• 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

1.) false without the first there is no second. Fact
2.) didnt insult you, nice try
yes and that statement is false unless it breaks laws. Bigotry itself or even as motive is NOT a crime unless a crime is actually committed.

You could be MOTIVATED to punch a guy cause he is black but you DONT actually act on that so there would be ZERO crime if there was no action/
glad i could clear that mistake up for you again
3.) correct
4.) false according to LAW, facts and definition of crimes (not me)
5.) false according to LAW, facts and definition of crimes (not me)
6.) correct according to LAW, facts and definition of crimes (not me)
7.) now THAT is a failed insult that makes me laugh cause it shows how desperate you are to be right when facts prove you wrong and it shows your anger over being wrong. Im only trying to hel you. Getting angry and trying to attack me and fail wont work it only further exposure your lack of education of american law rights and crimes on this topic.

also ANOTHER example of your english disconnect . . who said i went to law school? seems you have a real habit of making things up and assumptions things that are completely wrong.

8.) thread history, links to laws facts and definitions all prove this lie wrong :shrug:

9.) this is a bold face lie you just posted, in ever claimed any such thing. If you disagree simply quote me saying the building was the victim. You will fail because you just made it up but id love to see you try lol. In your next post quote me saying that lie, thanks

10.) planning is an action, again, english

11.) as already proven it was a wrong assumption.

12.) yes a presumption, translation assumption based on your FEELINGS and nothing factual

13.) a suggestion that you cant back up with any logic or facts that is wrong. In this case laws dont do it. Hurt feelings and ignorance does.
14.) well good thing thats not happening so theres no cause or effect.
your post fails and facts win again
lets go over the facts
your statement was wrong and the factual answer to your question is yes
hate crime is not a thought crime and there are many other crimes that assess motive
lets see if you can admit it and lets see what you learned
your question was "Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
the factual answer is YES as proven by facts,law and the definition of the crime
do you still disagree with this fact? yes or no

1) 2nd means second crime. You're wrong

2) the motivation of the crime is a crime in hate crime. "Bigotry itself or even as motive is NOT a crime, unless a crime is actually committed." Two separate crimes

4) false it's your opinion of the law I'm basing my argument on, not fact

5) false it's your opinion if the law I'm basing my argument on, not fact

6) doesn't make sense, each charge against someone is a separate crime or else it's something called double jeopardy. You already admit this previously in the same post. Youre wrong

7) your snide insults and your counter arguments show your immaturity and how you never went to law school. Already known already proven

8) thread history doesn't prove anything of the nature, you're wrong it's just your interpretation

9) 1.) there is no victim of the "hate crime" the hate crime was done to property, " I never said it was a victiumless crime", implying the property is the victim since it's not a victimless crime

10) is a single person planning is an idea not action. You're wrong

11) wrong. Prior posts suggest differently not proven just your interpretation

12) wrong that's not the definition of perceive your translation is just your opinion not fact

13) refusing to say something is logical simply because you are a master of being able to twist words to support a non existent counter argument isn't the definition illogical, you're wrong. Laws don't divide people, opinion does besides for Jim Crow laws, I'm right and your wrong

14) your wrong it's based on fact. Bias with motivation is hate crime law, that's a thought crime, that's a fact. Facts win again

Let's go over your counter argument.

Your counter argument has absolutely no rational basis considering the question you are asking at this point could be over 20
There are many other crimes that asses level of motive to give punishment, but a hate crime is the only crime based solely on motive

Yes I do disagree with this, because it's not a fact. Your little hypothetical case didn't prove this to be untrue in the slightest, the definitions you attempted to use against me actually worked against you and you twisted words to try to proof your point

Wow look at that I just destroyed you
 
1) 2nd means second crime. You're wrong

2) the motivation of the crime is a crime in hate crime. "Bigotry itself or even as motive is NOT a crime, unless a crime is actually committed." Two separate crimes

4) false it's your opinion of the law I'm basing my argument on, not fact

5) false it's your opinion if the law I'm basing my argument on, not fact

6) doesn't make sense, each charge against someone is a separate crime or else it's something called double jeopardy. You already admit this previously in the same post. Youre wrong

7) your snide insults and your counter arguments show your immaturity and how you never went to law school. Already known already proven

8) thread history doesn't prove anything of the nature, you're wrong it's just your interpretation

9) 1.) there is no victim of the "hate crime" the hate crime was done to property, " I never said it was a victiumless crime", implying the property is the victim since it's not a victimless crime

10) is a single person planning is an idea not action. You're wrong

11) wrong. Prior posts suggest differently not proven just your interpretation

12) wrong that's not the definition of perceive your translation is just your opinion not fact

13) refusing to say something is logical simply because you are a master of being able to twist words to support a non existent counter argument isn't the definition illogical, you're wrong. Laws don't divide people, opinion does besides for Jim Crow laws, I'm right and your wrong

14) your wrong it's based on fact. Bias with motivation is hate crime law, that's a thought crime, that's a fact. Facts win again

Let's go over your counter argument.

Your counter argument has absolutely no rational basis considering the question you are asking at this point could be over 20
There are many other crimes that asses level of motive to give punishment, but a hate crime is the only crime based solely on motive

Yes I do disagree with this, because it's not a fact. Your little hypothetical case didn't prove this to be untrue in the slightest, the definitions you attempted to use against me actually worked against you and you twisted words to try to proof your point

Wow look at that I just destroyed you

well since you are not interested in learning, honest discussion, have trouble with english, cant admit you lost to facts or even facts themselves Im not going to try and help and fix your mistakes anymore. Ill just leave it here to further expose youer failed and factually proven wrong post. you post fails and fact win again.

lets go over the facts

your statement was wrong and the factual answer to your question is yes. Fact
hate crime is not a thought crime and there are many other crimes that assess motive there has to be ACTION. fact

lets see if you can admit it and lets see what you learned

your question was "Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
the factual answer is YES as proven by facts,law and the definition of the crime
do you still disagree with this fact? yes or no

facts, laws and definitions all prove you wrong, please tell us what you have that support your failed and proven wrong claims

in you reply post FACTS that make your claims right, your OPINIONS are meanignless
 
10) a single person planning is an idea not action. You're wrong

I think this is my favorite example of the inability to understand facts, english and or dishonesty in your posts

did you really just type that and you thought it would be taken seriously?


lets look at the dictionary

Planning - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
planning
: the act or process of making or carrying out plans;

planing is in fact an ACTION

your post fails and is destroyed and facts win again
 
Last edited:
You're right but let's just assume a group of white people were reported yelling kill all black people by witnesses before killing a black guy with his wife. Also, it's pretty obvious they targeted him because he is white. Personally I think hate crime law should not even exist. I do not agree with racism in the slightest but I also don't think we should legally punish people for motivation. The scumbag threatening the family deserves to be arrested on charges pertaining to the threat and causing fear in the family's life but not charged on his own personal motivation. Just as the people killing zemir begic should be charged with murder but not hate crime. Now the Bosnians in the St. Louis area feel like they aren't properly represented by the authorities because they won't charge the teens with hate crime. This shows that charging people based on thought will only cause more division.

When you ASS-U-ME you set yourself up for a fail.

We have seen where dozens of 'eyewitnesses' were determined to be wrong. You miss the difference between 'reported' and 'determined'. Might want to work on that.

The legal system uses motivation all the time. Murder isn't a one bin of sin. We have degrees based on intent and premeditation. The motivation is ALWAYS a factor.

IF and it is a huge if, IF you want to use the hate crime laws as an example of division- it isn't that they exist but rather that a great deal of discretion is given to their enforcement.
 
well since you are not interested in learning, honest discussion, have trouble with english, cant admit you lost to facts or even facts themselves Im not going to try and help and fix your mistakes anymore. Ill just leave it here to further expose youer failed and factually proven wrong post. you post fails and fact win again.

lets go over the facts

your statement was wrong and the factual answer to your question is yes. Fact
hate crime is not a thought crime and there are many other crimes that assess motive there has to be ACTION. fact

lets see if you can admit it and lets see what you learned

your question was "Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
the factual answer is YES as proven by facts,law and the definition of the crime
do you still disagree with this fact? yes or no

facts, laws and definitions all prove you wrong, please tell us what you have that support your failed and proven wrong claims

in you reply post FACTS that make your claims right, your OPINIONS are meanignless

Fact your counter argument is wrong Responding to Bigotry and Intergroup Strife on Campus: Guide for College and University Administrators

Why not look at the adl definition of hate crime for me ok? Your definition is different Fact

Your assumption is wrong Fact

The hate crime is a crime motivated by the bias of the victims identity fact

Of course if you change the definition of victim from being the actual victim to something like property then you can change the definition of hate crime
 
I think this is my favorite example of the inability to understand facts, english and or dishonesty in your posts

did you really just type that and you thought it would be taken seriously?


lets look at the dictionary

Planning - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
planning
: the act or process of making or carrying out plans;

planing is in fact an ACTION

your post fails and is destroyed and facts win again

This is the way you twist things around to try to make things fit that don't

think·ing (thngkng)
n.
1. The act or practice of one that thinks; thought.
2. A way of reasoning; judgment: To my thinking, this is not a good idea.
adj.
Characterized by thought or thoughtfulness; rational: We are thinking animals.

So thinking is an action correct? Then by you definition of example a hate crime can only happen after an action then by this scenario, "I was motivated to think about killing him because he was black" is a hate crime
 
Last edited:
1.)Why not look at the adl definition of hate crime for me ok? Your definition is different Fact
2.)Your assumption is wrong Fact
3.)The hate crime is a crime motivated by the bias of the victims identity fact
Of course if you change the definition of victim from being the actual victim to something like property then you can change the definition of hate crime

1-3) not a fact

how did i know you would dodge the questions lol
sorry i have no interest in thier website, why? they have no LEGAL power to WRITE and DETERMINE laws.
US government does not answer to them lol if you were from america you would know this.
I can post he OPINIONS of the Family Research Council saying gay marriage is not equal rights, just like your opinion thats meaningless.
what a complete failure, once again your post is destroyed and fact win again

maybe in your NEXT post you provide FACTS that support you and not meaningless talking points and opinions

your question was "Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
the factual answer is YES as proven by facts,law and the definition of the crime
do you still disagree with this fact? yes or no

facts, laws and definitions all prove you wrong, please tell us what you have that support your failed and proven wrong claims

in you reply post FACTS that make your claims right, your OPINIONS are meanignless
 
When you ASS-U-ME you set yourself up for a fail.

We have seen where dozens of 'eyewitnesses' were determined to be wrong. You miss the difference between 'reported' and 'determined'. Might want to work on that.

The legal system uses motivation all the time. Murder isn't a one bin of sin. We have degrees based on intent and premeditation. The motivation is ALWAYS a factor.

IF and it is a huge if, IF you want to use the hate crime laws as an example of division- it isn't that they exist but rather that a great deal of discretion is given to their enforcement.

It's not the suggestion that they were right, it's the suggestion that according to events taking place that weekend and the witness accounts authorities should legally investigate it as a hate crime but they are refusing to do so.

Yea I agree with you, but if would also further go forward and suggest that hate crime laws will initially sub categorize groups even further then the category that counts and that's Americans. It' nature is to represent people differently according to the persons difference. Well as we have seen since the creation of hate crime laws more people feel less represented equally for broader and broader differences and this will be a cause for divison
 
1-3) not a fact

how did i know you would dodge the questions lol
sorry i have no interest in thier website, why? they have no LEGAL power to WRITE and DETERMINE laws.
US government does not answer to them lol if you were from america you would know this.
I can post he OPINIONS of the Family Research Council saying gay marriage is not equal rights, just like your opinion thats meaningless.
what a complete failure, once again your post is destroyed and fact win again

maybe in your NEXT post you provide FACTS that support you and not meaningless talking points and opinions

your question was "Can you be charged with a hate crime without a bias towards the victims identity"
the factual answer is YES as proven by facts,law and the definition of the crime
do you still disagree with this fact? yes or no

facts, laws and definitions all prove you wrong, please tell us what you have that support your failed and proven wrong claims

in you reply post FACTS that make your claims right, your OPINIONS are meanignless

What about the duhaime definition Hate Crime Legal Definition ?
 
This is the way you twist things around to try to make things fit that don't

think·ing (thngkng)
n.
1. The act or practice of one that thinks; thought.
2. A way of reasoning; judgment: To my thinking, this is not a good idea.
adj.
Characterized by thought or thoughtfulness; rational: We are thinking animals.

So thinking is an action correct? Then by you definition of example a hate crime can only happen after an action then by this scenario, "I was motivated to think about killing him because he was black" is a hate crime

yes if you understood english by definition thinking is an action :shrug: again this is why i know english isn't your first language.
are you telling me we are supposed to say the dictionary is wrong?
wow are you seriously denying planning is an action? law and facts and definitions all prove you wrong

you do know this is a legal discussion?
wow talking about completely owning your own posts

ok here we go, this will let everybody know the integrity of your posts and the honesty of them

its a yes no question

by law and definition is planning an ACTION . . yes or no
 
What about the duhaime definition Hate Crime Legal Definition ?

also meaningless to US law. notice how the group WORLD laws and human rights together. They also have no power. LOL
again if you were from america you would know this

facts win again.

its over dude, your claim lost pages ago and they just keep getting destroyed over and over again. Ive never seen somebody argue against facts so hard and lose so bad. WHy?

I give you FBI definition and you give me human rights groups and the ADI?
 
yes if you understood english by definition thinking is an action :shrug: again this is why i know english isn't your first language.
are you telling me we are supposed to say the dictionary is wrong?
wow are you seriously denying planning is an action? law and facts and definitions all prove you wrong

you do know this is a legal discussion?
wow talking about completely owning your own posts

ok here we go, this will let everybody know the integrity of your posts and the honesty of them

its a yes no question

by law and definition is planning an ACTION . . yes or no

Good job on proving my point on twisting things around to suit your claim and your failure to respond to me purposely

If thinking is an action, and a hate crime needs an action to occur to become a hate crime, then me thinking about doing harm to someone while I'm motivated by my bias is a hate crime
 
Good job on proving my point on twisting things around to suit your claim and your failure to respond to me purposely

If thinking is an action, and a hate crime needs an action to occur to become a hate crime, then me thinking about doing harm to someone while I'm motivated by my bias is a hate crime
Posting lies wont help you, nobody honest, educated and objective is falling for it
another dodge, with each one your post claims further fail and get more destroyed

by law and definition is planning an ACTION . . yes or no
 
also meaningless to US law. notice how the group WORLD laws and human rights together. They also have no power. LOL
again if you were from america you would know this

facts win again.

its over dude, your claim lost pages ago and they just keep getting destroyed over and over again. Ive never seen somebody argue against facts so hard and lose so bad. WHy?

I give you FBI definition and you give me human rights groups and the ADI?

Hate Crimes Victims legal definition of Hate Crimes Victims how about the same website you quoted Hate crimes "are based, at least in part, on the defendant's belief regarding a particular status of the victim. "
 
Posting lies wont help you, nobody honest, educated and objective is falling for it
another dodge, with each one your post claims further fail and get more destroyed

by law and definition is planning an ACTION . . yes or no

Planing is the verb, the action form, of collecting ideas or material to create a plan.

Yes, When you stated action first i was lead to believe you meant a physical action. But you didn't.

So like I said since you state " a hate crime needs an action to be a hate crime" the action of thinking about being motivated to commit a crime based on race is now a hate crime.
 
correct
now honesty and integrity test
so your previous statement:

" a single person planning is an idea not action. You're wrong"

was in fact wrong? yes or no
 
It's not the suggestion that they were right, it's the suggestion that according to events taking place that weekend and the witness accounts authorities should legally investigate it as a hate crime but they are refusing to do so. Yea I agree with you, but if would also further go forward and suggest that hate crime laws will initially sub categorize groups even further then the category that counts and that's Americans. It' nature is to represent people differently according to the persons difference. Well as we have seen since the creation of hate crime laws more people feel less represented equally for broader and broader differences and this will be a cause for divison

It is not a suggestion, but an assumption... try to stay on track. Assuming is moot, evidence is the key... pretending to attempt a weak argument is pointless. What testimony stands up in court, what forensic evidence supports the witness statements means so much more than what a new outlet reports.

Your attempt to use 'libertarian' POV is interesting but useless. Hate criminals are still Americans, as it stands now many Americans feel the law is unequally applied so your narrow 'worry' about hate crime laws and an imagined sense of disenfranchisement seems odd.
 
correct
now honesty and integrity test
so your previous statement:

" a single person planning is an idea not action. You're wrong"

was in fact wrong? yes or no

The statement is wrong, but the statement was taken out of context, the previous statement was actually in regards towards your definition of hate crime needing an action. To my understanding you suggest you need to have an action before a hate crime exists so the action of planning can be a hate crime, then the action of thinking can be a hate crime and I don't think that that is vary fair
 
It is not a suggestion, but an assumption... try to stay on track. Assuming is moot, evidence is the key... pretending to attempt a weak argument is pointless. What testimony stands up in court, what forensic evidence supports the witness statements means so much more than what a new outlet reports.

Your attempt to use 'libertarian' POV is interesting but useless. Hate criminals are still Americans, as it stands now many Americans feel the law is unequally applied so your narrow 'worry' about hate crime laws and an imagined sense of disenfranchisement seems odd.

Seriously what is the purpose of you trying to insult me here?

Suggestion, police should investigate hate crime charges based on witnesses and even a victim of the crime his wife

Fact, police ruled out hate crime charges without thoroughly investigating all evidence

Americans feel the law is unequally applied, causing guess what "division"

You're attempt to insult me for no absolute reason is interesting but useless
 
since the facts and links i already gave you that you are having trouble understanding say that, yes it, yes of course
it CAN be but doesnt HAVE to be. this was stated in my links PAGES ago. its nothing new.

Not by the definiton of the law written in the law (1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin. - Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person

How does it feel to be wrong facts win again
 
The statement is wrong, but the statement was taken out of context, the previous statement was actually in regards towards your definition of hate crime needing an action. To my understanding you suggest you need to have an action before a hate crime exists so the action of planning can be a hate crime, then the action of thinking can be a hate crime and I don't think that that is vary fair

good job!!! thats the most honest and integrity your post have shown even though you couldnt just answer yes or know you had to try to defend your mistake

also add "context" to the list of words you dont understand.

YOU having a misunderstanding of laws, definitions and facts is NOT context, nor does your idea of fair change those facts
 
good job!!! thats the most honest and integrity your post have shown even though you couldnt just answer yes or know you had to try to defend your mistake

also add "context" to the list of words you dont understand.

YOU having a misunderstanding of laws, definitions and facts is NOT context, nor does your idea of fair change those facts

Good job no integrity by the intentional refusal to respond to this claim "then the action of thinking can be a hate crime and I don't think that that is vary fair"
 
Back
Top Bottom