Pros And Cons Of Hate Crimes Legislation

485 Words2 Pages
During the summer of 2001, a guy stopped by my house collecting signatures and donations for a group who were trying to get laws enacted in Minnesota treating hate-crimes against homosexuals more harshly than the same crimes committed against other groups. There were two things that bothered me about this. The first thing that bothered me was that they wouldn't take a signature for their petition without a donation. The second took me longer to figure out, and it was that I don't think hate-crimes legislation is a good idea. Thinking about it more, I realized that hate-crimes legislation doesn't aim to punish the actual crime, but rather the motive (or thoughts) behind it. That's smacks of being more than a little Orwellian to me, besides being something that's very difficult to prove. If someone is continually spouting hateful speech, there's a pretty good chance you can figure out that their motive for a crime might be related to that hate. But what about someone who doesn't give any…show more content…
Do you prosecute that as a hate-crime, just because it might be? One group of people is now getting special treatment under the law. That sounds lot like discrimination to me, which isn't how this country is supposed to work. Whatever happened to equal protection under the law? Further, because most hate-crime legislation puts added effort into prosecuting crimes against certain individuals or groups, what about the same crimes committed against someone who doesn't fit into one of those groups? Will the crime be prosecuted to the same extent? If not, you're making things worse for the majority, who are likely to feel underprotected. If the problem is that too many people (of any group) are being mugged, or assaulted, or their belongings vandalized, you should put more effort into prosecuting muggings, assaults, or vandalism. Not to protect any one group, but to protect all

More about Pros And Cons Of Hate Crimes Legislation

Open Document