This is mainly a question for those who oppose the concept of hate crimes (that someone can be sentenced more harshly for committing a fixed crime against a
minority of some type).
Would you be more accepting if there was no such word as 'hate crime", and instead there was a separate criminal offense called something like "intimindation through criminal action" whereby someone who committed a crime (arson, murder, destruction of private property, whatever) where it could be demonstrated that the person had some kind of intent to send an intimidating message to members of the victim of that crime's group?
Where you're basically charging someone for essentially making a threat against a group of people by way of the manner in which they act out the original offense?
Just wonderin.
Would you be more accepting if there was no such word as 'hate crime", and instead there was a separate criminal offense called something like "intimindation through criminal action" whereby someone who committed a crime (arson, murder, destruction of private property, whatever) where it could be demonstrated that the person had some kind of intent to send an intimidating message to members of the victim of that crime's group?
Where you're basically charging someone for essentially making a threat against a group of people by way of the manner in which they act out the original offense?
Just wonderin.
