Why Hate Crime Legislation is a Waste of Time
Anyone who has read much of what I write knows that I am no fan of hate crime legislation. Today, on CNN, an article was posted that illustrates my reasoning perfectly.
The article describes the attack of a young white man by a group of blacks. It is assumed that the reason the man was attacked was that he is dating a black woman. The young man's father thinks this attack should be classified as a hate crime, and if you accept the letter of the law, it should. The boy was attacked because of his race.
The problem, of course, is that the severity of a crime should not be decided by these factors. The race, sexual persuasion, or gender of the victim should not be a deciding factor when determining the severity of a crime. These factors should help convict a criminal (by establishing motive), but they should not be used to change the nature of the crime or to increase the level of punishment.
To make my point, I am going to create a hypothetical alternative to the crime described in the CNN article. In the hypothetical crime, a young man, who happens to be a member of a certain gang, falls in love with a young woman, whose brother is a member of a competing gang. When the brother finds out about the relationship, he and a few of his friends track down his sister's boyfriend and beat him.
Is this a hate crime? There are no gender issues. There are no race issues. There are no sexuality issues. But it IS the same mentality--the "you-don't-belong-here" mentality. Why should this crime be treated as any less severe than the one in the CNN article?
Let's try another one. Let's say the same group of gang members is on their way home from beating the young lover when they happen upon an old man, very well dressed and also very drunk. He is stumbling along. The gang members roust him and demand his wallet. He mumbles something and they start swinging. They beat the man severely.
Is this a hate crime? Same guys doing the same thing for an entirely different reason. Should they not be punished as harshly because there is no reason to establish "hate"?
I think what most people who support hate crime legislation don't understand is that those of us who are arguing against this type of legislation don't think the criminals in ANY of these examples should get a lighter sentence. We think they should get the maximum sentence possible. That is because I think that ANYONE who beats another person nearly to death with a chunk of concrete should get the MAXIMUM SENTENCE POSSIBLE.
There is no justice when we start defining the crime by the race, gender or sexual persuasion of the victim. These are factors that establish motive--just like being a "spurned lover" or a "cheated partner" determines motive. They are not, however, factors to determine the severity of the punishment.
Everyone should be protected equally from such attacks, regardless of our race, gender, or sexual persuasion.
Read More Here >>>Article
[Send Me a Comment] Share
