Post by colonelbuckrobely on Jul 9, 2009 11:06:13 GMT -6
I have been wondering for some time now if there ever was a need for "hate crime legislation"? There were already so many statutes on the books to cover everything from vandalism, to assault, to arson and even murder.
The problem I have with this, and it is a big problem, is what is a hate crime? It seems to me that branding something as a hate crime is so subjective and therefore open to misuse by whatever party or influential group has the ear of the politicians and therefore law enforcement.
Here is my viewpoint plain and simple. Hate crime legislation should be taken off the books. It is as simple as this, a crime is a crime and there is no need for special legislation to embellish that fact. Am I off base on this and just not understanding the issue?
The problem I have with this, and it is a big problem, is what is a hate crime? It seems to me that branding something as a hate crime is so subjective and therefore open to misuse by whatever party or influential group has the ear of the politicians and therefore law enforcement.
Here is my viewpoint plain and simple. Hate crime legislation should be taken off the books. It is as simple as this, a crime is a crime and there is no need for special legislation to embellish that fact. Am I off base on this and just not understanding the issue?
