Re: Sad Symptom
- From: Alvin Toda <aet@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 06:27:50 -1000
On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:16:20 -0500, Fred Ghadry <falko282@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Harry Thompson wrote:
In this case under discussion -- hate crime -- I can see the effort to
stigmatize the offense, for example, assault and battery in a particular
state of mind. Is this fundamentally different from assault and battery with
a deadly weapon?
In another thread, there is some discussion about "thought control".
Stigmatizing a particular crime by labeling it as "hate" motivated does
nothing to deter a potential criminal, does nothing to make such a
criminal subject to unique laws, and does nothing to change any possible
punishment.
On the whole, I think criminal law should avoid the nebulous, that is, the
malefactor's state of mind, spiritual condition, etc. Criminal law should be
based on act, not on being. Nevertheless, state of mind figures in so many
crimes. There are grades of killing, depending on the offender's intent:
several types of manslaughter, several types of murder, and some killing
isn't an offense.
Agree, and defining a crime as "hate" motivated accomplishes absolutely
nothing.
Hate crime isn't a clear cut yes or no to me.
Someone said let the punishment fit the crime. Unless there is a defined
punishment for committing a "hate" crime, such a designation is meaningless.
The punishment is determined by judge and jury and not by the law.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Sad Symptom
- From: Harry Thompson
- Re: Sad Symptom
- From: Fred Ghadry
- Re: Sad Symptom
- References:
- Re: Sad Symptom
- From: Fred Ghadry
- Re: Sad Symptom
- From: Harry Thompson
- Re: Sad Symptom
- From: Fred Ghadry
- Re: Sad Symptom
- Prev by Date: Re: Is Israel Invincible?
- Next by Date: Re: Is Israel Invincible?
- Previous by thread: Re: Sad Symptom
- Next by thread: Re: Sad Symptom
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
