Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime

[manifold]

I disagree that is the same line of thinking... If someone is not already convicted of a crime they do not stand to face any hate crime charges...

You need to educate yourself about how hate crime prosecution works.

Why don't you educate me. ONE example would be nice...

You seem to be under the misconception that a person first gets tried for a particular crime, and once found guilty, then the question of whether it's a hate crime is considered. That's not how it works.

 

[del]

I dunno... Can you explain how it is unamerican...?

i have already

policing thought is unamerican

Taking intent into account in deciding the punishment for a crime is not unAmerican.

making an emotion a crime is not only unamerican, it's stupid.

 

[Valerie]

i have already

policing thought is unamerican

Taking intent into account in deciding the punishment for a crime is not unAmerican.

making an emotion a crime is not only unamerican, it's stupid.

It's not emotion but motivation and harm which are established concepts in criminal law.

 

[del]

Taking intent into account in deciding the punishment for a crime is not unAmerican.

making an emotion a crime is not only unamerican, it's stupid.

It's not emotion but motivation and harm which are established concepts in criminal law.

when did hate stop being an emotion, exactly?

 

[Amelia]

Now we're devolving into semantics.

Intent matters.

Law which did not take intent into consideration would be a travesty.

 

[Valerie]

You need to educate yourself about how hate crime prosecution works.

Why don't you educate me. ONE example would be nice...

You seem to be under the misconception that a person first gets tried for a particular crime, and once found guilty, then the question of whether it's a hate crime is considered. That's not how it works.

No, I am attempting to demonstrate the lack of harm in the laws' mere existence...

One does not get charged with a hate crime without already having been charged with another crime as well...

 

[Si modo]

Why don't you educate me. ONE example would be nice...

You seem to be under the misconception that a person first gets tried for a particular crime, and once found guilty, then the question of whether it's a hate crime is considered. That's not how it works.

No, I am attempting to demonstrate the lack of harm in the laws' mere existence...

One does not get charged with a hate crime without already having been charged with another crime as well...

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

 

[Valerie]

You seem to be under the misconception that a person first gets tried for a particular crime, and once found guilty, then the question of whether it's a hate crime is considered. That's not how it works.

No, I am attempting to demonstrate the lack of harm in the laws' mere existence...

One does not get charged with a hate crime without already having been charged with another crime as well...

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

So if you accidentally run someone over with your car it's the same crime as purposely running someone over with your car?

 

[Si modo]

No, I am attempting to demonstrate the lack of harm in the laws' mere existence...

One does not get charged with a hate crime without already having been charged with another crime as well...

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

So if you accidentally run someone over with your car it's the same crime as purposely running someone over with your car?

What's crazy is your thinking that's what I said.

 

[Valerie]

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

So if you accidentally run someone over with your car it's the same crime as purposely running someone over with your car?

What's crazy is your thinking that's what I said.

So the drivers "emotion" is irrelevant...???

 

[Amelia]

You seem to be under the misconception that a person first gets tried for a particular crime, and once found guilty, then the question of whether it's a hate crime is considered. That's not how it works.

No, I am attempting to demonstrate the lack of harm in the laws' mere existence...

One does not get charged with a hate crime without already having been charged with another crime as well...

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

Are you seriously saying that if a person throws a rock through a window as a Halloween prank he should get the same penalty as someone who throws a rock through a window to strike fear into the heart of black families?

 

[Si modo]

So if you accidentally run someone over with your car it's the same crime as purposely running someone over with your car?

What's crazy is your thinking that's what I said.

So the drivers "emotion" is irrelevant...???

Absolutely.

 

[Si modo]

No, I am attempting to demonstrate the lack of harm in the laws' mere existence...

One does not get charged with a hate crime without already having been charged with another crime as well...

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

Are you seriously saying ....

No.

 

[Amelia]

No harm? For the exact same crime, but for the emotion of the perpetrator, they are punished more?

Thought crimes? How Orwellian.

Are you seriously saying ....

No.

Why did you change my question to ellipses?

It very much sounds as if you are saying that the same penalty should be attached to the crime of breaking the window regardless of the motivation.

I'm glad if that is not what you think the legal standard should be.

But it sure did sound like it.

 

[Valerie]

What's crazy is your thinking that's what I said.

So the drivers "emotion" is irrelevant...???

Absolutely.

So, you DO think someone who intentionally runs someone over with their car is the same as an accident...

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

Murder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

^^ Policing thought...???

 

[Intense]

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

Prosecutors and the ACLU of Massachusetts said no matter the defendants’ sexual orientation, they can still face the crime of assault and battery with intent to intimidate, which carries up to a 10-year prison sentence, by using hateful language.

“Someone who is Jewish can be anti-Semitic,” said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. “The mere fact that someone is a member of the same class doesn’t mean they could not be motivated by hatred for their very own group.”


Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime - BostonHerald.com

Thought Crime is so much more fun and empowering to the totalitarian mind set, huh. Let's fill our over crowded prisons for ten year terms because we have a bigger problem with why people do wrong, than with the level of harm or offense. Shit, why stop there. We need Reeducation Camps outside of the Higher Education Models.

 

[Amelia]

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

Murder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

^^ Policing thought...???

Positively Orwellian!

 

[Si modo]

So the drivers "emotion" is irrelevant...???

Absolutely.

So, you DO think someone who intentionally runs someone over with their car is the same as an accident...

No, I don't. Your misunderstanding lies in your conflation of emotions with thoughts.

(And, I used the term "thought crime" in general because of the origins of the term - Orwellian.)

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

Murder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

^^ Policing thought...???

It is based on the act of planning, a motive, and a timeline.

It is not the same as an emotion.

 

[Si modo]

Are you seriously saying ....

No.

Why did you change my question to ellipses?

It very much sounds as if you are saying that the same penalty should be attached to the crime of breaking the window regardless of the motivation.

I'm glad if that is not what you think the legal standard should be.

But it sure did sound like it.

Why did YOU try to say something I clearly did not say?

I'm pretty sure my English was clear.

 

[Valerie]

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

Prosecutors and the ACLU of Massachusetts said no matter the defendants’ sexual orientation, they can still face the crime of assault and battery with intent to intimidate, which carries up to a 10-year prison sentence, by using hateful language.

“Someone who is Jewish can be anti-Semitic,” said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. “The mere fact that someone is a member of the same class doesn’t mean they could not be motivated by hatred for their very own group.”


Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime - BostonHerald.com

Thought Crime is so much more fun and empowering to the totalitarian mind set, huh.

Let's fill our over crowded prisons for ten year terms because we have a bigger problem with why people do wrong, than with the level of harm or offense.


Shit, why stop there. We need Reeducation Camps outside of the Higher Education Models.

But the reasons WHY someone commits a crime can be significant in determining the level of harm or offense... That is the whole point.