Hate Crimes Violate the 14th amendment

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by ihopehefails, Mar 7, 2010.

  1. ihopehefails
    Offline

    ihopehefails BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,384
    Thanks Received:
    228
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +228
    The equal protection clause states that any protection given to one person must be given equally to all so if I were to penalize someone for assault more when the victim happen to be white you are not protecting the citizenary equally since you are staggering different penalties for different races. A person who is white will be more protected from assault than a person who is black.

    This is what why the equal protection clause was created because whites were getting protections that other ethnic groups were not. Now we have crimes that are penalized more harshly when they are prejedice in nature this basically gives people who are the victim of hate crimes extra protection. This violates the 14th amendment (when a state law is doing it) and should be removed.
     
  2. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,087
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,187
    You logic is incorrect here. Hate crimes do not punish assaults. They punish assaults that are commited for racial or ethnic reasons. There is a difference. An assault committed because the actor is angry, could be committed against anyone - white, black or purple. The law fixes the punishment for that, and that punisment will be imposed, regardless of the color of the skin of the victim.

    Hate crime legislation only goes into effect when the assault is motivated in whole or in part by the color of the skin of the victim. This is an entirely different type of assault than a "general" assault - where the only motivation for it is anger on the part of the actor.

    Hence, a victim who is in a group that is protected by hate crime legislation is not receiving "more protection" than a member of the general propulation, because members of the general population can never be victims of hate crimes. Conversely, someone who receives a harsher punishment for committing a hate crime than someone who commits a "general" assault, is not being discriminated against, because he has committed a more culpable crime than the person who commits an assault merely because of anger.

    The whole basis behind hate crime legislation is the idea that an assault committed in whole or in part for racial reasons, is a more culpable crime than an assault committed merely because of anger toward the victim.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2010
  3. Zander
    Offline

    Zander Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    Messages:
    17,455
    Thanks Received:
    6,576
    Trophy Points:
    390
    Location:
    Los Angeles CA
    Ratings:
    +12,895
    A "hate crime" is bullshit. It is essentially a "thought crime". Let's suppose I bludgeoned someone's skull in with a rock. Smashed it open like a watermelon and killed the person. How is it a worse crime if the victim is a homosexual or black? He's still dead. We already have laws for killing people. Imposing additional punishment because the victim is a member of a "special" group is biased.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,087
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,187
    No, hate crimes are not "thought" crimes. They are thought motivated ACTION crimes.

    If you smash someone's skull in with a rock simply because you wanted to smash someone's skull in with a rock, and the victim was homosexual or black, you would never be prosecuted under any hate crime legislation. Conviction of a hate crime requires more. It requires that you smashed the person's skull in with a rock in whole or in part because the person was homosexual or black.

    I have been involved in the criminal prosecution of a number of hate crimes. In every case, the person charged had said something as he was committing the crime (racial slurs in every case), that gave a clear indication as to why he was doing it. Yes - the crime was motivated by racial bias, which is a "thought." But in each case, the "thought" was put into ACTION in the form of a criminal act. Hence, it is much more than a mere "thought" crime.

    I don't have any trouble seeing an attack on a black person that is motivated by racial bias as being more culpable than an attack on another person (regardless of the color of their skin) merely out of anger. In both cases, the defendant's actions are motivated by anger. In a hate crime, there is more - there is anger that is caused by racial prejudice or bias.

    Hence, a hate crime should be punished more severely.
     
  5. Zander
    Offline

    Zander Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    Messages:
    17,455
    Thanks Received:
    6,576
    Trophy Points:
    390
    Location:
    Los Angeles CA
    Ratings:
    +12,895
    Thanks for proving my point. The "action" is the crime and we already have laws against criminal ACTIONS. We don't have laws against criminal "thoughts". You are free to think that homosexuals are an abomination or that black people are a stain on the planet (I don't believe any of those things!) and you'll NEVER be arrested for thinking those thoughts. Try it. You'll never be arrested. The crime takes place only when you ACT on those thoughts in a criminal way. Because we already have laws against criminal ACTIONS, "Hate crimes" are "thought" crimes, plain and simple. You are adding punishment because you do not like the thoughts of the person.
     
  6. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,087
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,187
    No. There is a difference between an action motivated by a general thought (anger) and an action motivated by a specific (racial hatred) thought.

    Crimes are classified as general intent crimes (battery) and specific intent crimes (murder). Specific intent crimes are punished more severely than general intent crimes.

    Think of a hate crime as a specific intent crime - because that is exactly what it is.

    You might as well argue that specific intent crimes merely punish thought and therefore should not be punished more severely than general intent crimes. Such an argument would be obviously wrong.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2010
  7. theHawk
    Offline

    theHawk Registered Conservative

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    10,919
    Thanks Received:
    2,074
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +5,807
    How many of these cases was the victim white?
     
  8. ☭proletarian☭
    Offline

    ☭proletarian☭ Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I concur.

    If it is worse because they sought the victim out for targeting, let that fall under 'aggravating circumstances'. That's why we have sentences ranges and allow for aggravating and mitigating circumstances in the first place, is it not, to account for the circumstances of an individual crime?
     
  9. Ragnar
    Offline

    Ragnar <--- Pic is not me

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,271
    Thanks Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Ratings:
    +843
    "Hate Crimes Violate the 14th amendment"

    I too hate when crimes violate the law. :lol: When someone says "you can't say that' (speaking in PC code/Orwellian newspeak) what the ymean is "you can't THINK that".

    Lets us just all us protect the smallest minority on earth... the individual
     
  10. Tommy Lucchese
    Offline

    Tommy Lucchese The Hustler, Ask About Me

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    140
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    City of Champions!
    Ratings:
    +23
    Just thought I'd stop by and point out that hate crimes aren't actual criminal charges, they are modifiers to the sentencing for other criminal charges.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
14th amendment and hate crimes
,
do hate crime laws violate the 14th amendment of the constitution
,
hate crime bullshit
,
hate crime equal protection
,

hate crime is bullshit

,
hate crime laws are bullshit
,

hate crime violate first amendent

,
hate crime violation of the 14 admendment
,
hate crimes and the 14 amendment
,
is hate crimes law part of the fourteenth amendment