Forums > Social Discussion > Hate crime legislation. Right or wrong?
Login/Join to Participatemember
190 posts
190 posts
Posted:
What are your opinions on hate crime legislation? It was put on paper to discourage hate crimes, but personally I think it's a shotty piece of legislation, and I don't see how it is justified to give greater penalty for a hate crime then any other crime.
If I beat up a man out of hate because he's black, or gay or jewish etc... why is that any diffrent then beating up a man because I hate him because he's a republican, or likes a sports team I don't like etc etc...
To me, assault is assault. The penalty should depend on the severity of the assault, the degree of pre-meditation etc...
I do agree the hate crime legislation is good when it comes to areas of discrimination, such as work place discrimination.
Another thing that bothers me is the fact that it's a hate crime to write hateful literature about people covered by the hate crime legislation. To me it's outright censorship. Canada recently broadend it's hate crime definition to envelope homosexuals (before it was very vague about how the legislation applied to hate crimes agaisnt homosexuals) and I expect various right wing religious publications to end up in court for writeing about how homosexuality is wrong. Something is wrong when the government can step in and censor religious publications.
Personally I think homosexuals should have inclusion in the legislation just because everyone else does, but it kind of bothers me to see the legislation becomeing larger.
Another issue is hate crimes agaisnt majoritys are rarely charged. For example if I am beaten up by a black man because he hates white men, he will simply be charged with assault most likely (although people have been charged with hate crimes in these instances). Furthermore if I beat up a black man because he beat up my brother for example. Even though my motivation isn't hatred towards black men, there is a very good chance I could be charged with a hate crime and receive more jail time.
What are your opinions on hate crime legislation? It was put on paper to discourage hate crimes, but personally I think it's a shotty piece of legislation, and I don't see how it is justified to give greater penalty for a hate crime then any other crime.
If I beat up a man out of hate because he's black, or gay or jewish etc... why is that any diffrent then beating up a man because I hate him because he's a republican, or likes a sports team I don't like etc etc...
To me, assault is assault. The penalty should depend on the severity of the assault, the degree of pre-meditation etc...
I do agree the hate crime legislation is good when it comes to areas of discrimination, such as work place discrimination.
Another thing that bothers me is the fact that it's a hate crime to write hateful literature about people covered by the hate crime legislation. To me it's outright censorship. Canada recently broadend it's hate crime definition to envelope homosexuals (before it was very vague about how the legislation applied to hate crimes agaisnt homosexuals) and I expect various right wing religious publications to end up in court for writeing about how homosexuality is wrong. Something is wrong when the government can step in and censor religious publications.
Personally I think homosexuals should have inclusion in the legislation just because everyone else does, but it kind of bothers me to see the legislation becomeing larger.
Another issue is hate crimes agaisnt majoritys are rarely charged. For example if I am beaten up by a black man because he hates white men, he will simply be charged with assault most likely (although people have been charged with hate crimes in these instances). Furthermore if I beat up a black man because he beat up my brother for example. Even though my motivation isn't hatred towards black men, there is a very good chance I could be charged with a hate crime and receive more jail time.
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com