Quote:
Originally posted by j8ear
Self defense and insanity are not motives they are affirmative defenses to a crime.
Motive is a reason why a person might want to have commited the crime they are accused of, and essentially only important for the crime of Murder, afaik. I believe lack of motive is also an affirmative defense to murder, but it is not a pre-requisite for conviction of murder.
The motive is not a factor in what crime someone is charged with except in the case of hate crimes, which elevates the 'hated' to a protected status. Pure unmitigated discrimination, just like affirmative action. Their merits are debatable, but that change their color.
|
I'm just saying that motives and intent are taken into consideration when the prosecutor is deciding whether to prosecute a crime. i.e. inadvertant violations might result in lesser charges than outright disregard for the law. It happens with more than just murder charges. They also take account of motive and intent during sentencing. To claim such things have no sway in the meting out of justice seems, at the very least, inaccurate.
Also, i fail to see how hate crimes legislation gives one group a "protected status" when said legislation can be applicable to any group. You can commit hate crimes against anybody. How is that discriminatory in the least? Affirmative action? Please.