|
While I AM upset intellectually by the idea that if someone kills me (as a white man) out of hate for my race that it is a less serious crime than if a white man kills a black man (or woman) out of hate for their race or sex, I recognize the necessity.
I hate to think that my life is less valuable than another's simply because of my skin color, as it does smack of reverse-racism. And yet I also see a demonstrable public need to stamp out as much racism as humanly possible.
Furthermore, I look at "hate crime" legislation with the same credibility as "premeditated murder" legislation. Certainly a murder still occurred, and the victim suffered pain and death, but I still feel differently about it. If someone accidentally murders someone through their reckless behavior, it is less severe than someone who makes the choice to kill someone out of anger. Worse still is someone who PLANS their attack; they had time to consider their actions, and didn't act out of anger or recklessness. If "premeditation" can be demonstrated and defended, certainly "hate" can be too.
If a person is killed by someone of the opposite race or sex, it should NOT be immediately considered a hate crime. Only when proof exists that the person acted directly out of hate for the other individual should it be acted on. And it should be acted on in exactly the same way that someone convicted of premeditated murder should be acted on.
__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel
|