On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:34:08 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:23:08 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:53:32 -0400, HK wrote:

In the last century, you may recall, some of the states in the south did
not bother to properly prosecute those who murdered or otherwise abused
blacks or even whites who were helping blacks.


That is another problem that can be dealt with, simply by making
states enforce the laws equally. This "hate crime" thing is unequal
application of the law.

Seems that way to me too. Let's say you kill one of these "protected
classes" because you just don't like the SOB. You know he belongs to
the "protected class."
But that's got nothing to do with you killing him. Maybe he killed
your mother and got away with it.
So you get life with no parole or the chair for a hate-crime murder.
But if he kills you, he gets 20 years - with boyfriends.
Don't seem fair.

--Vic

I think a jury is likely to be able to discern. If you cannot prove
someone was targeted for their difference, it wouldn't apply.

If you run into someone in your car who's gay, it doesn't mean you get
nailed for a hate crime. However, if it's proven that you ran into
them because they were gay, the punishment should include electrodes
to the balls since we don't torture.