Hate Crimes
It never ceases to amaze me how some people can miss the mark so badly that it makes me wonder if they have a brain that works.
When President Barack Obama signed the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, he also authorized the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Now this largely went under the radar, but has the effect of adding extra penalties to violent crimes when they are motivated by gender, sexual orientation, or disabilities.
Star Parker calls the law a “weakening and damaging our country is not something to be proud of.” Parker continues by saying, “It should be clear that hate crime law has nothing to do with improving our law but rather creating favored political classes. It is something that should be hateful to everyone who cares about a free society, and particularly hateful to those, such as blacks, who have been victimized by politicization of law.”
Hate crimes are premeditated or conducted out of intentions to be overly cruel to an individual. In many cases, the victim did nothing but be born and has been attacked for being a certain race, religion, or sexual orientation. Such crimes should not be tolerated in an evolved society and those who perpetrate them should be dealt with sternly. What I find ironic in Parker’s editorial was the justification cited:
Is it not a sign of our own pathology that we now have codified that it is worse to murder a homosexual than someone who has committed adultery, even with your husband or wife, or who has slandered or robbed? Isn’t the point murder?
No, the point is the intention and the methodology of the crime. This is why when one does face murder charges, the circumstances are factored into case. Is it pre-meditated? Was it an act of “passion?” Was it accidental? Hate is just another factor to the equation to be considered. It is simply one more tool for the legal system to utilize when sentencing.
The QiRanger Adventures 
I believe that pre-meditated murder is pre-meditated murder.
If you have “protected classes” than there is no equality under the law, which is my right as an American and “hate crimes” legislation denies me that right, IMO.
We will have to agree to disagree on this issue.
Tammy
November 4, 2009 at 4:50 am
You’re right, we’ll have to disagree on this, as I don’t see it as creating any sort of protective class. It is simply a fact that the United States is finally acknowledging that hate and prejudice is a strong factor in many crimes, and if that happens to be the case, then the punishment should be stronger, no matter who it is the perpetrator of victim.
Steve
November 4, 2009 at 7:41 am
Let’s pretend a man rapes a woman. If he rapes her “just because” he gets a certain sentence under the law.
However, if he rapes her because she is a lesbian or some minority “race” or he just *believes* she is a lesbian or a minority then he gets a stiffer sentence?! That’s what hate crimes legislation does. It punishes thoughts and motives rather than the crime itself. We already have laws that make pre-meditation a factor in stricter sentences.
Giving a man who rapes a lesbian a stricter sentence than a rapist of a straight woman denies the straight woman equal protection under the law because it shouldn’t matter whether the woman was straight or lesbian, black or white or Asian. But with hate crimes laws, the person who rapes the lesbian, black or Asian woman gets a harsher sentence than the man who rapes the white woman. Basically “some are more equal than others”.
That means the law is favoring the lesbian and the minority woman above the non-lesbian, non-minority woman. That is wrong, IMO. It violates my right to equal protection under the law as an American.
(BTW, I put race in quotes because based on DNA tests, there really aren’t any races. We’re 99+ % the same regardless of politics, language, religion our culture,)
Tamar
November 4, 2009 at 9:04 am
Your situation is exactly why we need hate crime legislation. The individual perpetrating the crime does need a stricter sentence. I disagree that it violates equal protection, because it the hate is factored into why the crime took place. It is immaterial if the victim is gay, straight, religion x, or race y. Any crime spurred by hate against someone should receive a stiffer penalty.
Steve
November 4, 2009 at 9:12 am
As far as I’m concerned, such targeting is already covered under pre-mediation.
So, in other words, it’s ok if a man who rapes a lesbian (or an alleged one) gets a stiffer sentence than one who rapes a straight woman?
Tamar
November 4, 2009 at 4:18 pm
The motivation and intent are different in the two scenarios you describe. While both may have aspects of pre-meditation, hate is another factor that usually plays a part in why the attack took place. It is something that should be considered and weighed when deciding the sentence.
Steve
November 4, 2009 at 4:28 pm