[mad puppy]

i am not totally against hate crime legislation though, and let me tell you what i'm thinking. (i've been dying to actually talk to someone about this topic). i totally think whoever kills anyone with malice etc. should just get the death penalty etc. regardless of who they kill. (for instance, i think in my state they keep trying to make it a death penalty crime if you kill a cop, or a kid--well too bad. i want the death penalty for them if they kill me also).....but hate crimes legislation also applies to assault. for instance, here are two very different scenarios: if you and i are walking down the street, i bump into you, so we exchange words, and then we fight, vs the scenario, me and a bunch of my black friends decide we are going to go out as a gang and pick out an unknown single white assailant, and beat the crap out of them because they are white. my understanding is that without hate crime legislation, all of the perpetrators, of these two scenarios, the bumpers into, and the gang, would receive the same charge:assault, or aggravated assault etc. i just think it is two very different things. perhaps if we had "premeditated assault", vs hate crime legislation, that would cover it. interested to hear what you think
stell

Nothing is simple, that is for sure. I am all for the death penalty in theory, but have some real issues with how it is practiced in the U.S. Why does justice take soooo long? We, the average tax payer, has to pay for 10-20 years of death-row care, lawyers, judges, food, guards, doctors and more lawyers for some murder'n trash before justice is finally served. That bugs me. A lot. I think I'd rather have the convicted murderer just go to jail with no (zero, 0) chance of ever getting out, then live for decades in the court system. I agree with your point that killing a cop is just as bad as killing me or you and the punishment should be the same.

As to your point about "motive" ie: hate crime. While I agree that some motives are worse than others, I'm not ready to sign up for more laws to put 'extra' punishment into what amounts to the same crime. To use your example, if you and some black friends beat the crap out of me because I'm white, then I and some of my white friends find and beat you because you beat on me, which is worse? In this example, my motive may be less evil, but our actions are the same. When we start judging the motives things get a little fuzzy. When we rely on the justice system to judge motives, then it gets scary.

The flip side to this, is that I really am a white guy and have no experience with being black, hispanic, asian or a woman. I've got a couple of black friends and one buddy in particular is close enough that we have talked about a few of his experiences. (very interesting perspective on the Rev. JJ!) He has a white wife and when we've been out, I've seen a few of the looks they get from some people. I guess things take time. Another generation and I think having 1 white and 1 non-white parent will be the norm in this country. I guess I say all that to say that if one specific group can truly demostrate that they are being treated worse because of their skin color, well, then perhaps some extra 'protection' is needed. I'm just not sure that this protection means additional punishment for the offender.

Anyway, that is my nickels worth, for what its worth. Thanks for asking! I love to chew on this stuff! <|8^) mp

[EBUCK]

Nothing is simple, that is for sure. I am all for the death penalty in theory, but have some real issues with how it is practiced in the U.S. Why does justice take soooo long? We, the average tax payer, has to pay for 10-20 years of death-row care, lawyers, judges, food, guards, doctors and more lawyers for some murder'n trash before justice is finally served. That bugs me. A lot. I think I'd rather have the convicted murderer just go to jail with no (zero, 0) chance of ever getting out, then live for decades in the court system. I agree with your point that killing a cop is just as bad as killing me or you and the punishment should be the same.

I just look at it like this.

A death sentance in this country is like a life sentance with option to kill. The crook isn't getting out, ever. One way or another he's going to die in prison. And if they kill him in twenty years that's probably 10-15 years less that we have to pay for when compared to true-life WPP.

Doesn't bother me that he gets 10-20 years to fight it. As a matter of fact I wouldn't have any other way. If we're going to kill the crook we'd better make damn sure that we are right and the best way to do that is to let him fight for his life in court.

BTW. I hadn't seen this in at least 6 months and it wasn't on this site. Thanks for posting.

EBUCK