Quote:
Originally posted by Lebell
smooth,
I understand what you are saying, I just refuse to accept your premise that that a victims's sexual orientation, race, etc. are more relevant than their marital status, income bracket or any other factor when sentencing a criminal.
To make it so insults the whole idea that we are all equals under the law.
Now what can't you understand about that?
|
Well, where did you get your concept that we are all equals under the law? We may have guaranteed rights, but that doesn't necessarily mean we all have the same rights under all laws.
Law is the complex interaction between society and lawbreakers. We allow the law to protect particular things we hold important--we create special laws to protect groups that can't, won't, or are restricted from protecting themselves.
We have laws that protect property, the environment, people, and groups (children, aged, and now ethnic minorities), etc.
"Hate crime" legislation is a social statement that our society protects various groups from harmful acts that would otherwise occur against them simply on the basis of attributes they were born with.
Did you read the links I provided?
Here is an interesting point:
"When we talk about INTENTIONAL CONDUCT, we're talking about situations in which people set out to accomplish something and they try to realize that accomplishment exactly as planned. They have a mental picture in their minds, so to speak, of precisely how they want things to turn out. There's no accidents, no complications, no side effects, just true intent. Intent is a legal concept that goes beyond Purpose.
Probably the best way to understand Intention is to understand it's opposite -- Negligence. The irony is that the concept of Intent comes into criminal law from tort law and notions of liability. But even long ago, Roman lawyers distinguished between the terms dolus (intention) and culpa (fault, negligence). These terms have become the basis for criminal and civil responsibility, respectively. It's widely assumed that committing a crime intentionally is much worse, more culpable, more blameworthy, than committing a crime negligently. But where do we draw the line between intention and negligence? The answer is that intention is closer to motive, the idea that there was a special inducement to commit the crime. Motive, considered along with Intent, help us easily distinguish harmful consequences from blameworthy and non-blameworthy accidents. Negligence is a blameworthy accident in which a person didn't exercise a reasonable degree of care. Negligence lacks a motive, however, and the only defenses to it are mistake and justification."