• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Utah man gets maximum sentence in hate crime case

AGENT J said:
1.) there doesnt have to be plotting in M@ your statement was wrong that hasn't changed
2.) sorry it doesnt have to be a group and its still not thought crime. Like i said if you disagree please provide ONE fact that supports you . . one
3.) false i can be charged with aggravated assault then evidence comes forward and then im charged with murder in addition . . . so yes its the same
4.) you havent provide anythign that makes it a thought crime or different from many other crimes lol repeating yourself with no logical, legal or factual backing wont get it done

in you next post please tell us what a though crime is and then factually prove it. I bet you dodge this request again
Click to expand...

"an instance of unorthodox or controversial thinking, considered as a criminal offence or as socially unacceptable" thought crime

1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the brutal murder of a German holidaymaker"
synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More - murder

Evidence comes forward such as the person dies and you can prove you had the intention and premeditation to kill the person in cases of aggravated assault... Different crimes doesn't disprove anything I've stated

I said based on a bias towards a group are you seriously trying to dispute this fact

Ummm ok then?
 
Libertie76 said:
M2 is still a forethought of killing maybe not with a plan. Manslaughter is no a forethought this isn't up for discussion

Hate crime is crime you commit because you have a personal bias towards a specific group of the belonging individual still not debatable

You can be charged with murder and have an additional charge because you have a prior prejudice towards that individual based on things like race sexual orientation etc. etc. that additional charge is based on the thought it's not the " similarity between m1 and m2" because these sub categories suggest a difference in how inherently heinous the crime is. You get into a fight with someone and stab them in the neck with the intention to kill is less heinous then plotting a murder for a few weeks. These levels dictate how heinous a crime is based on the amount of afore though given. Not because you had a personal bias towards that person which if it were the case would be a crime against your thoughts. But guess what? They're the same crime your still killing the person. When you are charged with a hate crime it's an additional crime because of your bias towards that person, which is why it's a thought crime
Click to expand...

It is a hate crime when it is a bias against a whole group of people, not just one person. The intended message is that those people as a group don't belong in your community and/or should shut up and keep a low profile or else they will be targeted.
 
Hard Truth said:
When has that happened? A quick google search didn't turn up any examples.
Click to expand...

It has been attempted and done a few times. The public wants someones head, so after the man is found not guilty the federal government starts to see if they can nail him for a hate crime.
 
Hard Truth said:
It is a hate crime when it is a bias against a whole group of people, not just one person. The intended message is that those people as a group don't belong in your community and/or should shut up and keep a low profile or else they will be targeted.
Click to expand...

Not always. You might have a prejudice against Asian men and your sister dates one and you assault him because you don't want an Asian dating your sister not necessarily as a message to the whole Asian race not belonging in your community. Just that you think your family should only date your own specific race. This would be considered a hate crime as well as a crime of assault. This is how it's a thought crime, now I'm not suggesting it's 1984 status of crimes against thoughts but the reason people are against it isn't because they defend racism it's because these stipulations set precedents for future laws to be passed.

Of you hated Asians and the same scenario and you were charged with assault and given a harder sentence on the basis of the nature of your crime, crime against him for being Asian being one of them that is perfectly acceptable. But the problem is that it's an additional charge.
 
Libertie76 said:
M2 is still a forethought of killing maybe not with a plan. Manslaughter is no a forethought this isn't up for discussion

Hate crime is crime you commit because you have a personal bias towards a specific group of the belonging individual still not debatable

You can be charged with murder and have an additional charge because you have a prior prejudice towards that individual based on things like race sexual orientation etc. etc. that additional charge is based on the thought it's not the " similarity between m1 and m2" because these sub categories suggest a difference in how inherently heinous the crime is. You get into a fight with someone and stab them in the neck with the intention to kill is less heinous then plotting a murder for a few weeks. These levels dictate how heinous a crime is based on the amount of afore though given. Not because you had a personal bias towards that person which if it were the case would be a crime against your thoughts. But guess what? They're the same crime your still killing the person. When you are charged with a hate crime it's an additional crime because of your bias towards that person, which is why it's a thought crime
Click to expand...

So... what you're saying is that... for murder 1 and murder 2.... it's the thought process that goes into each that counts? ;)
 
Hatuey said:
So... what you're saying is that... for murder 1 and murder 2.... it's the thought process that goes into each that counts? ;)
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that for murder one it's a higher level of severity due to the level of foreknowledge of the crime. However it's the same crime. You charge someone with murder 1 but it can be dropped to murder two depending on level of foreknowledge. You however can't charge murder 1 and murder 2 at the same time, why? Because it's the same crime based on level of severity.

However, you can charge someone with murder1 and a hate crime because they are two different crimes, murder 1 is the crime based on the amount of foreknowledge or forethought, hate crime is based on the actual bias you have to the person, or your own thoughts of the person based on prejudices which is crime based solely on your thought processes. If there was a higher punishment in murder cases because you intended to terrorize a race I would agree to that, however an additional charge or additional crime is completely based crime on thought.
 
Libertie76 said:
What I'm saying is that for murder one it's a higher level of severity due to the level of foreknowledge of the crime. However it's the same crime. You charge someone with murder 1 but it can be dropped to murder two depending on level of foreknowledge. You however can't charge murder 1 and murder 2 at the same time, why? Because it's the same crime based on level of severity.

However, you can charge someone with murder1 and a hate crime because they are two different crimes, murder 1 is the crime based on the amount of foreknowledge or forethought, hate crime is based on the actual bias you have to the person, or your own thoughts of the person based on prejudices which is crime based solely on your thought processes. If there was a higher punishment in murder cases because you intended to terrorize a race I would agree to that, however an additional barge or additional crime is completely based crime on thought.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with what I asked. You stated that it was the amount of thinking and planning which went into a crime which made a difference. Would you say that doesn't constitute the thought that went into the crime? As to your second point, that's pretty much what I'm asking you about. M1 carries a tougher sentence than M2 because (according to you) thought makes a difference. How is that different than being charged for both a hate crime and assault at the same time? Are you more likely to get a job after being convicted for 3 assaults as opposed to 3 assaults and a hate crime? What palpable difference does the additional charge of a hate crime make other than showing the severity of your crime and giving you more jail time? :)
 
Hatuey said:
That has nothing to do with what I asked. You stated that it was the amount of thinking and planning which went into a crime which made a difference. Would you say that doesn't constitute the thought that went into the crime? As to your second point, that's pretty much what I'm asking you about. M1 carries a tougher sentence than M2 because (according to you) thought makes a difference. How is that different than being charged for both a hate crime and assault at the same time? Are you more likely to get a job after being convicted for 3 assaults as opposed to 3 assaults and a hate crime? What palpable difference does the additional charge of a hate crime make other than showing the severity of your crime and giving you more jail time? :)
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with your question because it's dictating severity of the crime based on forethought and the inherent heinousness of the crime. It's not an additional charge like a hate crime. The hate crime is a charge solely on your personal thoughts. Murder 1 and murder 2 are he levels of severity in regards to the murder charges.

Thought makes a difference in the punishment of a crime however thought itself should not be a crime. The difference is that your given an additional charge solely based on your thought

You can threaten to beat someone up and be given a misdemeanor, however if the attorneys can prove you have a racial bias towards that person your given a misdemeanor threat charge but also the felony hate crime charge as well. It's the punishment for thought and solely thought.
 
Libertie76 said:
It has everything to do with your question because it's dictating severity of the crime based on forethought and the inherent heinousness of the crime.
Click to expand...

Eh... that's what delineating a difference between M1 and M2 does too.....

It's not an additional charge like a hate crime. The hate crime is a charge solely on your personal thoughts.
Click to expand...

Yes, and the intent behind them as well as the forethought and heinousness of attacking a person solely because of their race, gender, creed etc.

Murder 1 and murder 2 are he levels of severity in regards to the murder charges.
Click to expand...

And a hate crime charge is an added level of severity for another crime.

Thought makes a difference in the punishment of a crime however thought itself should not be a crime. The difference is that your given an additional charge solely based on your thought
Click to expand...

Eh, you just admitted that thought goes into the equation when punishing someone for the act of killing.

You can threaten to beat someone up and be given a misdemeanor, however if the attorneys can prove you have a racial bias towards that person your given a misdemeanor threat charge but also the felony hate crime charge as well. It's the punishment for thought and solely thought.
Click to expand...

That's not how hate crime charges work. Hell, hate crimes are probably the hardest types of crime to prove because bias is extremely hard to establish. For example, say black kid who one said "**** asians" and 4 hours jumps a white lady. From that one statement, there is very little which can actually be used to lay a hate crime charge. A person needs to have displayed quite a history of racial bias for hate crimes charges to even be considered. However, even then, if the kid does everything I mentioned and decides to take her wallet, most courts will ignore his racial bias and just charge him with theft and assault etc. Again, it's not as easy as you make it look and you're basically now saying that thought does and doesn't count.
 
Hatuey said:
Eh... that's what delineating a difference between M1 and M2 does too.....



Yes, and the intent behind them as well as the forethought and heinousness of attacking a person solely because of their race, gender, creed etc.



And a hate crime charge is an added level of severity for another crime.



Eh, you just admitted that thought goes into the equation when punishing someone for the act of killing.



That's not how hate crime charges work. Hell, hate crimes are probably the hardest types of crime to prove because bias is extremely hard to establish. For example, say black kid who one said "**** asians" and 4 hours jumps a white lady. From that one statement, there is very little which can actually be used to lay a hate crime charge. A person needs to have displayed quite a history of racial bias for hate crimes charges to even be considered. However, even then, if the kid does everything I mentioned and decides to take her wallet, most courts will ignore his racial bias and just charge him with theft and assault etc. Again, it's not as easy as you make it look and you're basically now saying that thought does and doesn't count.
Click to expand...

It does ialready by deciding the level of severity due to the definition so why would we need additional law based on someone's personal politics? Thought crime I'm suggesting isn't a crime because of how much forethought of committing the crime or the amount of knowledge placed into executing the crime, it's based on the persons own political or social thoughts and actually charging that person with a crime solely because that thought and that motive existed

It's a crime because a person has a personal thought politically.

It's a crime based on thought and solely on thought,opening the door to more legislation to thought crimes. This kind of legislation is needed to charge other subversive groups that politically disagree with the modern power structure. Subversive groups like the American militia that is now defined as domestic terrorists. This law opens the door to more political abuse, whether the intentions are pure or not.

Thought goes into the punishment based on the judges interpretation in regards to sentencing, however the thought itself is not the crime as opposed to a hate crime is an additional crime based on the persons thought

Statistics show thousands of hate crime cases. These statistics show the amount of hate crime charges, even if the hate crime is dropped the divisional damage is done. Black people see ten times more hate crimes against blacks and think white racism is expanding, white people see blacks commit ten times more crime against whites but only 1 tenth is recorded as a racially based crime and then whites feel under represented causing racial division on both accounts. The politician expands the definition of hate crime covering more subjects and groups and so the politician gives government more authority when the statistics increase taking away the liberties of the citizenship. It's safe to say charging people with a crime because of that persons personal bias is a political action to legally force political agenda, and in the case of enlightenment liberalism these policies should not be accepted.
 
Hate Crimes are an insult to those that are victims of crimes of equal victimhood that do not fall under Hate Crime status.
 
Libertie76 said:
1.)"an instance of unorthodox or controversial thinking, considered as a criminal offence or as socially unacceptable" thought crime

2.)
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the brutal murder of a German holidaymaker"
synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More - murder

Evidence comes forward such as the person dies and you can prove you had the intention and premeditation to kill the person in cases of aggravated assault... Different crimes doesn't disprove anything I've stated
3.)I said based on a bias towards a group are you seriously trying to dispute this fact

Ummm ok then?
Click to expand...

1.) false since that alone isnt a crme, thanks for proving the facts right and yourself wrong again
2.) lol thats the dicitionary we are talkign about LAW
m2 doesnt not require plotting, sorry you are still 100% factually wrong
3.) you didnt state any fact
"im" not disputing anything, the law says you are wrong because it do not have to be a "group"
4.) yes its ok you are wrong again. Seriously how old are you and what country are you from because you have no clue about america

here let me help you and further educate you again

Second Degree Murder: Definition Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as: 1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or 2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. Second-degree murder may best be viewed as the middle ground between first-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter. - See more at: Second Degree Murder Overview - FindLaw
Click to expand...

again that fact remains your statement was wrong

also check these links out, a "group" isnt necessary
FBI — Overview
Hate Crime | CRS | Department of Justice
18 U.S. Code § 249 - Hate crime acts | LII / Legal Information Institute

once again we will be waiting for one single fact that makes it thought crime . .. . . one. . again please do not dodge it . . thanks
 
AGENT J said:
1.) false since that alone isnt a crme, thanks for proving the facts right and yourself wrong again
2.) lol thats the dicitionary we are talkign about LAW
m2 doesnt not require plotting, sorry you are still 100% factually wrong
3.) you didnt state any fact
"im" not disputing anything, the law says you are wrong because it do not have to be a "group"
4.) yes its ok you are wrong again. Seriously how old are you and what country are you from because you have no clue about america

here let me help you and further educate you again



again that fact remains your statement was wrong

also check these links out, a "group" isnt necessary
FBI — Overview
Hate Crime | CRS | Department of Justice
18 U.S. Code § 249 - Hate crime acts | LII / Legal Information Institute

once again we will be waiting for one single fact that makes it thought crime . .. . . one. . again please do not dodge it . . thanks
Click to expand...

1) it's still a crime on your thoughts, did you read anything I said? It's not 1984 level thought crime it is however still a crime against you because of your thoughts. You can charge someone with ag assault and murder because ag assault is defined differently then murder as two separate crimes. Just as a hate crime is a separate crime. Non of this is debatable

2) I gave you the definition of murder, murder two is a separate circumstance where you can show you intended the harming of the individual but not the death, but that the action actually resulted in death. I already stated this

3) now your just arguing for no inherent reason or showing any disproving facts about my original statement. Group what I mean by group is racial community. Ethnic group. Religious views, or the belonging to a religious sect. This argument your making is seriously childish

Not premeditated or planned in the killing, but premeditated or intentions of harming the individual. The intentional killing of an individual is the lesser severity of the actual plotting. If you can prove the person intentionally wished to seek harm to the victim and the victim dies as a result it's murder 2. If you can show that the person intentionally wishes to kill the victim and the victim dies it's murder 1. I already stated this this is not debatable I don't know what your disproving by showing this.

Ok already stated, many times. Don't dodge it? I haven't
 
Libertie76 said:
1) it's still a crime on your thoughts, did you read anything I said? It's not 1984 level thought crime it is however still a crime against you because of your thoughts. You can charge someone with ag assault and murder because ag assault is defined differently then murder as two separate crimes. Just as a hate crime is a separate crime. Non of this is debatable

2) I gave you the definition of murder, murder two is a separate circumstance where you can show you intended the harming of the individual but not the death, but that the action actually resulted in death. I already stated this

3) now your just arguing for no inherent reason or showing any disproving facts about my original statement. Group what I mean by group is racial community. Ethnic group. Religious views, or the belonging to a religious sect. This argument your making is seriously childish

4.)Not premeditated or planned in the killing, but premeditated or intentions of harming the individual. The intentional killing of an individual is the lesser severity of the actual plotting. If you can prove the person intentionally wished to seek harm to the victim and the victim dies as a result it's murder 2. If you can show that the person intentionally wishes to kill the victim and the victim dies it's murder 1. I already stated this this is not debatable I don't know what your disproving by showing this.

5.) Ok already stated, many times. Don't dodge it? I haven't
Click to expand...

1.) i read everythign you said and its all debatable because you cant back it up with anything. You havent provide one thing that makes this a thought crime and not other crimes, you are making it up based on your own subjective opinions and nothing else.

your opinion is meaningless im asking for facts

2.) LOL your statement said MURDER, period it didnt say m1 or m2 or m3 it said murder and then talked about manslaughter. Your statement was and still is factually wrong.

3.) wrong again, im not arguing just pointing out your statement is factually wrong. If that bothers you correct your statement or don't make inaccurate ones. Deflect and try failed insults if you want but again there is no argument and your statement was inaccurate. facts, laws and definitions all prove that.

4.) strawman thats not being discussed. wow

5.) no you keep talking in circles without being ONE single fact to the table that makes it a thought crime, please do so
also please educate yourself on american laws and rights because you do not understand them

lets reflect so you dont repost more inaccurate and factually proven wrong things
murder does not have to be preplotted, fact, proven by definition and law
hate crime does not have to be a group, fact, proven by definition and law
calling a hate crime a thought crime is ONLY your opinion and nothing more

if you disagree once again simple provide ONE fact that makes your statement true . . . .one
 
AGENT J said:
1.) i read everythign you said and its all debatable because you cant back it up with anything. You havent provide one thing that makes this a thought crime and not other crimes, you are making it up based on your own subjective opinions and nothing else.

your opinion is meaningless im asking for facts

2.) LOL your statement said MURDER, period it didnt say m1 or m2 or m3 it said murder and then talked about manslaughter. Your statement was and still is factually wrong.

3.) wrong again, im not arguing just pointing out your statement is factually wrong. If that bothers you correct your statement or don't make inaccurate ones. Deflect and try failed insults if you want but again there is no argument and your statement was inaccurate. facts, laws and definitions all prove that.

4.) strawman thats not being discussed. wow

5.) no you keep talking in circles without being ONE single fact to the table that makes it a thought crime, please do so
also please educate yourself on american laws and rights because you do not understand them

lets reflect so you dont repost more inaccurate and factually proven wrong things
murder does not have to be preplotted, fact, proven by definition and law
hate crime does not have to be a group, fact, proven by definition and law
calling a hate crime a thought crime is ONLY your opinion and nothing more

if you disagree once again simple provide ONE fact that makes your statement true . . . .one
Click to expand...

It violates the 14th amendment because it shows that we care less about an assault victim then we care about one who is a victim in a "federally protected category" such as race and gender.

it converts actions into thought crimes on the basis that it creates an additional charge simply based on the perpetrators personal bias towards the victims identity. That personal bias is the thoughts, or the opinions of the perpetrator. Again its not the difference between m1 and m2. Its not the measurement of the severity its the actual opinion of the perpetrator that is being charged on him/her

You are able to be charged with a hate crime through non violent crime offenses such as intimidation or threatening. This also shows that it doesn't need to be an actual physical conflict to conclude a hate crime. If you state "f you im going to hurt you" you're threatening some one, if you say "f you im going to hurt you n-word" your threatening some one and showing your personal bias towards that individuals race. The showing of a personal bias towards a race constitutes it as a hate crime. Which it then intensifies and creates an additional category of charges solely on personal opinions and personal bias. Not additional charges simply because the severity. Not level charges such as Murder 1 or Murder 2, but whole new charges based completely on opinion and thought

My arguments you've been trying to "disprove" seriously have absolutley nothing with what we're even discussing.

Fact: Already stated murder doesnt have to be preplotted, i said the level of severity in regards to forethought. If you intentionally harm some one and it results in the persons death its murder. That intentionally harming is the severity of the forethought already stated several posts ago hasnt been "disproven" by you

Fact: Race, sexual orientation are all terms to classify people into specific groups. I.E. i am part of the Yugoslavian community because i am ethnically Yugoslavian. The Yugoslavian community is a group. You are seriously only arguing this because you want to argue.

Fact: The personal bias, opinions, or thoughts of the accused become put on trial during hate crime cases. Causing his Thoughts to be the crime. You accuse some one of a hate crime you have to prove that he thinks, has opinions, shows bias in the matter you are accusing him of. The level of severity becomes in question in regards to things like murder and assault, and a judge can say due to the nature we give a maximun punishment. However, the personal bias of the person gets put on trial the minute you charge him/her with a hate crime.
 
Libertie76 said:
1.) It violates the 14th amendment because it shows that we care less about an assault victim then we care about one who is a victim in a "federally protected category" such as race and gender.
2.)it converts actions into thought crimes on the basis that it creates an additional charge simply based on the perpetrators personal bias towards the victims identity. That personal bias is the thoughts, or the opinions of the perpetrator. Again its not the difference between m1 and m2. Its not the measurement of the severity its the actual opinion of the perpetrator that is being charged on him/her
3.)You are able to be charged with a hate crime through non violent crime offenses such as intimidation or threatening. This also shows that it doesn't need to be an actual physical conflict to conclude a hate crime. If you state "f you im going to hurt you" you're threatening some one, if you say "f you im going to hurt you n-word" your threatening some one and showing your personal bias towards that individuals race. The showing of a personal bias towards a race constitutes it as a hate crime. Which it then intensifies and creates an additional category of charges solely on personal opinions and personal bias. Not additional charges simply because the severity. Not level charges such as Murder 1 or Murder 2, but whole new charges based completely on opinion and thought
4.)My arguments you've been trying to "disprove" seriously have absolutley nothing with what we're even discussing.
5.)Fact: Already stated murder doesnt have to be preplotted, i said the level of severity in regards to forethought. If you intentionally harm some one and it results in the persons death its murder. That intentionally harming is the severity of the forethought already stated several posts ago hasnt been "disproven" by you
6.)Fact: Race, sexual orientation are all terms to classify people into specific groups. I.E. i am part of the Yugoslavian community because i am ethnically Yugoslavian. The Yugoslavian community is a group. You are seriously only arguing this because you want to argue.
7.)Fact: The personal bias, opinions, or thoughts of the accused become put on trial during hate crime cases. Causing his Thoughts to be the crime. You accuse some one of a hate crime you have to prove that he thinks, has opinions, shows bias in the matter you are accusing him of. The level of severity becomes in question in regards to things like murder and assault, and a judge can say due to the nature we give a maximun punishment. However, the personal bias of the person gets put on trial the minute you charge him/her with a hate crime.
Click to expand...

1.) lol links? facts? court cases?
2.) no thought crimes and nothign different than other crimes has already proven
3.) correct just like other crimes. legal threats illegal threats and terrorist threats
want an example of a whole new charge like as already been given by me and others. You assault someone then they find out you had plans to murder them , you get assault and attempted murder. NEW charge.

you dont fix faulty stairs at your business, thats negligence, then its found out you did it on purpose or new they were broke and ignored it then you can get charged with reckless endangerment also a NEW charge
4.) nobody is trying to disprove them they simply fail because of facts laws and rights. Your inability to understand the laws and rights of my country is your issue not mine.
5.) yes after you were proved wrong you corrected your wrong statement
6.) and yet that doenst change the fact a hate crime doenst have to be a group, keep tryign though its funny watching you deny facts
7.) nope this is your OPINION. his thoughts aren't the crime his actions are. a person could think hateful things all day, not a crime.

we are still waiting for your to provide ONE fact that its a thought crime . . . .
 
AGENT J said:
1.) lol links? facts? court cases?
2.) no thought crimes and nothign different than other crimes has already proven
3.) correct just like other crimes. legal threats illegal threats and terrorist threats
want an example of a whole new charge like as already been given by me and others. You assault someone then they find out you had plans to murder them , you get assault and attempted murder. NEW charge.

you dont fix faulty stairs at your business, thats negligence, then its found out you did it on purpose or new they were broke and ignored it then you can get charged with reckless endangerment also a NEW charge
4.) nobody is trying to disprove them they simply fail because of facts laws and rights. Your inability to understand the laws and rights of my country is your issue not mine.
5.) yes after you were proved wrong you corrected your wrong statement
6.) and yet that doenst change the fact a hate crime doenst have to be a group, keep tryign though its funny watching you deny facts
7.) nope this is your OPINION. his thoughts aren't the crime his actions are. a person could think hateful things all day, not a crime.

we are still waiting for your to provide ONE fact that its a thought crime . . . .
Click to expand...

In hate crime cases are the persons prejudices being brought up on specific charges
 
Libertie76 said:
In hate crime cases are the persons prejudices being brought up on specific charges
Click to expand...

no, thier actions are
glad i could help again
 
Libertie76 said:
Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity
Click to expand...

yes
also no action, no crime at all
you are free to have your thoughts all you want

if you ACT you can be additional charges based on motive, reasoning and scale just like other crimes

still waiting for you to support the thought part and that it only applies to hate crime, so far you havent
 
AGENT J said:
yes
also no action, no crime at all
you are free to have your thoughts all you want

if you ACT you can be additional charges based on motive, reasoning and scale just like other crimes

still waiting for you to support the thought part and that it only applies to hate crime, so far you havent
Click to expand...

So you can be charged with a hate crime without any bias. If I attack a straight Yugoslavian Male I can be charged with a hate crime, considering I'm Yugoslavian as well.
 
Libertie76 said:
1.)So you can be charged with a hate crime without any bias.
2.)If I attack a straight Yugoslavian Male I can be charged with a hate crime, considering I'm Yugoslavian as well.
Click to expand...

1.)"Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
yes
2.) yes depending on your reason/motive

thank you again for proving you are severely uneducated about laws, rights and hate crimes.
anything else you need help with please ask.
 
AGENT J said:
1.)"Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
yes
2.) yes depending on your reason/motive

thank you again for proving you are severely uneducated about laws, rights and hate crimes.
anything else you need help with please ask.
Click to expand...

What would that reason and motive be to constitute as a hate crime then if I hold no bias towards the victims identity.
 
AGENT J said:
did you so quickly forget the law/link yesterday
FBI — Overview
Click to expand...

"A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias" now please explain how you can commit a hate crime without a bias towards the victim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom