Hate crimes against "the homeless"

[occupied]

You don't always have to be a dick.

Yeah, I pretty much do to those who make a habit out of it themselves.

Hadn't noticed that. I'm not on all that much anymore. Kinda for the reason you described. Too many loons

I used to keep a neutral tone with pretty much everyone but the "libertarians" have been so full of rage lately I just got to give some back.

 

[Si modo]

The Green River Killer...didn't he only kill street hookers? Why the hell aren't THEY protected under hate crime laws? I bet they would still be alive, if only we had more hate crime laws.

 

[occupied]

What is wrong with using the existing laws for these crimes? Get the legislature to change the laws to be harsher if warranted but no to special hate crime laws for only certain subsets of society.

We have all kinds of laws that jack up the penalties if the crime involves children under a certain age, you have no problem protecting especially vulnerable people in that way, I assume.

I understand your point and I do want to see children and elderly protected but being homeless is a choice in this country. We have shelters and a network in place to aid those who hit hard times. If I choose to take on a lifestyle that makes me more vulnerable to crime when there are alternatives that would keep me safer, whose fault is this?

Should prostitutes have special "hate crime" legislature for them?

We barely do shit to house the homeless, we put such a terrible stigma to that label that you would not believe the great lengths people who are homeless go to hide it, I guarantee that if you have kids in school they attend with homeless kids who are so terrified of being separated from their out of work parents that they do not tell. The real face of homelessness is not the alcoholic tramp you see but the far more numerous desperate people living behind shopping centers in cars.

 

[Clementine]

The crime should determine the punishment.

Person A sets a homeless man on fire because he hates the homless, person B sets a banker on fire because he hates corporate America. How is person A deserving of a harsher punishment?

Great point. Punish the act. In court, it isn't necessary to prove motive when trying someone for a crime. With hate crimes, some are trying to get inside people's heads and determine what they are thinking. Clearly, they cannot.

Those kids who set the homeless man on fire don't necessarily hate homeless people. Maybe they are troubled or gang wannabes who chose the easiest target.

I don't agree with hate crimes because the prosecutors are now expected to prove a person's mindset. Even if a person is prejudiced against a certain group, that doesn't mean a crime will be motivated by that. If a person can murder someone for any reason, they are subhuman and equal to other murderers. A person is capable or not.

Do gang members get selective about the color or sex of their victims? I have heard they chose who to kill by stupid things, like the first red car they see or the first person who cuts them off in traffic.

Some people are just evil and I don't care to waste time trying to figure out why they are that way. Just find evidence and get their sorry asses off the street.

Victims of non-hate crimes are still just as dead or wounded.

Along this subject, I also think that people should be tried as murderers, even if their victims are lucky enough to survive. If you push someone off a cliff, shoot them or put poison in their food, you meant to kill them and you are capable of murder. If they survive by some miracle, that doesn't mean you are less of a murderer.

 

[Dreamy]

We have all kinds of laws that jack up the penalties if the crime involves children under a certain age, you have no problem protecting especially vulnerable people in that way, I assume.

I understand your point and I do want to see children and elderly protected but being homeless is a choice in this country. We have shelters and a network in place to aid those who hit hard times. If I choose to take on a lifestyle that makes me more vulnerable to crime when there are alternatives that would keep me safer, whose fault is this?

Should prostitutes have special "hate crime" legislature for them?

We barely do shit to house the homeless, we put such a terrible stigma to that label that you would not believe the great lengths people who are homeless go to hide it, I guarantee that if you have kids in school they attend with homeless kids who are so terrified of being separated from their out of work parents that they do not tell. The real face of homelessness is not the alcoholic tramp you see but the far more numerous desperate people living behind shopping centers in cars.

I actually know more about homeless people first hand than you might expect but that aside this is not a judgment call on the dynamics of how and why various people end up homeless. I am simply questioning the need to make special laws for people. Are we not all equal under the USC and the law? Should we not all be treated the same?

And once again, can we have special laws for working girls?

 

[Connery]

When I read it in this context I agree with it, "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation." Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties".

Hate crimes are no pedestrian crimes there is actually a scheme or plan to break the law in order punish someone or something based upon an actual hate for what that person, place or thing represents.

 

[Connery]

So I can't yell at these bums who stand at the exits of Interstates at a traffic light holding "Homeless and Hungry" signs to get a job? That's not a hate crime in my book; that's a suggestion, which they refuse if you offer them a job, btw.

I saw some in a NH border town where they actually appear to work in shifts. Different "homeless sign carriers" at the traffic island at different times.

I am pretty sure people can yell just not physically abuse others, not just the homeless. I want to know what is the difference in the crime between me, a woman with a home getting assaulted and a homeless man getting assaulted?

If it is exit 36 to Nashua off of route 3 those people give their signs to the next shift. The signs pull a 24 hours shift the peole do a few hours then switch off.

 

[Dreamy]

When I read it in this context I agree with it, "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation." Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties".

Hate crimes are no pedestrian crimes there is actually a scheme or plan to break the law in order punish someone or something based upon an actual hate for what that person, place or thing represents.

Why is rape not a "hate crime"?

When serial killers target a specific type of victim, why are those killings not hate crimes?

Why is child molestation not a hate crime?

Why is the assaulting and robbing of people of wealth not a hate crime?

Our society is full of numerous subsets of people. At any time, we might find ourselves part of a group that is singled out by criminals because of the common thread we share with that group. Does this not make some of us less than equal under the law?

 

[occupied]

I understand your point and I do want to see children and elderly protected but being homeless is a choice in this country. We have shelters and a network in place to aid those who hit hard times. If I choose to take on a lifestyle that makes me more vulnerable to crime when there are alternatives that would keep me safer, whose fault is this?

Should prostitutes have special "hate crime" legislature for them?

We barely do shit to house the homeless, we put such a terrible stigma to that label that you would not believe the great lengths people who are homeless go to hide it, I guarantee that if you have kids in school they attend with homeless kids who are so terrified of being separated from their out of work parents that they do not tell. The real face of homelessness is not the alcoholic tramp you see but the far more numerous desperate people living behind shopping centers in cars.

I actually know more about homeless people first hand than you might expect but that aside this is not a judgment call on the dynamics of how and why various people end up homeless. I am simply questioning the need to make special laws for people. Are we not all equal under the USC and the law? Should we not all be treated the same?

And once again, can we have special laws for working girls?

We do have special laws for prostitutes, they are laws against what they do but it is still a law that addresses a specific problem, it is also the purpose of hate crime laws, an attempt to address a specific problem in a focused way. I think the best argument for hate crime legislation is that they are usually premeditated in some way, a choice is made at some point to go burn a church, beat a gay, vandalize a property or set a bum on fire, I think it is one of the requirements for such a crime to be leveled, and absolutely deserves a harsher penalty than just simple assault or vandalism.

 

[francoHFW]

HATE laws, dupes.

 

[Dreamy]

So I can't yell at these bums who stand at the exits of Interstates at a traffic light holding "Homeless and Hungry" signs to get a job? That's not a hate crime in my book; that's a suggestion, which they refuse if you offer them a job, btw.

I saw some in a NH border town where they actually appear to work in shifts. Different "homeless sign carriers" at the traffic island at different times.

I am pretty sure people can yell just not physically abuse others, not just the homeless. I want to know what is the difference in the crime between me, a woman with a home getting assaulted and a homeless man getting assaulted?

If it is exit 36 to Nashua off of route 3 those people give their signs to the next shift. The signs pull a 24 hours shift the peole do a few hours then switch off.

I suspected as much. Was not sure of the logistics of the operation but that it existed was obvious.

Also on the homeless issue. Some people are homeless off and on. So how would these special hate crime laws address such:

What day sir were you attacked? On Monday? Well, on Monday through Thursday were you not staying at your sister's home?

 

[Connery]

When I read it in this context I agree with it, "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation." Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties".

Hate crimes are no pedestrian crimes there is actually a scheme or plan to break the law in order punish someone or something based upon an actual hate for what that person, place or thing represents.

Why is rape not a "hate crime"?

When serial killers target a specific type of victim, why are those killings not hate crimes?

Why is child molestation not a hate crime?

Why is the assaulting and robbing of people of wealth not a hate crime?

Our society is full of numerous subsets of people. At any time, we might find ourselves part of a group that is singled out by criminals because of the common thread we share with that group. Does this not make some of us less than equal under the law?

Because a "hate" crime is a legal fiction which far within certain parameters as are those termed sex offenders and are treated in a similar special category criminal together with it own unique punishment. For example, being listed in the sex offender registry even for urinating in certain jurisdictions.

 

[Connery]

I saw some in a NH border town where they actually appear to work in shifts. Different "homeless sign carriers" at the traffic island at different times.

I am pretty sure people can yell just not physically abuse others, not just the homeless. I want to know what is the difference in the crime between me, a woman with a home getting assaulted and a homeless man getting assaulted?

If it is exit 36 to Nashua off of route 3 those people give their signs to the next shift. The signs pull a 24 hours shift the peole do a few hours then switch off.

I suspected as much. Was not sure of the logistics of the operation but that it existed was obvious.

Also on the homeless issue. Some people are homeless off and on. So how would these special hate crime laws address such:

What day sir were you attacked? On Monday? Well, on Monday through Thursday were you not staying at your sister's home?

That is fact sensitive and would be determined after an investigation.

 

[Si modo]

Well, I am just thrilled about this. The next time I am snowed in catching a flight out of Albuquerque and sleep in the airport, I'll feel safer knowing that there is such a deterrent against my possible murder but, damn, I'll still be dead.

 

[Dreamy]

We barely do shit to house the homeless, we put such a terrible stigma to that label that you would not believe the great lengths people who are homeless go to hide it, I guarantee that if you have kids in school they attend with homeless kids who are so terrified of being separated from their out of work parents that they do not tell. The real face of homelessness is not the alcoholic tramp you see but the far more numerous desperate people living behind shopping centers in cars.

I actually know more about homeless people first hand than you might expect but that aside this is not a judgment call on the dynamics of how and why various people end up homeless. I am simply questioning the need to make special laws for people. Are we not all equal under the USC and the law? Should we not all be treated the same?

And once again, can we have special laws for working girls?

We do have special laws for prostitutes, they are laws against what they do but it is still a law that addresses a specific problem, it is also the purpose of hate crime laws, an attempt to address a specific problem in a focused way. I think the best argument for hate crime legislation is that they are usually premeditated in some way, a choice is made at some point to go burn a church, beat a gay, vandalize a property or set a bum on fire, I think it is one of the requirements for such a crime to be leveled, and absolutely deserves a harsher penalty than just simple assault or vandalism.

There are also laws against trespassing, loitering and publicly lewdness, something the homeless do, often daily.

They also start fires and damage property. We lost 6 firefighters in Worcester from a fire started by some homeless people in a vacant building.

6 firefighters a presence at station - The Boston Globe

I despise anyone who would attack another unprovoked but please do not tell me that I am less protected under the law if I am attacked in the same location as a homeless person. My life and well-being is as valuable as the homeless person's is.

 

[occupied]

I actually know more about homeless people first hand than you might expect but that aside this is not a judgment call on the dynamics of how and why various people end up homeless. I am simply questioning the need to make special laws for people. Are we not all equal under the USC and the law? Should we not all be treated the same?

And once again, can we have special laws for working girls?

We do have special laws for prostitutes, they are laws against what they do but it is still a law that addresses a specific problem, it is also the purpose of hate crime laws, an attempt to address a specific problem in a focused way. I think the best argument for hate crime legislation is that they are usually premeditated in some way, a choice is made at some point to go burn a church, beat a gay, vandalize a property or set a bum on fire, I think it is one of the requirements for such a crime to be leveled, and absolutely deserves a harsher penalty than just simple assault or vandalism.

There are also laws against trespassing, loitering and publicly lewdness, something the homeless do, often daily.

They also start fires and damage property. We lost 6 firefighters in Worcester from a fire started by some homeless people in a vacant building.

6 firefighters a presence at station - The Boston Globe

I despise anyone who would attack another unprovoked but please do not tell me that I am less protected under the law if I am attacked in the same location as a homeless person. My life and well-being is as valuable as the homeless person's is.

Certainly it is but there have to be statutory allowances made to cover what constitutes aggravating circumstances. If you were attacked in some place there are a lot of laws on the books that allow prosecutors to make the penalty more severe based on the severity of the crime, it does not mean you are any less valuable under the law but your attacker may be subject to a harsher sentence due to what actually happened. It's the difference between some kids possibly getting into a sudden unexpected altercation with a homeless man and planning a crime by loading up the baseball bats and going hunting.

 

[Dreamy]

We do have special laws for prostitutes, they are laws against what they do but it is still a law that addresses a specific problem, it is also the purpose of hate crime laws, an attempt to address a specific problem in a focused way. I think the best argument for hate crime legislation is that they are usually premeditated in some way, a choice is made at some point to go burn a church, beat a gay, vandalize a property or set a bum on fire, I think it is one of the requirements for such a crime to be leveled, and absolutely deserves a harsher penalty than just simple assault or vandalism.

There are also laws against trespassing, loitering and publicly lewdness, something the homeless do, often daily.

They also start fires and damage property. We lost 6 firefighters in Worcester from a fire started by some homeless people in a vacant building.

6 firefighters a presence at station - The Boston Globe

I despise anyone who would attack another unprovoked but please do not tell me that I am less protected under the law if I am attacked in the same location as a homeless person. My life and well-being is as valuable as the homeless person's is.

Certainly it is but there have to be statutory allowances made to cover what constitutes aggravating circumstances. If you were attacked in some place there is a lot of laws on the books that allow prosecutors to make the penalty more severe based on the severity of the crime, it does not mean you are any less valuable under the law but your attacker may be subject to a harsher sentence due to what actually happened. It's the difference between some kids possibly getting into a sudden unexpected altercation with a homeless man and planning a crime by loading up the baseball bats and going hunting.

I have no problem with the use of mitigating circumstances and the variances the existing laws allow depending on the events surrounding the crime. I do however oppose anything that is special law as in "hate crime" legislation for subsets of society.

Are those B&E home invasion criminals who single out people with homes in a premeditated manner also committing a hate crime?

 

[OKTexas]

If that's what it takes to get a bunch of young psychopaths charged as adults who would set a man on fire for fun I am all for it. Google "kids set homeless man on fire", it's a damned epidemic. Anyone who would do something like that needs to be locked up for years and years, not just until they turn 18.

Nope, they deserve the exact same fate.

How do you figure? Do you not think setting a sleeping defenseless human being on fire to be a little more serious than a couple of years in juvie at the most? You probably see it as industrious young conservatives preforming a public service.

I know being a lib your a little slow, but what do you think a criminal deserving the same fate as the victim is some how giving them a pass. You set someone on fire, you get set on fire, sounds fair to me.

 

[occupied]

There are also laws against trespassing, loitering and publicly lewdness, something the homeless do, often daily.

They also start fires and damage property. We lost 6 firefighters in Worcester from a fire started by some homeless people in a vacant building.

6 firefighters a presence at station - The Boston Globe

I despise anyone who would attack another unprovoked but please do not tell me that I am less protected under the law if I am attacked in the same location as a homeless person. My life and well-being is as valuable as the homeless person's is.

Certainly it is but there have to be statutory allowances made to cover what constitutes aggravating circumstances. If you were attacked in some place there is a lot of laws on the books that allow prosecutors to make the penalty more severe based on the severity of the crime, it does not mean you are any less valuable under the law but your attacker may be subject to a harsher sentence due to what actually happened. It's the difference between some kids possibly getting into a sudden unexpected altercation with a homeless man and planning a crime by loading up the baseball bats and going hunting.

I have no problem with the use of mitigating circumstances and the variances the existing laws allow depending on the events surrounding the crime. I do however oppose anything that is special law as in "hate crime" legislation for subsets of society.

Are those B&E home invasion criminals who single out people with homes in a premeditated manner also committing a hate crime?

It all has to do with proof, if they can prove someone invaded your home because you were gay or whatever they can be charged with such. As it is even in states that have such laws on the books it is not charged except in some pretty clear cut cases. Turns out there have not been that many people charged with hate crimes, most of them have been cases of vandalism or arson where some jackass painted swastikas on synagogues or burned black churches and such.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Crime is crime and by its very nature is fueled by hate. Trying to rationalize it by giving it unique names and special penalties is dumb. The end result of crime is the same regardless of motive. If you're dead you're dead regardless of motive.....

It’s enhanced sentencing, which is perfectly appropriate.

Judges have been using, and are authorized to use, enhanced sentencing for decades – it’s really nothing new. See: Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993).

The states and local jurisdictions are well within their rights to deter hate crimes, or other such crimes motivated by a victim’s condition beyond his control, and exact upon those found guilty of such crimes a harsher penalty.

That this somehow offends your ‘anti-PC’ sensibilities is fortunately irrelevant, as this is settled and accepted case law.