I'm never wrong. I was not alive then, so I feel no guilt about it, and the historical fact is that slavery was a monsterous intituion and affected not only slaves, but free workers as well. Racism is not judeged in degrees, if racism is wrong for white people to express, then it is wrong for black people (or half black people) to express as well. And because there was a KKK, that does not excues the BPP. I have a balenced non-partisan view, its called reality. A lobotomy would only make matters worse, there is no cure for progressive leftist loser stupidity.
They are single issue racist losers, like El Barrack bin Husseini Ibn O'Bama Blackeagle and his race baiting hatred.
"Barack Obama is a government nig....ummmm ahh" Rick Santorum Probably the least dog whistley of the bunch.
Ah, the new leftist loser legal standard of "hate crimes". Its a loser, just like the embiciles who pulled that out of their hindsides. Crime is crime, and hate is usually a component.
Racially charged language is race baiting and divisive and not helpful and at the best only reveals a gaping hole in the soul of the leftist loser who utilizes such derogatory and inflammatory tactics. Yes, I am talking about El Presidente` Soetoro.
Are you suggesting that a hate crime is not worse than a hate speech? Or are you saying that a hate crime is no different from a regular crime? And if you're saying this, what does it have to do with what Veni said? Or, am I just misunderstanding what you're saying completely?
Indeed... but that is not the point. Your lost son, sit down and let daddy explain it to you. When someone commits a crime against someone because solely of the race of the victim, that is worse than the same person calling the other person a racist name. There was that hard?
Hate speech is still free speech. Hate is the motivation of crime, particularely race crime. Crime is already punishable under law, pointing out the hate motivation does not make the crime worse.
There was a crime committed, how is that worse if it was motivated by hate. It is not, and so hate crime designations are a waste of time. As all things leftist loser are.
Also, hate is the motivation for crime some of the time, but certainly not all of the time, and possibly not even most of the time. -Meta
Thats true. But why waste time trying to assess hate motivation when the consequences of the actual crime are already applicable. Seems a silly endeavor.
I mean you didn't answer this question, "Are you suggesting that a hate crime is not worse than a hate speech?" What you said is that hate speech can inspire hate crimes, but that doesn't tell me which one you view as being worse than the other. I believe that a hate crime is worse than a hate speech, but I agree that hate speech is bad because it can as you said inspire hate crime, but given the choice between there being in existence only hate speeches and no hate crimes, or hate crimes and no hate speeches, I personally would prefer the verbal hate to the actual physical and violent hate. Would you agree with that? Also, you seem to be saying that a hate crime is the same as any other crime. Is that what you are meaning to say?
Understanding the motivations behind any criminal is important, because that is the first step in preventing future crimes from occurring.
Because the motivation of a given crime will suggest the chances of the criminal being a repeat offender, and how much of a danger to the rest of society a criminal may be. I'll illustrate If you beat up a guy, you should be charged for assault. If at trial it is found you beat up the fellow because he pushed your 5 year old son down the stairs you might be punished, but I for one would expect the punishment to be light. However if you beat up the guy just because you should probably be more severely punished. Motivation is huge in both law enforcement, and imprisonment sentencing.
The crime is the crime regardless of the hate factor. Hate does not make the crime worse because it was motivated or calculated by hate, if that leads to murder, its still murder and that could get you the needle, will the needle hurt worse if the crime was initiated by hate? No. Crime is crime regardless of the hate factor. Hate speech is still free speech, if that speech results in crime then the crime is the crime and not the speech that inspired it no matter how dispicable that speech is. I am saying that hate crime should not exist at all. Its stupid leftist loser bottom feeding thinking. My choice would be that neither existed. But with the likes of O'Bama and Holder that is not likely to change. I hope that clarifies it for you.
In your own slow *EDIT* way you've seem to come to see that yes crime is worse than speech. Maybe completely hopeless isn't fair after all.
OK, thanks for trying to clarify, but I'm still a bit confused. Are you saying that killing someone because of the color of their skin is no worse or better than killing someone because you thought they were trying to kill you? Also I'm still confused about your view on hate speech vs hate crime. Can you answer this with a yes or no? Is a hate crime worse than a hate speech? Thanks. -Meta
If that is the circumstance I would beat the crap out of someone who pushed my kid, but that would not be hate, that would be anger and self defense or defense of the helpless, in this case the child. But if later, I stalked the guy and killed him because I hate his child abusing ass, then I still killed him and that I hated him would be a useless aside that does not change the fact I killed him because I hated him for abusing my kid. I will spend the rest of my life in jail because I killed him, and that I hated him will not be in play.
Nice body-swerve. You might want to revisit your post and the part which suggests there is 'no evidence' of racism in America. Your words, not mine.
If I killed some one because of the color of his skin, that makes me a racist killer loser, but that does not change the fact that I killed a colored man, it is a useless fact that I did it because he was black, he is still dead, and I will still go to jail forever, and that forever will noy be longer because it was designated a hate crime. If I kill someone because of self defense, that is an entirely different case, but I had better be right and justified in the deed. That is Zimmermans failure, he was not right, but wrong.
OK, so it sounds like you're saying here that, yes, the motivation for a killing does matter. But what about my other question? Is a hate crime worse than a hate speech? Yes or no???
