Should hate crime laws be expanded?

[Dr.Who]

Rapists, murderers, and other assorted criminals have also been systematically targeted by congress. Does that mean they need protection also?

Could be.

When justice makes an act against the law then everybody who does it is supposed to get the same penalty. We call that blind justice and we make statues wearing blindfolds to remind us just how important it is that our courts do not look at the attributes of the victims or the perps when making decisions. Hate crime laws are not examples of blind justice; they are the opposite.

When it comes to pedophiles all the laws are extra severe, extra voluminous, and they never get to pay their penalty and be finished. Too often we hear the stories about the people who get "labeled" as sex offenders and they have to carry that label around for life when they either never deserved it in the first place or already paid the penalty.

http://www.justice4matt.com/

The sad thing about those laws is that we already have laws but they make new ones just to appear to be hard on someone that no one likes to get votes. Pedophiles are either congenitally and irreversibly twisted and should never be let out of the mental hospital or they made a choice and after they serve their time they should start over the same way that everyone else does.

 

[samsara15]

Who and what will pay for those people who are twisted beyond fixing to be kept in mental hospitals? Not disagreeing, Dr Who, just wondering how the bills will get paid.

Hate crime laws do seem to be proliferating out of control. The problem with organizatons like Congress is that they seem to believe that if they aren't passing laws they are doing anything. Perhaps now and then they ought to repeal some of the laws we already have.

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Who and what will pay for those people who are twisted beyond fixing to be kept in mental hospitals? Not disagreeing, Dr Who, just wondering how the bills will get paid.

Hate crime laws do seem to be proliferating out of control. The problem with organizatons like Congress is that they seem to believe that if they aren't passing laws they are doing anything. Perhaps now and then they ought to repeal some of the laws we already have.

Or at least go back and look at the penality phase that is on the books before they do a 'new improved' sentencing...it would boggle your mind to see amount of variances in the most recent laws on our books for drug abuses and those currently serving time for those same weights and quantaties that are incarcerated from prior convictions. We do not have the 3 stikes rule here in Kansas but the 'wide ranging' penalties that judges have to look at is crazy!

 

[PLC1]

When it comes to pedophiles all the laws are extra severe, extra voluminous, and they never get to pay their penalty and be finished. Too often we hear the stories about the people who get "labeled" as sex offenders and they have to carry that label around for life when they either never deserved it in the first place or already paid the penalty.

http://www.justice4matt.com/

The sad thing about those laws is that we already have laws but they make new ones just to appear to be hard on someone that no one likes to get votes. Pedophiles are either congenitally and irreversibly twisted and should never be let out of the mental hospital or they made a choice and after they serve their time they should start over the same way that everyone else does.

How is it possible to tell the difference between those who are irreversibly twisted, and those who made a bad choice?

Are you willing to have one let out of jail and live in your neighborhood because a judge decided he had simply made a bad choice and then paid the penalty?

 

[GenSeneca]

How is it possible to tell the difference between those who are irreversibly twisted, and those who made a bad choice?

Are you willing to have one let out of jail and live in your neighborhood because a judge decided he had simply made a bad choice and then paid the penalty?

The 17 year old who has sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, who he later married, and is labeled a sex offender as a result... That is just one example of an individual who isn't twisted...

A drunk guy went streaking... he got labeled a sex offender. example #2.

Both men are now thought to be child predators and pedophiles thanks to being slapped with the blanket label of "sex offender".... When the state orders them to inform their neighbors that they are a "sex offender", the neighbors immediately think these guys are child predators and pedophiles, not drunken streakers or high school sweethearts.

 

[Dr.Who]

Who and what will pay for those people who are twisted beyond fixing to be kept in mental hospitals? Not disagreeing, Dr Who, just wondering how the bills will get paid.

The same way they get paid now when we either incarcerate a person in prison or in mental hospitals for the criminally insane.

Hate crime laws do seem to be proliferating out of control. The problem with organizatons like Congress is that they seem to believe that if they aren't passing laws they are doing anything. Perhaps now and then they ought to repeal some of the laws we already have.

That would be a refreshing change.

 

[Dr.Who]

How is it possible to tell the difference between those who are irreversibly twisted, and those who made a bad choice?

Are you willing to have one let out of jail and live in your neighborhood because a judge decided he had simply made a bad choice and then paid the penalty?

When I was a shrink I worked with both victims of sexual abuse and court ordered therapy for those who were sexual offenders ( they would never come willingly).

From about 15 years experience I can tell you that I do not know how to tell when one is a danger to society and when one has been rehabilitated. As I understand it that is the same dilemma for all criminals who serve time.

Because I do not know how to tell the difference I used the word "OR" in my sentence to say that one case or the other is true.

 

[Dr.Who]

The 17 year old who has sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, who he later married, and is labeled a sex offender as a result... That is just one example of an individual who isn't twisted...

A drunk guy went streaking... he got labeled a sex offender. example #2.

Both men are now thought to be child predators and pedophiles thanks to being slapped with the blanket label of "sex offender".... When the state orders them to inform their neighbors that they are a "sex offender", the neighbors immediately think these guys are child predators and pedophiles, not drunken streakers or high school sweethearts.

I took a couple of moments to surf around and I saw a range of statistics from 40% of those on the list are not pedophiles to most of those on the list are not pedophiles.

That is way to high a percentage of not pedophiles being labeled as pedophiles for anyone to argue that the law is appropriate.

 

[PLC1]

The 17 year old who has sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, who he later married, and is labeled a sex offender as a result... That is just one example of an individual who isn't twisted...

A drunk guy went streaking... he got labeled a sex offender. example #2.

Both men are now thought to be child predators and pedophiles thanks to being slapped with the blanket label of "sex offender".... When the state orders them to inform their neighbors that they are a "sex offender", the neighbors immediately think these guys are child predators and pedophiles, not drunken streakers or high school sweethearts.

Drunken streakers and high school sweethearts are not pedophiles. It is a travesty, and a miscarriage of justice, that such people wind up in our courts at all, let alone get branded as "sex offenders." Not only that, but it places doubt as to the actual danger of people who really are sex offenders.

I've heard of cases in which peeing in the wrong place, i.e., not checking carefully enough for observers, has resulted in a "sex offender" label. That is just wrong.

 

[Charles Franklin]

Okay, I'm going to stick my neck out here and ask a question....... why is this necessary?

"Hate crimes motivated by race, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, and identity or disability not only injure individual victims, but also terrorize entire segments of our population and tear at our nation's social fabric," Hoyer said.

"I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance," Obama said in a statement before the vote.


According to the FBI their latest figures.......

Total Incidents 7,624
Total Offenses 9,006
Total Offenders 6,965

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/downloadablepdfs/07hcpressrel.pdf
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/victims.htm

2007 are the latest available figures from the FBI. I assume this legislation has been based on FBI stats since all states are supposed to inform the FBI of all hate crime incidents, thus politicians will be lookling at these as being the authoritative figures? So the total population of the US is over 300 million and there have been 7,600 offences...........If so this legislation is a load of rubbish and just window dressing designed to appease lobbists and special interest groups - as I said I'm sticking my neck out.

I agree with this statement, if we keep nitpicking what crime against what individual constitutes a "hate crime", we will continue spinning our wheels. We need one general statement to address this issue, not a general statement with additional items tacked on as hate crimes happen.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

The 17 year old who has sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, who he later married, and is labeled a sex offender as a result... That is just one example of an individual who isn't twisted...

A drunk guy went streaking... he got labeled a sex offender. example #2.

Both men are now thought to be child predators and pedophiles thanks to being slapped with the blanket label of "sex offender".... When the state orders them to inform their neighbors that they are a "sex offender", the neighbors immediately think these guys are child predators and pedophiles, not drunken streakers or high school sweethearts.

actuly most states that would be legal...for one, alot of states the age of consent is 16...so thats legal ...and those that dont most have a some form of a buffer like unless 3-4 years older unless they are a boss or some kind of authority.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

House approves expanded hate crime law



A violent crime perpetrated due to greed, lust, or whatever is less serious than one motivated by hatred.

Why is that?

If I walk into a black neighborhood and burn a cross in someones yard, who is the target...its not just the person who's house I burned the cross on, its a threat against the entire community. Had Burned a bag of dog poop...thats more a issue contained to that house...that is the issue. When I stab someone to take their money, the target was only the person I attaked...If I stab someone for being gay...it effects and is a threat to all gays. Its ment to terrorize a community, not just a attack on one person. So yes they should be included....

that said overall I am against the law itself, but as it is in place, adding them makes sense.

 

[PLC1]

If I walk into a black neighborhood and burn a cross in someones yard, who is the target...its not just the person who's house I burned the cross on, its a threat against the entire community. Had Burned a bag of dog poop...thats more a issue contained to that house...that is the issue. When I stab someone to take their money, the target was only the person I attaked...If I stab someone for being gay...it effects and is a threat to all gays. Its ment to terrorize a community, not just a attack on one person. So yes they should be included....

that said overall I am against the law itself, but as it is in place, adding them makes sense.

Good answer.
Now, if a black person beats up a white person for being white, is that not a threat to the entire white community as well? Why isn't that a hate crime?

 

[Charles Franklin]

Good answer.
Now, if a black person beats up a white person for being white, is that not a threat to the entire white community as well? Why isn't that a hate crime?

Thank you for your response. I would classify that as a "hate crime" under my definition of crime against another human being because of perceived difference".

However....

There is a historical part to your question. Black Americans (and other "minorities") have faced a history of violent crimes systematically because of their race that at a level that has not happened to non-minority White Americans. This is what the media and most of the general public refer to "hate crime". Whenever a "minority" is assaulted and their "minority status" is seen as the main instigator of the crime, everyone calls it a hate crime.

This doesn't or shouldn't downplay crime against anyone. A crime against a White person, Black person, or whoever else is a crime. We should recognize the fact that crimes bring up a lot of issues (not just the immediate impact), but we should work to end crime for everyone.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Good answer.
Now, if a black person beats up a white person for being white, is that not a threat to the entire white community as well? Why isn't that a hate crime?

that is a hate crime, the hard part and the part far to many don't understand is that for hate crimes, you have to prove the intent was to target whites...often time thats very hard to prove and if there is not a clear case, they don't charge. To many times people see no charge as meaning its not a hate crime, when realy its not enough prove to prove it in a court of law.