Terrorism vs. Hate Crime

Well...there are crimes of passion.

IMO, there is no difference between a hate crime and an act of terrorism...both are designed to terrorize a group. It always mystifies me that many will be okay with bringing terrorist charges against someone but hesitant about bringing hate crime charges against someone.

I was hoping someone could explain the difference.

This probably wherein your confusion lies.

Definitions of Terrorism -- International and Domestic Bodies' Definitions of Terrorism

However the definition of Hate Crime:
Which IMHO is stupid unless the investigator is a mind reader.

hate crime - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
For the record, charges of hate crimes must be proved...i.e. there must be concrete evidence that the crime was committed because of some underlying "anti" factor.

Your link on terrorism gives, and admits to not giving, a definite definition of terrorism.

To the poster above you, military bodies can commit acts of terrorism but so can non-military bodies. :cuckoo:

I provided two links to show where one has a definite definition while the other has multiple, conflicting, controversial definitions, i.e. the source of confusion. My comment concerning "mind reader" was a joke, my fault, I should have indicated as such. If you read the two then the difference is actually fairly clear.
 
Bombing the churches is a crime. Would the church some how be 'less bombed' if it was a random church bombing?
No, but you aren't even making an effort to answer the questions I posed. :lol:

Perhaps that is because I fail to understand the concept of a hate crime vs any other crime.

Lets use your example of somebody specifically targeting black churches for bombing. I would say the person is trying to instill terror, so it would be a terrorist act.
Now, lets say somebody specifically targets churches (regardless of the skin color of the worshipers) for bombing. I would say the person is trying to instill terror, so it would be a terrorist act.
So is it safe to say that in your mind there is no difference between hate crimes and terrorism?
 
This probably wherein your confusion lies.

Definitions of Terrorism -- International and Domestic Bodies' Definitions of Terrorism

However the definition of Hate Crime:
Which IMHO is stupid unless the investigator is a mind reader.

hate crime - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
For the record, charges of hate crimes must be proved...i.e. there must be concrete evidence that the crime was committed because of some underlying "anti" factor.

Your link on terrorism gives, and admits to not giving, a definite definition of terrorism.

To the poster above you, military bodies can commit acts of terrorism but so can non-military bodies. :cuckoo:

I provided two links to show where one has a definite definition while the other has multiple, conflicting, controversial definitions, i.e. the source of confusion. My comment concerning "mind reader" was a joke, my fault, I should have indicated as such. If you read the two then the difference is actually fairly clear.
Could you explain it in your own words?
 
a crime is a crime to say similar crimes differ in seriousness because what the perp was thinking is fucking ridiculous.

To determine pre-meditated murder (1st degree murder) you have to determine what the perp was thinking

Not quite true. Different states have different laws about what constitutes 1st degree murder.
In the state I live in, if you rob somebody and kill them in the process of robbing them, that is 1st degree murder. It doesn't matter if your intent was never to kill them.
 
No, but you aren't even making an effort to answer the questions I posed. :lol:

Perhaps that is because I fail to understand the concept of a hate crime vs any other crime.

Lets use your example of somebody specifically targeting black churches for bombing. I would say the person is trying to instill terror, so it would be a terrorist act.
Now, lets say somebody specifically targets churches (regardless of the skin color of the worshipers) for bombing. I would say the person is trying to instill terror, so it would be a terrorist act.
So is it safe to say that in your mind there is no difference between hate crimes and terrorism?

No.
 
For the record, charges of hate crimes must be proved...i.e. there must be concrete evidence that the crime was committed because of some underlying "anti" factor.

Your link on terrorism gives, and admits to not giving, a definite definition of terrorism.

To the poster above you, military bodies can commit acts of terrorism but so can non-military bodies. :cuckoo:

I provided two links to show where one has a definite definition while the other has multiple, conflicting, controversial definitions, i.e. the source of confusion. My comment concerning "mind reader" was a joke, my fault, I should have indicated as such. If you read the two then the difference is actually fairly clear.
Could you explain it in your own words?

Essentially the way I read it is hate crimes are supposedly committed against a person/persons because of color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.
Terrorism is usually an act based primarily on nationalistic, religious and/or politically idealistic motivations.
The one overlapping area seems to be religious.
 
I provided two links to show where one has a definite definition while the other has multiple, conflicting, controversial definitions, i.e. the source of confusion. My comment concerning "mind reader" was a joke, my fault, I should have indicated as such. If you read the two then the difference is actually fairly clear.
Could you explain it in your own words?

Essentially the way I read it is hate crimes are supposedly committed against a person/persons because of color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.
Terrorism is usually an act based primarily on nationalistic, religious and/or politically idealistic motivations.
The one overlapping area seems to be religious.
:eusa_eh: So the motivation is basically the same (the intent to control through terrrorism) but the victims are different except in the case of religion.
 
Props to Ravi. :clap2:

Getting this many saps to indulge your retarded question is almost mani-esque! :lol:




and then some. :cool:
 
Acts of terror are hate crimes, but not all hate crimes are considered acts of terror.

Despite whatever terror a hate crime may provoke in a targeted group, the legal definition of an "Act of Terror" requires a political objective.


The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property in order to coerce or intimidate a government or the civilian population in furtherance of political or social objectives.

act of terrorism legal definition of act of terrorism. act of terrorism synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
 
Acts of terror are hate crimes, but not all hate crimes are considered acts of terror.

Despite whatever terror a hate crime may provoke in a targeted group, the legal definition of an "Act of Terror" requires a political objective.


The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property in order to coerce or intimidate a government or the civilian population in furtherance of political or social objectives.
act of terrorism legal definition of act of terrorism. act of terrorism synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
Okay, that makes sense.

But still, wouldn't many hate crime groups (like the KKK) like to intimidate the government and/or the civilian populace into controlling their targets in some way? For instance, how many times has William Joyce or the Bass called for separation of races (ethnic groups)?
 
Could you explain it in your own words?

Essentially the way I read it is hate crimes are supposedly committed against a person/persons because of color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.
Terrorism is usually an act based primarily on nationalistic, religious and/or politically idealistic motivations.
The one overlapping area seems to be religious.
:eusa_eh: So the motivation is basically the same (the intent to control through terrrorism) but the victims are different except in the case of religion.

As you are proving it is a matter of perspective.
 
Essentially the way I read it is hate crimes are supposedly committed against a person/persons because of color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.
Terrorism is usually an act based primarily on nationalistic, religious and/or politically idealistic motivations.
The one overlapping area seems to be religious.
:eusa_eh: So the motivation is basically the same (the intent to control through terrrorism) but the victims are different except in the case of religion.

As you are proving it is a matter of perspective.
:confused:

I'm not proving anything, I am just curious.
 

Forum List

Back
Top