
If you could change any law in your country what would it be and why?
MYSTIC MYSTIQUE
2012/06/06 21:10:40
Top Opinion
-
I'd change....+3Divorce........... shouldnt get married without first going to counselling, the same with divorce........cant get divorced without first going to counselling... but still, free to stay free to leave otherwise....but always "optional" counselling!
























(Follow the link for more information.)
Hate crime means they're punishing you for your thoughts in addition to the actual criminal acts you've committed. When they started locking people up for "wrong thinking" and "hate" the whole country should have demanded that those lawmakers be ejected from office immediately.
It's "thought crime" whether it's policed fairly or not. Nobody in a free society should be punished for their thoughts. North Korea, maybe. The USA... never.
Next they are not looking people up for " wrong thinking" they are locking people up from crimes that they did . You can hate whom ever you want.No one is going to come in your house and tell you not to be racist . However when you hurt someone that is when it is in issue . So all this complaining about a thought crime is moot.
Edit: It is funny you talk about North Korea yet you are ok with people being profiling .
I like you, and I know you're a smart man. While I don't always sound like it, I learn from you. The thing we always butt heads on, though, is that you seem to think white people get everything handed to them on a silver platter, and I think black people do. The truth must be somewhere closer to the middle.
And they are indeed locking people up for wrong thinking. That's what "hate" crimes are. Murder might get you 10 years, but if they suspect you "hate" the victim because of race, gender, sexual preference, etc. they tack on a longer sentence. They punish you for your motivations. Read about it-- you'll see.
You are right there motives are taken into account but that...
You are right there motives are taken into account but that is not wrong thinking .. that is wrong thinking followed by a wrong action. However this is something that happens in every murder case . If you plan it out ... you get a longer time than if it was just something random . While not a technical terms people use the term a crime of passion in order to try to get less time . I don't understand why hate crimes are where we draw the line .
1. Accost EVERYONE, rather than the likely suspects?
2. Drive through the neighborhoods, but not stop the car?
3. Place officers on every street corner to prevent crime?
Bear in mind that somebody has to pay for all this, and that none of it would be necessary if the people in this part of town would obey the law in the first place. Whose responsibility is this? Are these young black men incapable of behaving themselves without a babysitter of some kind? You will never convince me that there is any actual difference between people of different colors. We are all equally capable of being honest, law-abiding citizens.
So... what should we do, if not to mix it up with the ones who are actually committing the crimes?
As for premeditation as a special circumstance, a person's intent is entirely different from his/her motivations. When you start punishing people for something intangible like a thought-- by adding 20 years for "hate", you've entered a realm of conjecture. Nobody knows what's on someone else's mind.
You can make a good case for premeditation if the killer goes home and returns w...
1. Accost EVERYONE, rather than the likely suspects?
2. Drive through the neighborhoods, but not stop the car?
3. Place officers on every street corner to prevent crime?
Bear in mind that somebody has to pay for all this, and that none of it would be necessary if the people in this part of town would obey the law in the first place. Whose responsibility is this? Are these young black men incapable of behaving themselves without a babysitter of some kind? You will never convince me that there is any actual difference between people of different colors. We are all equally capable of being honest, law-abiding citizens.
So... what should we do, if not to mix it up with the ones who are actually committing the crimes?
As for premeditation as a special circumstance, a person's intent is entirely different from his/her motivations. When you start punishing people for something intangible like a thought-- by adding 20 years for "hate", you've entered a realm of conjecture. Nobody knows what's on someone else's mind.
You can make a good case for premeditation if the killer goes home and returns with a .45 auto, but to say that he pulled the trigger because his victim was gay or black or disabled or whatever is guesswork. And even if you KNOW how he felt about the other person, why should this earn him more years in prison?
It's a political gesture-- created in congress to appease people who perceive themselves to be 'special' in some way. Everyone but whites and straights is what it boils down to.
I'm probably not as bitter as I sound, and definitely not as racist as I sound-- what I am is alarmed by the acceptance of the double standard. It's not even acceptance, anymore. It's expected to such a degree that half the country refuses to acknowledge it.
Women demand equal pay for equal work, but can't hold up their end of the bargain. Minorities want a level playing field, but want it tipped in their favor. We're not supposed to see any difference in a man's worth based on skin color, but blacks still call each other "brother" to the exclusion of everyone else in the room.
For years, you've insisted that we're all the same, and now that this is common knowledge, you want to be treated differently. It's a 2-way street, you know-- we ALL have to be willing to integrate. This means that we have to give little to become part of something larger than ourselves.
This is exactly the "conversation on race" that I've been wanting to have since Obama suggested this in a speech a few years back. A very good speech, I might add. I'm not trying to wear you down-- I'm trying to find some reasonable common ground with you. How can someone so obviously intelligent as yourself fail to recognize a double standard when you see one?
It's not up to us to judge what someone is worth. It's certainly nothing to punish someone for.
If the government can't afford to pay its bills, it can cut back its consumption, like the rest of us have to.