Hate Crime and Hate Speech

I'd like to know what your opinions on Hate Crime are. I was looking at the laws in different countries around the world on this subject, and some are very interesting - other rather creepy. I'd like to know your opinion and the regulations in your country.

If a person beats up another individual he/she gets a sentence according to his/her crime, however, the sentence for the same crime may be elevated if the person has beat up another person because they dislike their colour, religion, creed, nationality, sexual orientation....etc.

I'd like to open an argument about this - is it wrong or right to elevate the punishment for the same crime, be it arson, mugging, murder or other, based on person's thoughts and prejudices against the victim? Is it sometimes difficult to identify hate crimes?

If yes - why?
If no - why not?

What if person is to get a longer sentence for a particular grave crime if they are NOT charged with Hate Crime then if they are prejudiced?

Hate speech - does it lead to hate crime, and how should it be punished, if at all? Can freedom of expression be mistaken for hate speech?

Please discuss.

I'm sorry I'm a bit unfamiliar. Hate Crime/Speech as in like racism/predjudicism to say religion?

You don't mean that they hate the person in the literal sense, more based on a prejudice right?

i just like to say me and my brother have gotten into some pretty bad fights with each other mostly him not me since i am the oldest.. he calls me a spic i call him a salted cracker.. is their racial slurs in their sure.. but why should it be a crime? i mean he isnt in the hospital after its over he feels better so do i and none is worse for wear.. i think its stupid that some kids can get in a fight and call one a cracker, spic, ni^&er and end up in juvy for a few months and as an adult a yr for what would have bn nothing more then disorderly conduct or whatever since chances are neither ppl will press charges which leaves it up to the police to come up with something..

i mean how fair is it to be locked up longer for the exact same crime but b/c you said cracker or ni^%er its some how worse..

me and my brother called each other racial names but we still love each other so why would one of us diserve to go to jail for a minor childish life experience of fighting.. it happens all the time through out time

by the way my brother calls me a queer and i call him a f@g and we are adults now.. so its like a f@g what you doing.. bite me queer..
see? no harm no foul no hate the love is there

Originally posted by Liberator
I'm sorry I'm a bit unfamiliar. Hate Crime/Speech as in like racism/predjudicism to say religion?

You don't mean that they hate the person in the literal sense, more based on a prejudice right?

Exactly.
Sorry, I wasn't really clear about what I was asking, I shall fix the first post. But yes, not hate in literal sense, but more based on prejudice. 👆

And religion is indeed included.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I'd like to know what your opinions on Hate Crime are. I was looking at the laws in different countries around the world on this subject, and some are very interesting - other rather creepy. I'd like to know your opinion and the regulations in your country.

If a person beats up another individual he/she gets a sentence according to his/her crime, however, the sentence for the same crime may be elevated if the person has beat up another person because they dislike their colour, religion, creed, nationality, sexual orientation....etc.

I'd like to open an argument about this - is it wrong or right to elevate the punishment for the same crime, be it arson, mugging, murder or other, based on person's thoughts and prejudices against the victim? Is it sometimes difficult to identify hate crimes?

If yes - why?
If no - why not? What if the sole purpose of crime WAS hatred?

What if person is to get a longer sentence for a particular grave crime if they are NOT charged with Hate Crime then if they are prejudiced?

Hate speech - does it lead to hate crime, and how should it be punished, if at all? Can freedom of expression be mistaken for hate speech?

Please discuss.

I remember from when I was working in a supermarket back in my student days that one of our security guards was middle eastern and some drunk old man came in and gave him abuse for not letting him into the store. When the police showed and questioned me as a witness, the only thing they were interested in is if there was any racial connotation to the incident. Like the fact that being verbally abused and threatened with violence isn't enough. Even when I was explaining what happened step by step they kept butting in and asking "But was there any racial abuse?" involved.

On this occasion there was and the person who committed it was arrested that very night and charged.

Another security guard got a far worse level of abuse only a week later and because there was no racial slur involved (despite him being from Latvia and being insulted as because of it) the police did nothing.

So from that perspective I don't think it's right to have 1 person be subject to abuse and have their case dealt with higher priority than someone facing worse abuse but without a racial insult involved.

As for the freedom of expression point. Can you give examples...I presume you're meaning the likes of Anjem Choudary, Abu Hamza and Omar Bakri compared with the likes of the infamous "bomb turban" cartoons.

I do think there will be an eventual backlash against certain factions of Islam continuously overreacting to things such as those drawings or the South Park episode.

Still...Can't help but laugh when they do stuff like this.

Originally posted by jaden101
I remember from when I was working in a supermarket back in my student days that one of our security guards was middle eastern and some drunk old man came in and gave him abuse for not letting him into the store. When the police showed and questioned me as a witness, the only thing they were interested in is if there was any racial connotation to the incident. Like the fact that being verbally abused and threatened with violence isn't enough. Even when I was explaining what happened step by step they kept butting in and asking "But was there any racial abuse?" involved.

On this occasion there was and the person who committed it was arrested that very night and charged.

Another security guard got a far worse level of abuse only a week later and because there was no racial slur involved (despite him being from Latvia and being insulted as because of it) the police did nothing.

So from that perspective I don't think it's right to have 1 person be subject to abuse and have their case dealt with higher priority than someone facing worse abuse but without a racial insult involved.

As for the freedom of expression point. Can you give examples...I presume you're meaning the likes of Anjem Choudary, Abu Hamza and Omar Bakri compared with the likes of the infamous "bomb turban" cartoons.

I do think there will be an eventual backlash against certain factions of Islam continuously overreacting to things such as those drawings or the South Park episode.

Still...Can't help but laugh when they do stuff like this.

Maybe the Fantastic Four will kill all the (zionist) Juice.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Maybe the Fantastic Four will kill all the (zionist) Juice.

Originally posted by jaden101

Haha! Juice.

I must make another comment about that though - I don't know if you're familiar, but in Arabic, there isn't really a sound ''P'', so I remember seeing some protests against Israeli occupation where the demonstrators held signs saying (or meant to say) Save the Palestinian People. Due to the lack of P in Arabic, to them it came out as ''Save the Balestinian Beoble''. The problem is that they actually WROTE on the placard, ''Save the Balestinian Beoble''.

I must find the picture.

Arabs actually say "phalestin", I guess whoever wrote it didnt know about that. But post the pic if you find it for the lols.

Originally posted by SamZED
Arabs actually say "phalestin", I guess whoever wrote it didnt know about that. But post the pic if you find it for the lols.

They do, indeed. However, in English obviously it is Palestinian, since they don't have P it came out as B.

They tried their best. 🙁

Although if we look at some English translation in the far east...oh lord.

PS. Can't find the pic! If anyone has it, please post.

I disagree about the religious thing.
You always have a choice there.

The other things you can't change. (not that you should want to because some fool decides to rip on you, anyhow.)

Hate Crime legislation over religion is just more-work-for-the-overpayed-lawyers is yet one more thing to keep us all fighting each other and preventing us progressing as a species. (Just like religion)

It could be too much of a double edged sword.
I reckon it would be the first thing that an organisation under scrutiny will try to cite to prevent "Harrassment"(investigation"😉 when its devout are under fair and due investigation. Look at the Catholic church for example or at the crazy death threat wielders with the signs...

And if thats passable as Law, then it should be prosecutable that anyone knocking on my door trying to convert me to their religion first thing in the morning on a Sunday get 28 days in the clink. hehehehee 😛

'Hate speech' as a prosecutable concept seems silly sometimes.

I think it depends on the gravity of the crime committed.

For example, one man murdering another or bringing him near death is bad enough. But if the man doing the murdering/wounding is doing it because his target is gay or black or Jewish? That's just disgusting to me.

As for hate speech leading to hate crime... not necessarily. As Wild Shadow said above, it can be totally harmless, though perhaps still mildly offensive.

first let me say I believe a hate crime can be preformed by any race.....although (im not raciest) if i say something like hey you frikkin retard...to someone that's black,Mexican,Chinese or so on and so forth it necessarily mean its a hate crime...in fact its not......its me saying what i would say to anyone....and you have people being raciest in more then one way.....for instance you have people who hate,make fun of, or attack just based on color but you also have a flip side....

for example if a white male and a black male are on a bus together and the white guys says something to a friend that sounds racist (were assuming he is here) then that's a hate crime but you also have to see it another way.

if the guy says something to his friend that sounds racist (this time were assuming he's not) then the black male jumps up gets in his face and goes crazy over it then its still considered a hate crime because it offended him.

it could be vice verse even because hate crimes are very hard to point out...if someone offends someone of another race by saying something or doing something but has no intent on offending then hows that a hate crime?

take me for example.....when i worked as a dishwasher a long while back their was a black male from another country working with me and he was angry and yelled at me....i couldn't understand him and i said "clam down i can't understand you...it sounds like your speaking gibberish" the something i would have said to anyone...my own parents even if i couldn't understand them.....but he took it as if i was mocking him.

the point is i think unless its an easy to see blatant race crime....then there may be more to it then color and in fact the exact opposite....so i think its just to hard to tell.

Obviously hatred due to a petty prejudice like race/creed shouldn't ever be looked upon lightly because its that ignorance that is so dangerous.

I don't really think Hate Speech should be a criminal offense, instead of being locked up or fined the said 'Hater' should be sent to correction classes and taught other cultures, that way they might get an understanding of the otherside and come to respect them.

Hate Crimes are another matter entirely. The physical violence against someone based on appearance, creed, or race is simply disgusting. But again, locking people up in prison has proven to not solve anything. They need to be taught to understand, for understanding is the cure to ignorance. If we can understand one another we can work together for a more peaceful world.

Hate Speech is one of the most foolish things I've ever heard of.
In America, we have freedom of speech. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and they can voice it if they so choose. There is nothing wrong with disliking or loathing something. It only becomes wrong when physical action is taken upon that feeling, i.e. murder, slavery, etc.

Hate Speech: It's ok by me.
Hate Crimes: Punish them according to the crime committed. Motive shouldn't play into the punishment, only the rehabilitation.

If somebody who is broke and desparate mugs someone of their money, I can understand that, not that it's right. But, if somebody mugs someone because they are a certain race or religion, then that is a hate crime and I think it's good they are punished more severely. It's one thing to know not to walk through a certain part of the neighborhood at night if you don't want to get mugged. But, you could be anywhere and be a victim of a hate crime. I'm all for elevated punishment for hate crimes.

As far as hate speeches, it's a big gray area. Sure there is such a thing as freedom of speech/expression, however there is also such a thing as common sense. I really think there should be 'common sense laws'. You just don't go to a soldier's funeral waving anti-war signs, you just don't do it. It doesn't make anyone stop and think...'Hmm, maybe war is wrong." It just breeds hate, so yes, I do think hate speeches can lead to hate crimes. What should be done about it? That's a hard thing to figure out. I guess there should be more specific laws put into place and enforced to prevent people from doing such cruel things.

Said it before; I think "hate crimes" are generally silly.

A) I beat the crap out of someone and called them moron.

B) I beat the crap out of someone and call them ******, ******, spick, gook or rag-head.

Why should B) be considered more of a crime when both victims were beaten equally? Doesn't make sense.

Because you're not white.

Originally posted by Robtard
Said it before; I think "hate crimes" are generally silly.

A) I beat the crap out of someone and called them moron.

B) I beat the crap out of someone and call them ******, ******, spick, gook or rag-head.

Why should B) be considered more of a crime when both victims were beaten equally? Doesn't make sense.

Motive. The prosecution needs a motive because it makes their case easier to relay to the jury. And for sentencing. If the judge knows why not just what, then he can deliver the proper punishment: prison, the nut house, or whatever.

M&O are the two elements that lead to a crime. (motive and oppurtinity) And the prosecutor has to know both for a solid case.

If a crime is committed because of a prejudice, then it should be judged more severely. Say some people beat up a guy 'cause he's gay... well, it wouldn't have happened ... but the guy being gay was the motive.

It's harder to tell in something less straight forward, obviously. A murderer kills a heterosexual couple and has the trait of being homophobic?

Only if the prejudice pertains to the crime. As for "anti-" signs, the showing of the confederate flag, etc. That falls into free speech, and although I would rather people not be so offensive, as long as no one is being "hurt" [which can be defined in numbers of ways] then I say suck it up and don't escalate.