Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Hate crime is mumbo jumbo trampHowever Progressives control the system and they do pass judgement.Says you? Hahaha hahaha who the fk are you to pass judgment on others? Gawd? Hahaha hahaha deliriousHate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
Everyone who believes in a criminal justice system to reduce crime, believes in passing judgement.
And since it usually works, it is a good idea.
The problem is there no way to deter a hate crime committed against strangers.
All based off hate, intent hate, to hurt, demoralizeWhat other kind is there?This is where you ignore the impact on society.Is 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
There are different degrees of murder. Do you want to get rid of all those and treat them all the same?
He said, murder is murder. Where hate crimes would be classified as 1st degree murder with aggravating factors. It would just be codifying those factors.
Murder is not just a single event of murder when it is a hate crime.
When one person kills one person over greed, jealousy, resentment, etc., there was a reason for it, and everyone else likely is safe since that reason does not apply to them.
But when it is a hare crime, then there is no reason for it, so it can't be avoided, and potentially tens of thousands of other people could also be at risk, through no fault of their own.
Normal murder does not threaten others, while hate crimes do.
What other kind of what is there?
If you mean what kinds of murders are there, there are crimes of greed and passion mostly.
And the difference between normal murder and hate crimes is that the target is limited to a motivation you can deter with a normal murder of greed or passion, but impossible to deter with motivated out of an irrational and impersonal hatred of any entire group of strangers.
Who are you referring to?Hate crime is mumbo jumbo trampHowever Progressives control the system and they do pass judgement.Says you? Hahaha hahaha who the fk are you to pass judgment on others? Gawd? Hahaha hahaha deliriousHate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
Everyone who believes in a criminal justice system to reduce crime, believes in passing judgement.
And since it usually works, it is a good idea.
The problem is there no way to deter a hate crime committed against strangers.
No it isn't.
When you have impersonal crimes against whole groups of people who are being illegally discriminated against, you need additional protection.
Historical examples include the Holocaust against Jews, the slavery of Blacks, the massacre of Armenians, etc.
Those who commit crimes against whole groups of strangers really are a much greater threat to society than someone who just wants to commit a property crime.
There is risk pumping gas, car jack you bozos ignore. No judgementSays you? Hahaha hahaha who the fk are you to pass judgment on others? Gawd? Hahaha hahaha deliriousHate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
I was evaluating the risk to strangers, not passing judgement on the individual.
You truly believe that nonsense. Makes you aAll based off hate, intent hate, to hurt, demoralizeWhat other kind is there?This is where you ignore the impact on society.Is 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
There are different degrees of murder. Do you want to get rid of all those and treat them all the same?
He said, murder is murder. Where hate crimes would be classified as 1st degree murder with aggravating factors. It would just be codifying those factors.
Murder is not just a single event of murder when it is a hate crime.
When one person kills one person over greed, jealousy, resentment, etc., there was a reason for it, and everyone else likely is safe since that reason does not apply to them.
But when it is a hare crime, then there is no reason for it, so it can't be avoided, and potentially tens of thousands of other people could also be at risk, through no fault of their own.
Normal murder does not threaten others, while hate crimes do.
What other kind of what is there?
If you mean what kinds of murders are there, there are crimes of greed and passion mostly.
And the difference between normal murder and hate crimes is that the target is limited to a motivation you can deter with a normal murder of greed or passion, but impossible to deter with motivated out of an irrational and impersonal hatred of any entire group of strangers.
Not at all.
Most crimes are just a means to get money, not intentionally to harm anyone.
A bank robbery is a traditional crime, but the 9/11 attack was a hate crime.
See the difference?
You can't deter something like the 9/11 attack with penalties because they intended it to be suicidal.
They steal babies and shoot drivers. What a sick fk you areThere is risk pumping gas, car jack you bozos ignore. No judgementSays you? Hahaha hahaha who the fk are you to pass judgment on others? Gawd? Hahaha hahaha deliriousHate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
I was evaluating the risk to strangers, not passing judgement on the individual.
Car jackers rarely harm anyone, and just want property that is likely insured anyway.
Hate crimes tend to not be property, and are much more harmful, as well as being unpredictable.
Reading your post made me think and consider what you mention. There is a problem with that, though. Hate is hard to prove so the burden of proof has to be lowered. From my own experience of seeing news of a crime being committed, it seems that a person who commits a crime against another person who is different in some way (race, nationality, gender, faith, etc.) is automatically accused of committing the crime because of that difference. It could be that the victim was just at the wrong place, at the wrong time. The perp would have committed the crime no matter who was victimized.Hate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
I dont think anybody disagrees, but here we are, all victims of the swampIs 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
Who are you referring to?Hate crime is mumbo jumbo trampHowever Progressives control the system and they do pass judgement.Says you? Hahaha hahaha who the fk are you to pass judgment on others? Gawd? Hahaha hahaha deliriousHate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
Everyone who believes in a criminal justice system to reduce crime, believes in passing judgement.
And since it usually works, it is a good idea.
The problem is there no way to deter a hate crime committed against strangers.
No it isn't.
When you have impersonal crimes against whole groups of people who are being illegally discriminated against, you need additional protection.
Historical examples include the Holocaust against Jews, the slavery of Blacks, the massacre of Armenians, etc.
Those who commit crimes against whole groups of strangers really are a much greater threat to society than someone who just wants to commit a property crime.
"Hate" doesn't have to be a "degree of murder"There are different degrees of murder. Do you want to get rid of all those and treat them all the same?Is 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
You truly believe that nonsense. Makes you aAll based off hate, intent hate, to hurt, demoralizeWhat other kind is there?This is where you ignore the impact on society.Is 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
There are different degrees of murder. Do you want to get rid of all those and treat them all the same?
He said, murder is murder. Where hate crimes would be classified as 1st degree murder with aggravating factors. It would just be codifying those factors.
Murder is not just a single event of murder when it is a hate crime.
When one person kills one person over greed, jealousy, resentment, etc., there was a reason for it, and everyone else likely is safe since that reason does not apply to them.
But when it is a hare crime, then there is no reason for it, so it can't be avoided, and potentially tens of thousands of other people could also be at risk, through no fault of their own.
Normal murder does not threaten others, while hate crimes do.
What other kind of what is there?
If you mean what kinds of murders are there, there are crimes of greed and passion mostly.
And the difference between normal murder and hate crimes is that the target is limited to a motivation you can deter with a normal murder of greed or passion, but impossible to deter with motivated out of an irrational and impersonal hatred of any entire group of strangers.
Not at all.
Most crimes are just a means to get money, not intentionally to harm anyone.
A bank robbery is a traditional crime, but the 9/11 attack was a hate crime.
See the difference?
You can't deter something like the 9/11 attack with penalties because they intended it to be suicidal.
Sick human. Taking some thing that doesn’t belong to you is hate. Dignity is taken during a crime you fat fk
They steal babies and shoot drivers. What a sick fk you areThere is risk pumping gas, car jack you bozos ignore. No judgementSays you? Hahaha hahaha who the fk are you to pass judgment on others? Gawd? Hahaha hahaha deliriousHate crime laws are necessary.
That is because you can protect yourself from a crime of passion or greed.
You can just avoid getting personally involved with a person who you discover to be unstable or overly narcissistic.
But the difference and problem with a hate crime is that the victim did nothing to cause it and had no way to avoid it.
And a hate crime is MUCH more serious because who would commit a hate crime is a much greater danger not only to others, but all of society. They break down the essential social trust people have that allows society to function at all.
If everyone becomes unsafe due to people who are willing to attack strangers based just on things like their race, religion, appearance, political affiliation, etc., then society faces total collapse.
You can deter a crime of passion or greed with punishments, but it is much harder to deter a hate crime because it is irrational, so you really have to keep them locked up and secure, maybe forever.
I was evaluating the risk to strangers, not passing judgement on the individual.
Car jackers rarely harm anyone, and just want property that is likely insured anyway.
Hate crimes tend to not be property, and are much more harmful, as well as being unpredictable.
Car jackers very often hurt people if they don't want to give up their car....
Doubt they're shooting kids but anyone resisting them taking the car, yes
It’s a factor identifying motive which assess risk and determines degree"Hate" doesn't have to be a "degree of murder"There are different degrees of murder. Do you want to get rid of all those and treat them all the same?Is 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
Car jackers very often hurt people if they don't want to give up their car....
Doubt they're shooting kids but anyone resisting them taking the car, yes
Which means their goal is the property value of the car and not an intent to cause personal harm.
With a hate crime, the goal is ONLY to cause personal harm, and there is no property value motive.
If anyone is motivated to commit a crime based on blatantly false and hateful information, the people that promoted and/or propagated that blatantly false and hateful information should be held equally accountable as the person that committed the crime.
For example:
If I spread a false rumor that my neighbor is a child molester, and someone murders my neighbor, I should be held accountable for that murder.
That idea will keep half the wingnuts up at night!!!
It is not the group so much as the odds on a percentage of the group giving a greater chance of criminal activity. An argument can be made for the reasons though.If anyone is motivated to commit a crime based on blatantly false and hateful information, the people that promoted and/or propagated that blatantly false and hateful information should be held equally accountable as the person that committed the crime.
For example:
If I spread a false rumor that my neighbor is a child molester, and someone murders my neighbor, I should be held accountable for that murder.
That idea will keep half the wingnuts up at night!!!
Could that be because so many White conservative nationalists are guilty of hate crimes and end up attacking people simply because of their race or their perceived sexual identity?Is 1 crime more heinous than another just because it is motivated by "Hate"? I don't think so. Tell the family of a murder victim that their loss is not so bad because it was not motivated by hate. Evidence of hate can be useful as a motive, but should not be a crime in itself. Murder is murder period.
