Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (5300)	2/9/2001 3:11:54 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

But....the way that I am looking at it is that there are two separate crimes being committed: the first is against the individual, the second is the intimidation against the unpopular group. OK. Sounds like you've got the beginning of an idea there. When you get the rest of it, please let me know. I'm willing to change my mind, too. My thinking has been that murder is murder. While I may have become inured to people murdering their spouses for the insurance money, I am still heartily offended by hate crimes. I just don't see why someone should be tried by a different law, or in a different court, or have a different penalty because there's a different motive. If you're suggesting that there be an additional charge for the crime of intimidation against the group, I think you may have something going there. Thanks for the idea. Karen

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (5300)	2/9/2001 4:05:44 PM
From: cosmicforce	Respond to of 82486

I used to reject "hate crimes" as being singled out for special prosecution. I'm not so sure now, but I do think that there is still a due process problem. In a way you aren't being prosecuted for YOUR crime, but the crimes of others and past crimes as well. I don't think it is necessary to have a special class of protection, but I can see how it might be considered in sentencing. This is the same case as "special circumstances" where, even though YOU didn't pull the trigger, you are held accountable for the criminal that did. I understand the reason for it, I'm just not sure I agree with it.