have her misery ended and present evidence to that claim.
The prosecution argues that Jon killed Mary for financial reasons.

The judge declares Jon is guilty of premeditated murder.
Now, in this situation the motive is "not proven". And it doesn't have to be.
During sentencing stage, the judge would pick a sentence (in the sentencing spectrum for the crime) taking into account what he thinks regarding the motive.

This is obviously not as reliable (and some could argue not as just) as a requirement that the motive be proven...


As I have been pointing out, motive is used in the sentencing phase.
You guys just don't seem to appreciate what that means.


And more directly, your question is a misnomer. It's based on a false premise.
Consider Murder vs Manslaughter. Distinguished by motive
Murder => the killer wanted to kill the victim.
Manslaughter => the killer did not want to kill the victim and it was typically some form of accident.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2018, 11:51 AM
GottaGo's Avatar
Sanity is overrated.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Miles to go before I sleep
Posts: 11,518
Thanks: 9,329
Thanked 7,531 Times in 4,839 Posts
Default Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
The reason I stated that is because some people are treating "hate crimes" like it's the victim belonging to a specific group which is the important part.
That's not the part that is relevant for hate crimes.
Hate crimes are defined by the motive being the offender is targeting the person because of that trait.
Targeting is premeditation. Up charge to the punishment is already added in.


Quote:
And this is the part where you fail to grasp what hate crimes are.
It's not that "someone is worth more".
It's that some motives are more heinous (or more deserving of more punishment than others.
Google the difference between premeditated and accidental.

Quote:
If Jack is killed by a man who wants his parking space, that's not a hate crime.
If Jack is killed by a man who hates people of Jack's race, that is a hate crime.

It's not Jack's race which makes him "more valuable".
It's the killer's motive which is reviewed for the heinousness of the crime.

And as I have pointed out, motive has always been considered for the penalty stage of crimes.
What, exactly, makes Jack's killing any more heinous for one or the other? When the term 'hate crime' came into play, was in the 1980's I believe. What was it before that phrase was coined? I'm sure the circumstances of a crime were taken into consideration by judge or jury, with no need to slap a name on it. But with the activism that started ramping up in the '80s, certain people found it necessary to up the terminology. The phrase is pointless, every crime against another person is a 'hate crime'.

Quote:
Here's the thing about such complaints.
THAT HAS NEVER BEEN THE CASE.
And if tomorrow we would 100% eliminate all hate crime legislation from the lawbooks, IT WOULD STILL NOT BE THE CASE. Judges would still be considering a lot more than just that in their sentencing.
And you guys are quiet about that.

But you guys ONLY COMPLAIN ABOUT HATE CRIMES.
You guys fail to comprehend how myopic your approach is.


It would be like complaining about jaywalkers.
Except the complaint is ONLY raised about people wearing red jackets. EVERYBODY ELSE WHO JAYWALKS is ignored.
The extra 'punishment' given for such crimes is exactly what I've called it - making another person worth more then someone who was assaulted or killed for being in the wrong place/wrong time.

Myopic. You were doing so well until on your post until you put that up there. No one is being myopic, they are seeing the terminology, and additional punishment, for what it is.
__________________
Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.
If you can't laugh at yourself, you might as well get embalmed
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:11 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,386
Thanks: 10,022
Thanked 15,138 Times in 9,175 Posts
Post Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Targeting is premeditation. Up charge to the punishment is already added in.
Invariably in these conversations there are two approaches from people opposed to hate crime legislation.

a) Poster_A: I feel hate crime legislation is unconstitutional.
b) Poster_B: I don't like hate crime legislation.

Here, your response is not a), but rather b). As such, while I understand that you want things done your way, a majority in this country do not agree.
In fact, the majority is well established to the point that it's not even close. Gallup Poll: Most Americans support hate crimes laws

As such, it is incumbent upon you to persuade others why they should change their mind.


Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66
And this is the part where you fail to grasp what hate crimes are.
It's not that "someone is worth more".
It's that some motives are more heinous (or more deserving of more punishment than others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Google the difference between premeditated and accidental.
Google the difference between asking somebody to google something and actually making an argument.


I don't see how this is a cogent response to the actual point I was making.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
What, exactly, makes Jack's killing any more heinous for one or the other?
You don't understand how some would see a killing to prevent pain and suffering as different (in "heinous" level) as compared to killing somebody motivated out of greed?



Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
When the term 'hate crime' came into play, was in the 1980's I believe. What was it before that phrase was coined? I'm sure the circumstances of a crime were taken into consideration by judge or jury, with no need to slap a name on it.
If you want to dig back into the history books...
Part of the problem revolves around an appreciation of legal history for how some courts in our history can look at the killing of a black person and receive (at best) a slap on the wrist.

Regardless, as I have mentioned, the goal is for the citizenry to send a message regarding their ideals on justice.
The law helps establish a punishment spectrum for a type of crime, according to the wishes of society.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
But with the activism that started ramping up in the '80s, certain people found it necessary to up the terminology. The phrase is pointless, every crime against another person is a 'hate crime'.
I am really bored with people who try to attack the concept of "hate crimes" by whining about the phrase taken literally.

By that mindset, we could argue against "greenhouse gases" by pointing out they are not really gases exclusive to greenhouses. Ergo, it's flawed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
The extra 'punishment' given for such crimes is exactly what I've called it - making another person worth more then someone who was assaulted or killed for being in the wrong place/wrong time.
Again, it's not the person that is worth more.
It's the crime, incorporating the offender's motive which is viewed as more heinous.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Myopic. You were doing so well until on your post until you put that up there. No one is being myopic, they are seeing the terminology, and additional punishment, for what it is.
Again you dodge the actual point being made.

So many people in this thread are whining that motive should not be used in crime sentencing.
But the only place you guys complain about it is on the subject of hate crime legislation.
The fact that motive is considered in the sentencing phase historically happens in every court-room across this country.
But none of you are bothered by that, even though you claim it's a problem.


1) Do you understand that motive has always been a factor considered in sentencing?
2) Can you explain why we only hear complaints about considering motive during sentencing on the issue of hate crimes, and never on the vast majority of situations it is applied elsewhere?
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:29 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,367
Thanks: 9,400
Thanked 5,660 Times in 3,812 Posts
Default Re: Hate Crimes Are Thought Crimes

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post


Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
seems to me the only fair questions concerning motives of a crime are.
Was it deliberate or intentional?
If so it that's taken into account, as apposed to the offense being an accident or negligence.
Was it planned as apposed to a "crime of passion"?
If planned then it's "premeditated".
Is/was the person mentality ill/disabled that did the crime?
The details of the negative thoughts around those issues aren't important to the prosecution or punishment beyond framing answers to those questions.
If a man planned to shoot his female neighbor becasue he doesn't like her dog crapping in his lawn Or because she's a Jew Or because she won't go out on a date with him.
The punishment shouldn't change.
The shooter did it with intent, premeditated and he was perfectly sane.
Seems pretty strait forward. more than that and it just becomes ...wrong IMO
That is your opinion.


A majority support hate crime legislation.
Yes that is my opinion and AHEM ... i'm often right.
so there's that.

But not only that, that's the way it's been approached traditionally.
If not, then why the need for all these NEW HATE crime laws?
what i described is/was the standard, and for good reason.

so the go'vt doesn't become thought police.
It was Initially set up this way in various parts of the U.S. so gov't would not police people based on their beliefs
and the courts would not judge people based on their beliefs.
Something that easily gets OUT of hand, and was common practice in Europe, from laws that made it a crime to NOT be catholic (or certain brand of protestant) to being a witch or not giving proper reverences to the crown and it's officers.

As far as your assertion that
"A majority support hate crime legislation."
I'd question that without some back up. but you do know that the majority support traditional marriage only as well. But somehow the majority hasn't gotten it's way there. A majority of Americans like some kinds of rock music. The majority in the south in the 1800's wanted to keep slavery. Heck, the majority of Republicans wanted Trump as the nominee!
Being in the majority does necessarily make it right or wrong.
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mr wonder For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
are, crimes, hate, thought

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0