We must eliminate hate crime laws

[Luddly Neddite]

So if a rapist targets black women, is that worse than one who targets white women?

If they could somehow prove they were part of some racist agenda then they could be prosecuted as a hate crime. The law does not really deal in questions of what is worse, just what can be proven in court and sentenced under existing legal guidelines.

So, if someone rapes anyone for any reason, they are charged with a crime. There is no need for hate crimes. Raping a woman because she is black is not any worse than raping a woman because she happens to be in the vicinity.

And, as usual, libs are good with dividing people into groups and assigning different weight to the victims based upon their colour or whatever.. White woman raped is not as bad as a black woman raped by a racist.

You just described the basic belief of most of the RWNJ traitors on this board.

Try reading about a black person being shot in the back or a black woman being raped and the RWNJ traitors will like up to say they deserve it.

Why don you think they voted for drumpf?

What? She is saying it is not worse when a black woman is raped than when a white woman is raped. It is the SAME. Is she wrong?

Actually, she said nothing of the kind. She did not state her own opinion at all. She lied about what libs believe and I set her straight.

If you disagree, I suggest you do as I told her to - read the RWNJ Pootarians' posts.

Here's what I believe: people tell you everything you need to know. They tell you, very clearly, what they are and when they do, you should believe them. Now, think about how that related to UUUGLY bigly amazingly tremendous drumpf SAYS he is as opposed to all we actually know about his life, actions, bragging about being a serial sexual predator, lousy money manager, running businesses into the ground, forcing people out of their jobs, stealing their property and all around bucket of anti-American slime. And, the same about RWNJ traitors who love Putin more than their own country and want jobs sent to China.

Now, I've had it with the way this board delays typing and corrections. Sorry in advance for any typos and now I'm going back to the nice side of town cuz I've been slumming long enough.

Buh Bye

 

[ChrisL]

If they could somehow prove they were part of some racist agenda then they could be prosecuted as a hate crime. The law does not really deal in questions of what is worse, just what can be proven in court and sentenced under existing legal guidelines.

So, if someone rapes anyone for any reason, they are charged with a crime. There is no need for hate crimes. Raping a woman because she is black is not any worse than raping a woman because she happens to be in the vicinity.

And, as usual, libs are good with dividing people into groups and assigning different weight to the victims based upon their colour or whatever.. White woman raped is not as bad as a black woman raped by a racist.

You just described the basic belief of most of the RWNJ traitors on this board.

Try reading about a black person being shot in the back or a black woman being raped and the RWNJ traitors will like up to say they deserve it.

Why don you think they voted for drumpf?

What? She is saying it is not worse when a black woman is raped than when a white woman is raped. It is the SAME. Is she wrong?

Actually, she said nothing of the kind. She did not state her own opinion at all. She lied about what libs believe and I set her straight.

If you disagree, I suggest you do as I told her to - read the RWNJ Pootarians' posts.

Here's what I believe: people tell you everything you need to know. They tell you, very clearly, what they are and when they do, you should believe them. Now, think about how that related to UUUGLY bigly amazingly tremendous drumpf SAYS he is as opposed to all we actually know about his life, actions, bragging about being a serial sexual predator, lousy money manager, running businesses into the ground, forcing people out of their jobs, stealing their property and all around bucket of anti-American slime. And, the same about RWNJ traitors who love Putin more than their own country and want jobs sent to China.

Now, I've had it with the way this board delays typing and corrections. Sorry in advance for any typos and now I'm going back to the nice side of town cuz I've been slumming long enough.

Buh Bye

Oh, I can see a reasonable discussion is out of the question with you, Trump derangement syndrome victim.

 

[ChrisL]

It's the end of the world! The sky is falling! Trump is going to kill black people!

 

[beagle9]

Hate crime law is like thought crime law. It's way too presumptuous.

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as some one's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

And my point is that it is NOT worse than murdering someone for any other reason.

. Like someone else said here.. It is about the degree be it either racially driven, heinous, murder 1,2, manslaughter etc. and then the sentencing phases come next. Really what should be looked at is how such added laws are possibly being over used where as all depending on who is running things, it could be that the people could start using laws in ways in which they were not intended to be used. The peverting of any law is possible, and we should be honest enough to judge exactly when the laws are being abused or used in a wrongful way. The appointment of great common sense Supreme Court justices, and lower court justices should work to fix such things. The laws are A-ok even hate crime laws, but how the laws are applied, and by whom is very important every single time.

 

[Tilly]

It is not OK to legislate against and criminalise thoughts.

 

[ChrisL]

Hate crime law is like thought crime law. It's way too presumptuous.

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as some one's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

And my point is that it is NOT worse than murdering someone for any other reason.

. Like someone else said here.. It is about the degree be it either racially driven, heinous, murder 1,2, manslaughter etc. and then the sentencing phases come next. Really what should be looked at is how such added laws are possibly being over used where as all depending on who is running things, it could be that the people could start using laws in ways in which they were not intended to be used. The peverting of any law is possible, and we should be honest enough to judge exactly when the laws are being abused or used in a wrongful way. The appointment of great common sense Supreme Court justices, and lower court justices should work to fix such things. The laws are A-ok even hate crime laws, but how the laws are applied, and by whom is very important every single time.

I disagree. Hate crimes make crimes against certain groups of people "worse" than the same crime committed against another person who is not a "protected status." We are ALL equal here in America.

 

[beagle9]

Hate crime law is like thought crime law. It's way too presumptuous.

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent is far more powerful in which was the intent. The application of such laws should work for all equally be it white on black or black on white.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Everything about the supposed "hate crime" laws are illegal and unconstitutional. For starters, it's a form of double-jeopardy. It's already illegal to assault someone. Charging them with the assault and a "hate crime" on top of that (or in addition to that to make the penalties for the crime harsher) is absurd. The same goes with murder, rape, etc.

Second, and much more importantly, it violates every basic law we have. Short of a confession, there is absolutely no possible way to prove the mindset of the accused. If the prosecutor were to - in a court of law - ask a witness if the accused committed the crime because they were racist/homophobic/etc., any competent defense attorney would object on the grounds of speculation. Nobody could possibly know what was in the mind of the accused. And any competent judge would sustain the objection. Even if the accused were a devout member of the KKK and killed a black person, nobody could possibly know with any level of certainty that the murder was committed due to the color of the victim. It could have been out of rage from confrontation. It could have been a hired hit by the wife of the victim. It could have been out of a perceived threat by the victim to the accused.

And yet that's exactly what these idiotic hate crime laws do - they assume what was in the mind of the accused and introduce it as "fact" in their arguments. Now that the party of logic and reason is in control again, we need to start repealing these idiotic laws. All minorities are already protected by the same laws that protect any other class of citizen.

You are one sick SOB.
You are lost in the theoretical and do not have a grasp of reality.

How is he sick? WTH? I totally agree as do a lot of other people. No one should be charged with a hate crime. Hate crime legislation is like a form of thought control, and a crime is a crime. No "special victim" status should be granted. Then we are not "equal" anymore.

That is a premise of the Alt Right. Look how the majority of America looks at the Alt Right in it's totality. I understand that Trump wants to start enforcing hate crimes against people who show hate towards old, uneducated white males. They have been unfairly picked on. How else can we round up the haters?

 

[ChrisL]

Hate crime law is like thought crime law. It's way too presumptuous.

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent if far more powerful in which was the intent.

That is SO wrong. It is not any worse to murder a person because of their skin color than it is because you "felt like it." The end results are the same, the families suffer just as much!

 

[Tilly]

Hate crime law is like thought crime law. It's way too presumptuous.

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent if far more powerful in which was the intent.

Well I don't think there is any evidence that this extra time acts as a deterrent, 'hate crimes' appear to be on the rise. But if there is evidence that the extra time acts as a deterrent, then it's even worse to omit white victims of rape, for example, from that protection - in other words they should just make all sentences longer.

 

[beagle9]

Everything about the supposed "hate crime" laws are illegal and unconstitutional. For starters, it's a form of double-jeopardy. It's already illegal to assault someone. Charging them with the assault and a "hate crime" on top of that (or in addition to that to make the penalties for the crime harsher) is absurd. The same goes with murder, rape, etc.

Second, and much more importantly, it violates every basic law we have. Short of a confession, there is absolutely no possible way to prove the mindset of the accused. If the prosecutor were to - in a court of law - ask a witness if the accused committed the crime because they were racist/homophobic/etc., any competent defense attorney would object on the grounds of speculation. Nobody could possibly know what was in the mind of the accused. And any competent judge would sustain the objection. Even if the accused were a devout member of the KKK and killed a black person, nobody could possibly know with any level of certainty that the murder was committed due to the color of the victim. It could have been out of rage from confrontation. It could have been a hired hit by the wife of the victim. It could have been out of a perceived threat by the victim to the accused.

And yet that's exactly what these idiotic hate crime laws do - they assume what was in the mind of the accused and introduce it as "fact" in their arguments. Now that the party of logic and reason is in control again, we need to start repealing these idiotic laws. All minorities are already protected by the same laws that protect any other class of citizen.

You are one sick SOB.
You are lost in the theoretical and do not have a grasp of reality.

How is he sick? WTH? I totally agree as do a lot of other people. No one should be charged with a hate crime. Hate crime legislation is like a form of thought control, and a crime is a crime. No "special victim" status should be granted. Then we are not "equal" anymore.

That is a premise of the Alt Right. Look how the majority of America looks at the Alt Right in it's totality. I understand that Trump wants to start enforcing hate crimes against people who show hate towards old, uneducated white males. They have been unfairly picked on. How else can we round up the haters?

. It should apply either way.

 

[eagle7_31]

Hate crime law is like thought crime law. It's way too presumptuous.

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent is far more powerful in which was the intent. The application of such laws should work for all equally be it white on black or black on white.

What does skin tone have to do with this? Dead is dead in terms of murder. Punish crime, thought is not a crime.

 

[ChrisL]

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent if far more powerful in which was the intent.

Well I don't think there is any evidence that this extra time acts as a deterrence, hate crime appears to be on the rise. But if there is evidence that the extra time acts as a deterrent, then it's even worse to omit white victims of rape, for example, from that protection - in other words they should just make all sentences longer.

Sometimes they get not much more than a slap on the wrist for rape as it is, so you are right. We need to be tougher on ALL crime against ALL victims. WTH! I would be pissed off if I was raped and the guy got a year in prison, but a black woman gets raped and her assailant gets 10 years. That is NOT fair and NOT equal.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent is far more powerful in which was the intent. The application of such laws should work for all equally be it white on black or black on white.

Okay, but looking at it the other way around, it's more okay for you to kill a person for whatever reason than it is to kill somebody because they were gay.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I disagree. Hate crimes make crimes against certain groups of people "worse" than the same crime committed against another person who is not a "protected status." We are ALL equal here in America.

Not according to Democrats.

 

[beagle9]

You don't understand how they work.

If there is substantial evidence, testimony, confession, that the pig-fucker racist was motivated by his own ignorant hate, then the statute applies.

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent if far more powerful in which was the intent.

That is SO wrong. It is not any worse to murder a person because of their skin color than it is because you "felt like it." The end results are the same, the families suffer just as much!

. Well remember these laws were created and enacted in a time where very bad things were going on... Now they just need to apply for all, and in either direction. No one needs a law that only protects them more so than any other, but the hate crimes laws are Ok, and they should remain but apply for all equally.

 

[ChrisL]

So? What is the difference between someone who murders a person because they "felt like it" and someone who murders someone because they are a racist? The end result is the same, and one is not worse than the other.

. Ok I will try this one.. Just to be fair right... It's not that the crime of murder is any different all due to the various reasons that it was comitted, but what is different or an add to the penalty found in the law's pertaining to hate crimes is the message that it sends upon the sentencing phase................ Ok let's say you murdered someone, and you are charged for murdering someone, but then the phase of the sentencing determined next is to why you murdered someone right ?? So the message that is sent is that you are charged of course for murdering someone, and then you are charged with a hate crime that lays out exactly why you murdered the person if falls into the category (2 charges). This 2nd phase is meant to send the message to others that you best not bring harm to some one in the form of a hate crime, and if you do so being based on something as ridiculous as someone's skin color, then you are going to wish that you were not that stupid as to do such an ignorant thing as that. So you are charged with murder, and then the hate crime penalty phase if proven adds to the charge in which is meant to send a message from the justice system that you best not do something that idiotic in your life, and if you do the penalty is very high for it.

There is no evidence that extra time for 'hate crimes' acts as a deterrent any more than the regular sentences do, AFAIK.

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent if far more powerful in which was the intent.

That is SO wrong. It is not any worse to murder a person because of their skin color than it is because you "felt like it." The end results are the same, the families suffer just as much!

. Well remember these laws were created and enacted in a time where very bad things were going on... Now they just need to apply for all, and in either direction. No one needs a law that only protects them more so than any other, but the hate crimes laws are Ok, and they should remain but apply for all equally.

No. I hope they are done away with and we get tougher on CRIME. ALL crimes.

 

[beagle9]

. I disagree... If you killed someone, and you get 20 years for it, but because you cold bloodedly killed someone because of their skin color, and you get 10 more years for that, then the message sent is far more powerful in which was the intent. The application of such laws should work for all equally be it white on black or black on white.

Okay, but looking at it the other way around, it's more okay for you to kill a person for whatever reason than it is to kill somebody because they were gay.

. Is this a question Ray ?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

. Like someone else said here.. It is about the degree be it either racially driven, heinous, murder 1,2, manslaughter etc. and then the sentencing phases come next. Really what should be looked at is how such added laws are possibly being over used where as all depending on who is running things, it could be that the people could start using laws in ways in which they were not intended to be used. The peverting of any law is possible, and we should be honest enough to judge exactly when the laws are being abused or used in a wrongful way. The appointment of great common sense Supreme Court justices, and lower court justices should work to fix such things. The laws are A-ok even hate crime laws, but how the laws are applied, and by whom is very important every single time.

So what you are saying here is that you don't believe in equal protection of the law, is that it?

 

[ChrisL]

A crime is a crime. It doesn't matter the motive. The victim is no less harmed no matter the motive!