Hate is an emotion. It is a crime to feel unapproved emotions.

A crime is a crime is a crime unless it is committed in today's America. Then it depends on who attacked whom in which case it must be studied to determine if it was justifiable; if it was caused by the racist policies of the attackees ancestors, then it might very well be understandable and not a cause for concern.

It is worse than that. Hate Crime legislation actually creates Preferred Victim Classes in the eyes of rational criminals. Consider that you are a purely unbiased felon wanting to attack a RANDOM victim. If you target a gay, woman, immigrant, or minority and at any point in your life made comments critical of that group, or target a victim willing to lie and SAY you made a hateful comment, your punishment will be dramatically greater than if you targeted a white male Christian citizen, making it only logical to avoid the groups protected by Hate Crime Legislation and focus your criminality on the rest of society.

Surely the First Amendment and principle of Equal Protection of the Law would require that otherwise identical offenses receive identical punishment regardless of any utterances made in or around their commission. Otherwise, the difference in punishment can represent nothing less than the criminalization of the defendant's speech.

To me hate crimes are an affront. just as having greater punishment for taking the life of a law enforcement officer. Are we not all equal under the law? A crime is a crime. I care not of the specific motivation. The fact that there is a motive, any motive, is sufficient corroborating evidence and nothing more. Unless of course you believe that "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

"Hate crime" is a totalitarian expression, aimed at controlling people's mind. Whoever uses that expression should be charged with it.

The purpose of the concept 'Hate Crime' is to criminalize any form of judgment. Since it is natural to hate anything or anyone that is contrary to your values, you will naturally hate politicians who are striving to shove Environmentalism and Multiculturalism down your throat via Progressive Education. As Peter Schwartz has pointed out, popular usage of a concept can change over time. 'Hate Crime' is already used to defend Islam and modern Feminism. How long before it is used to defend the Planet or the Food and Drug Administration?

We see racism in reverse. Rand said, with good reason: racism is the lowest form of collectivism.

Back in the day when we had plain old 'crime'... Now those were real criminals.

All crimes are motivated by some form of hate: hatred of others or hatred of self. When you accept that you are who you are and others are who they are and that you can't change anyone but yourself, hate disappears because reality sets in. "Hate crime" is really both an oxymoron and a redundancy.

The bigger problem is in attempting to heap extra punishment on a crime because of a certain inference made by the prosecutors as to motive. The purpose is to turn an objective/identifiable verdict into a subjective verdict and pervert justice to suit the agendas of those in power.

Assassination versus murder? Same thing.

I believe most libertarian writers get this answer wrong.

"Hate crime" laws are not really about prejudice or hatred, per se. They exist to punish terrorist crimes, by which I mean crimes which are intentionally so scary that they can intimidate a large class of people into doing what the criminals demand. (An example might be an IRA bombing of a store, or the KKK lynching a black person for visiting overnight in a "sundown town.") This bullying motivation not only makes the crime worse than it would be if treated only as a crime against the direct victim; it also provides additional motivation for the criminals, such that the usual punishments for bombing or murder (in my two examples) aren't likely to be enough to deter.

Of course, it would be better if the law could say this directly, and expressly punish the intent-to-bully rather than the mental state of hatred. But if written that way, the law wouldn't work in this country, because it's unconstitutional (I forget details) for a jury to infer that kind of intent without an actual admission by the accused, even when the facts make it obvious. I would allow this inference.

The liberal progressive connotation of Hate is a strong dislike at best, but if one looks at the original definitions of the word 'Hate' you'd find that it is much more than a dislike...it involves physical animosity. Liberal progressives do not look up word definitions, they disavow the authors authority and prefer to make it up on their own, some of it because they are stupid and some of it for nefarious means, to confuse us. I am no longer confused by them.

The government isn't interested in enforcing the laws that are on the books, like assault, rape and murder. So, they invent a new class of crime - hate crime - that they will enforce, until they get what they want. Then they won't enforce them either. If I kill you while calling you names, or I kill you quietly, you're just as dead; at that point, I don't think you'll give a rip about how I feel about you. If the government won't enforce the law against me about a non-hate crime murder, how likely is it that they will enforce the law about a hate crime murder? Will it matter to you if you're the victim? The punch line is that the government isn't doing its job, and they're creating new, unnecessary categories of crime to obfuscate the situation. And we're going along with the gag.

"they" use the term 'Hate Crime" so they can confuse the issue(s) and add unnecessary levels of law to the books. I do not care if the person assaulting me 'hates' me or not. I do not care if he mistook me for someone else. I do not care if he is beating me because I owe him (either in reality -- the 20 bucks I borrowed from him 5 years ago -- or because he believes more of my ancestors emigrated to the New World from Europe than from somewhere else) or because in his mind the way I walk suggests I engage in behaviors he does not condone. I do care that he is assaulting me without due process. The entire concept of Hate Crimes is unnecessary. Any Aggravating or mitigating circumstance can be considered at the time of sentencing.

Hate is an emotion and may be a motive. A crime is a crime.

Hate Crime is right out of Orwell's 1984.

"Hate Crime" is mostly used as a defense to embolden criminals today. Today a hate crime is seldom the primary crime, or the only crime, it is usually connected to another crime. We just don’t have a hate crime by itself anymore. A hate crime used to be when someone burned a cross in your front yard or on your lawn for no other apparent reason except hate.

Today “hate crime” is mostly used by non-white persons as a defense against being arrested for committing some other non-hate crime such as a simple robbery or simple assault against some other person. Predominately used as a defense usually only when white enforcement is used against a non-white criminal. Some black cops are exempt from hate crime charges but that too seems to be changing more recently. As an example, you will never see a defense of hate crime used by a white criminal for robbery or assault. White criminals will simply be charged with robbery or assault.

Who is responsible for all this nonsense? Is it the criminals, the lawyers, or the cops? It used to be when some committed a crime such as robbery or assault, they were subdued, arrested, and tried for robbery or assault. It didn’t matter if the handcuffs made bruise marks on their wrists, or they got a busted nose in the arrest process. Society today will get exactly what it asks for and what it enforces by its actions.

Democrats know that they cannot win without the Black votes. Blacks vote about 95% for the Democrat whoever he or she is. If even 10 % of Blacks switched to vote Republican, many close races would change the winner from Democrat to Republican. The Democrats support income entitlements and racial preferences. By constantly playing the race card, the Democrats get Blacks to believe that they are discriminated against by the White Republican establishment. Democrats keep fueling the Black distrust and hatred of Whites to ensure that they will stay on the plantation. Republicans can only offer liberty and freedom from government domination and that would be much more beneficial to Blacks in the long run than anything the Democrats advise.

“Hate crime,” a crime committed against a person because of his or her ethnicity, religious beliefs, sexual preference or membership in a “disadvantaged” group. Not to be confused with “love crime,” a crime committed to achieve a more “equal” distribution of wealth, uphold traditional beliefs, punish “greed”, combat global warming, or promote other government-approved causes.

Things began to fall apart when they dropped the term "justifiable homicide". People were more naturally careful not to piss someone off then.

You didn't get the memo?

Regular criminals are victims who cannot help themselves due to their socioeconopolticosexualpsychocircumstances.

Hate criminals are evil.

Common sense is not a PC application for a lib anything anymore. In fact, common sense could be racist.

It is the difference between sound policy and the histrionics of politics... Many crimes of violence require "hate" (as defined by whom) when committed but you will only get the support of the extreme activists if you make it special... whether someone is beat to a pulp because of their race, gender, sexual orientation or "colors", OR just beat to a pulp they still feel beat to a pulp... I guess it could protect the aggressor who mistakenly beats someone to a pulp! Political Histrionics vs Policy... PH wins every time, sadly.

I do not support the notion of hate crimes, but I think proponents' idea is to treat crimes more seriously if they're calculated to intimidate an entire group.

This is the exact same reasoning used to declare some crimes "terrorism".

They're words used to fire people up and justify gov't actions.

Wonder if there was open carry at the event?

The term "Hate crime" was created as a crime against "diversity" which is much much worse than murder. (sarcasm)