« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next »

This thread is locked

This still goes on?Follow

#127 Oct 02 2010 at 8:48 AM Rating: Decent

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

Eske wrote:

But wait, it's worse if you kill them because they are black. Or if they're gay. Minorities and gays are more protected under the law.

I hate to break up the chance of us actually agreeing, but I have to disagree on this point.... :(

Hate works both ways, so a "hate crime", as understood, would theoretically apply to everyone. The issue that you see, and are probably referencing to, is that it is usually geared towards minorities and ignored towards the majority.

I figured that somebody would mention this. I should have elaborated:

Here, I'm referring to how the law works in practicality. Technically, I'm sure that somebody could be convicted of a hate crime against whites or heterosexuals, but I'll be damned if that happens more than once a century.

That aside, I'm still against the technical legislation of a hate crime because it says that say, killing a person because of their race/sexuality is worse than killing someone because of any other aspect about them. If, with hate crime laws aside, the crime is the same crime, then it should be punished the same way. As I said before: Assault is assault. Murder is murder.

So it's wrong in practicality, and it's wrong in theory.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2010 10:44am by Eske

Edited, Oct 2nd 2010 10:46am by Eske

Ok then, we don't disagree then..

#128 Oct 02 2010 at 9:26 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

#129 Oct 02 2010 at 10:23 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1649636418093

View User Forum

Sage

30,646 posts

Almalieque wrote:

I'm sorry, as much as everyone on this forum loves to make the comparison to racism to African Americans, it's not the same thing. The act of being racist, is not a hate crime or even against the law. A person can be racist all day long and twice on Sunday. What they can't do is break laws because they are racist.

This was completely unnecessary, and you'd know that if you actually read what I typed. I never said racism was illegal. I said killing someone because they are African American (i.e. acting on racism) is not ok.

Almalieque wrote:

Like wise, a person can hate gays and wish they would all just die in a fire pit, that's perfectly legal. That belief doesn't justify that person to act upon his beliefs and start burning gays. Those are two different situations.

No ****, Sherlock. The only person confused on this is you. I have never said it's illegal to hate gay people. Quite the opposite, actually, when you try to harp on about people trying to make others "accept" homosexuality.

Almalieque wrote:

It simply doesn't matter rather you killed someone because they stepped on you shoe, because they have red hair or because it sounded like fun in terms of punishment. NOW, you can treat each scenario differently if you want analyze why it happened and come up with preventive measures for the situation not to occur in the future, then they become different scenarios.

Yes. Then they become hate crimes in some scenarios. And they become crimes of passion in others. And temporary insanity in others. And crimes of passion in yet other scenarios. And we have certain crimes labeled as such with different degrees of punishment to prevent them from happening again.

#130 Oct 02 2010 at 11:01 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1625444348715

Sage

3,362 posts

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

Yes, but when it comes to parole, who do you want let out? A guy who killed someone who was with his wife when he came home early, or a guy who killed a gay man because he "hates them homersexuals?" Who's more likely to reoffend?

#131 Oct 02 2010 at 11:16 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1636935913888

Sage

27,272 posts

Quadkit wrote:

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

Yes, but when it comes to parole, who do you want let out? A guy who killed someone who was with his wife when he came home early, or a guy who killed a gay man because he "hates them homersexuals?" Who's more likely to reoffend?

One acts upon the moment and impuls and the other on a hate within him. It would really depend on the case itself and not on a generalised example like this.

#132 Oct 02 2010 at 11:22 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1625444348715

Sage

3,362 posts

His Excellency Aethien wrote:

Quadkit wrote:

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

Yes, but when it comes to parole, who do you want let out? A guy who killed someone who was with his wife when he came home early, or a guy who killed a gay man because he "hates them homersexuals?" Who's more likely to reoffend?

One acts upon the moment and impuls and the other on a hate within him. It would really depend on the case itself and not on a generalised example like this.

I suppose. The point I'm trying to make is this: A person that commits a hate crime (as opposed to some other kind of crime) is more likely to offend against that same group. I might not agree with the increased punishment, though I haven't put enough time and thought to make that decision... I certainly agree with keeping such a thing labeled as a hate crime, even if it's nothing more than just for record keeping.

#133 Oct 02 2010 at 11:27 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

Quadkit wrote:

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

Yes, but when it comes to parole, who do you want let out? A guy who killed someone who was with his wife when he came home early, or a guy who killed a gay man because he "hates them homersexuals?" Who's more likely to reoffend?

I may have erred in my use of that example earlier, but I'm about to run out and don't have time to check. I'll assume that I did, and that would be my mistake. Those two examples may be different crimes...I believe that you're suggesting the latter is premeditated. In that case, one is a larger sentence because it is a premeditated murder and the other is not. But there are examples of premeditated murder or generalized hate that are not hate crimes.

Here's a more apt example:

What about a man who specifically killed a homeless person, because he hates homeless people? Compare him to a man who killed a homosexual, because he hates homosexuals. Hypothetically speaking, both are equally likely to kill again after serving their sentence. One is not a hate crime. The other is. One man's sentence is longer.

Not equal.

#134 Oct 02 2010 at 11:53 AM Rating: Decent

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Quadkit wrote:

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

Yes, but when it comes to parole, who do you want let out? A guy who killed someone who was with his wife when he came home early, or a guy who killed a gay man because he "hates them homersexuals?" Who's more likely to reoffend?

That's another inaccurate comparison. A more accurate comparison is a racist man who killed a man of another ethnicity who was with his wife when he came home early or a guy who who killed a man of the same ethnicity who was with his wife when he came home early.

You can't change the crime, throw in the hate factor and then say one is worse. It's "worse" because the two crimes aren't the same.

#135 Oct 02 2010 at 12:25 PM Rating: Good

Timelordwho

View User Forum

Unplanned

13,240 posts

Belkira the Tulip wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

I'm sorry, as much as everyone on this forum loves to make the comparison to racism to African Americans, it's not the same thing. The act of being racist, is not a hate crime or even against the law. A person can be racist all day long and twice on Sunday. What they can't do is break laws because they are racist.

This was completely unnecessary, and you'd know that if you actually read what I typed. I never said racism was illegal. I said killing someone because they are African American (i.e. acting on racism) is not ok.

Almalieque wrote:

Like wise, a person can hate gays and wish they would all just die in a fire pit, that's perfectly legal. That belief doesn't justify that person to act upon his beliefs and start burning gays. Those are two different situations.

No sh*t, Sherlock. The only person confused on this is you. I have never said it's illegal to hate gay people. Quite the opposite, actually, when you try to harp on about people trying to make others "accept" homosexuality.

Almalieque wrote:

It simply doesn't matter rather you killed someone because they stepped on you shoe, because they have red hair or because it sounded like fun in terms of punishment. NOW, you can treat each scenario differently if you want analyze why it happened and come up with preventive measures for the situation not to occur in the future, then they become different scenarios.

Yes. Then they become hate crimes in some scenarios. And they become crimes of passion in others. And temporary insanity in others. And crimes of passion in yet other scenarios. And we have certain crimes labeled as such with different degrees of punishment to prevent them from happening again.

What if you were driven temporarily insane by someone's gayness? I don't mean gender, rather that he was retarded. Not clinically, just colloquially. Would you get a conviction? Now what if I meant those modifiers literally?

Edited, Oct 2nd 2010 2:28pm by Timelordwho

____________________________

Just as Planned.

#136 Oct 02 2010 at 8:09 PM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

ZAM Administrator

10,601 posts

Quote:

It's "worse" because the two crimes aren't the same.

That's sort of the point. Hate crimes aren't the same. That's the whole idea. You're not killing someone because you're mad at them, or to get revenge. It's also as Aethien said, very much a case by case thing.

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

#137 Oct 02 2010 at 8:41 PM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Sir Xsarus wrote:

Quote:

It's "worse" because the two crimes aren't the same.

That's sort of the point. Hate crimes aren't the same. That's the whole idea. You're not killing someone because you're mad at them, or to get revenge. It's also as Aethien said, very much a case by case thing.

I hesitate to ask since you ignored my last comparison question in the prop 8 thread, explain to me how the two crimes in my example are different?

How can you committing the same exact crime be different because the person just so happen to hate group x?

I can hate ethnicity x with a passion and let everyone know it. If I came home early and killed man who was with my wife that just so happens to be of that ethnicity that I hate, how does that change anything? Why should I get a different sentence because the guy just so happens to be the ethnicity that I hate?

If the two crimes are the EXACT same, there is no way you can claim that they are somehow different because a person just so happens to have some form of hatred. If you can, then that means that the two crimes aren't the same.

#138 Oct 02 2010 at 8:59 PM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

ZAM Administrator

10,601 posts

Almalieque wrote:

I can hate ethnicity x with a passion and let everyone know it. If I came home early and killed man who was with my wife that just so happens to be of that ethnicity that I hate, how does that change anything? Why should I get a different sentence because the guy just so happens to be the ethnicity that I hate?

It probably doesn't. In your scenario you killed the man because he was sleeping with your wife, not because he was of a certain ethnicity. It wouldn't be a hate crime regardless of your personal feeling towards the race in question.

Quote:

If the two crimes are the EXACT same, there is no way you can claim that they are somehow different because a person just so happens to have some form of hatred. If you can, then that means that the two crimes aren't the same.

That's the point, the crimes aren't the same. Hate against the generality rather then the specific is the motivator. You seem to be under some sort of impression that all sorts of things are considered hate crimes by the courts when that's pretty much the opposite of true.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2010 10:01pm by Xsarus

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

#139 Oct 02 2010 at 9:33 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1625444348715

Sage

3,362 posts

Almalieque wrote:

Quadkit wrote:

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I feel like I should also elaborate to say that I'm not speaking out of a belief that minorities "have it better" because of hate crime laws. I'm actually motivated by the opposite: I believe that the laws undermine the idea that homosexuals and minorities are the same as everyone else. Hate crime laws promote the idea that they are not, that they should be treated differently. This only damages the causes of the civil/gay rights movements, in my opinion.

Yes, but when it comes to parole, who do you want let out? A guy who killed someone who was with his wife when he came home early, or a guy who killed a gay man because he "hates them homersexuals?" Who's more likely to reoffend?

That's another inaccurate comparison. A more accurate comparison is a racist man who killed a man of another ethnicity who was with his wife when he came home early or a guy who who killed a man of the same ethnicity who was with his wife when he came home early.

You can't change the crime, throw in the hate factor and then say one is worse. It's "worse" because the two crimes aren't the same.

I guess you're just going to ignore my reply to this exact point that was brought up earlier?

#140 Oct 03 2010 at 6:17 AM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.

#141 Oct 03 2010 at 6:27 AM Rating: Excellent

Uglysasquatch

Soulless Internet Tiger

35,474 posts

Quote:

In my scenario that I gave, I explicitly said "a racist" came home and saw his wife with another man of another ethnicity vs a guy who came home and saw his wife with a guy of the same ethnicity.

In your example, the guy always had the same motive-revenge for sleeping with his wife. The racist just got a little more satisfaction out of the revenge.

____________________________

Donate. One day it could be your family.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#142 Oct 03 2010 at 7:47 AM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Uglysasquatch wrote:

Almalieque, The Man of Genius wrote:

In my scenario that I gave, I explicitly said "a racist" came home and saw his wife with another man of another ethnicity vs a guy who came home and saw his wife with a guy of the same ethnicity.

In your example, the guy always had the same motive-revenge for sleeping with his wife. The racist just got a little more satisfaction out of the revenge.

That's exactly my point. His motivation was revenge for sleeping with his wife. He wouldn't have attacked that same guy if he saw him walking out of a Quickie Mart.

Edited, Oct 3rd 2010 3:48pm by Almalieque

#143 Oct 03 2010 at 8:18 AM Rating: Excellent

Gurue

16,299 posts

Almalieque wrote:

Uglysasquatch wrote:

Almalieque, The Man of Genius wrote:

In my scenario that I gave, I explicitly said "a racist" came home and saw his wife with another man of another ethnicity vs a guy who came home and saw his wife with a guy of the same ethnicity.

In your example, the guy always had the same motive-revenge for sleeping with his wife. The racist just got a little more satisfaction out of the revenge.

That's exactly my point. His motivation was revenge for sleeping with his wife. He wouldn't have attacked that same guy if he saw him walking out of a Quickie Mart.

Edited, Oct 3rd 2010 3:48pm by Almalieque

If you ever make it to 10k, your title had better be "Obtuse".

#144 Oct 03 2010 at 8:45 AM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Nadenu wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

Uglysasquatch wrote:

Almalieque, The Man of Genius wrote:

In my scenario that I gave, I explicitly said "a racist" came home and saw his wife with another man of another ethnicity vs a guy who came home and saw his wife with a guy of the same ethnicity.

In your example, the guy always had the same motive-revenge for sleeping with his wife. The racist just got a little more satisfaction out of the revenge.

That's exactly my point. His motivation was revenge for sleeping with his wife. He wouldn't have attacked that same guy if he saw him walking out of a Quickie Mart.

Edited, Oct 3rd 2010 3:48pm by Almalieque

If you ever make it to 10k, your title had better be "Obtuse".

Explain...

#145 Oct 03 2010 at 9:43 AM Rating: Excellent

Gurue

16,299 posts

No.

#146 Oct 03 2010 at 9:46 AM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Ok, just making sure that you didn't actually have a valid point. I'm open to constructive criticism, but if you're just making stuff up then I can't better myself.

#147 Oct 03 2010 at 10:16 AM Rating: Excellent

Prodigal Son

20,643 posts

It's because you're a fucking moron, that's why.

____________________________

publiusvarus wrote:

we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.

#148 Oct 03 2010 at 10:25 AM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

So, you're basically making stuff up also... ok got it. It's reassuring to know that there isn't any actual evidence of these claims. Makes me feel all happily and tingly in the inside.

#149 Oct 03 2010 at 10:54 AM Rating: Excellent

Gurue

16,299 posts

The sad thing is, even varus has a sense of humor and will even poke fun at himself on occasion.

Alma is just sad.

#150 Oct 03 2010 at 11:08 AM Rating: Decent

-REDACTED-

Scholar

1,150 posts

Look. Alma shat on another thread.

Let's get it over with early, eh?

#151 Almalieque, Posted: Oct 03 2010 at 11:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I thought "happily and tingly" was pretty funny, oh well. I guess once again, you're the confused one...

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next »

This thread is locked

You cannot post in a locked topic!

Recent Visitors: 375 All times are in CST

Anonymous Guests (375)

© 2024 Fanbyte LLC