Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Attention all Hate Crime Legislation Legal Geniuses
29 Oct 2009 | CanaGuy

Posted on 10/28/2009 9:16:09 PM PDT by CanaGuy

Attention all you legal geniuses. Here's a quick quiz.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: bho44; hatecrimes; homosexualagenda; thoughtpolice
Any of you legal geniuses out there want to step up to the plate and offer comment on the legal ramifications of the following three scenarios?

a. Two Street-toughs attack a man in an alley, beating him up and stealing his money.

b. Two Street-toughs attack a man in an alley, beating him up and stealing his money. During the altercation, Street-Tough-A says, "I really hate you gay ba$tards." Street-tough-B was silent throughout.

c. Two Street-toughs attack a man in an alley, beating him up and stealing his money. During the altercation, both Street-toughs say, "We really hate you gay ba$tards."

The victim is crippled for life. The two attackers are caught, tried and sentenced.

What are the differences between the three scenarios from the court's perspective, and sentencing, now that the U.S. is under Hate Crime legislation?

1 posted on 10/28/2009 9:16:09 PM PDT by CanaGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy

What takes place in Canada now?


2 posted on 10/28/2009 9:20:36 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (ACORN: Absolute Criminal Organization of Reprobate Nuisances)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy

If a person who is 1/2 black and 1/2 white does something that causes harm to both blacks and whites equally, could they be charged twice under a hate crimes bill with black on white crime and white on black crime?


3 posted on 10/28/2009 9:22:40 PM PDT by The Brush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

In Canada, the person who hates, gets it in the keister. Punishments are NOT equal. No lawyer has yet explained to me the justification for treating these three identical acts of physical violence and theft differently.


4 posted on 10/28/2009 9:28:31 PM PDT by CanaGuy (Go Harper!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy
sadly, the difference is the penalty. an obnoxious and probably uncinstitutional hate crime law is likely to be the only way to ensure that two criminals might spend some serious time in prison after they hospitalized any human being.

the federal government is not supposed to be playing cop. i understand the origin of the problem - blacks vs, the kkk. but the solution was flawed. local jurisdictions should have been left to correct their own behaviour. we fouled that up when we started screwing with the second amendment. imo, the correct answer to a cross-burning is a .30-06.

instead, we told minorities to seek peace at any cost, including their own legitimate anger. the anger never went away. it festered, and was passed on to the children. the results are painful and obvious. the united states of america is about freedom at any cost, not who can cry the most tears.

5 posted on 10/28/2009 9:51:15 PM PDT by sig226 (My President was President of the week at the Norwegian Slough Academy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy
You forgot scenario D.

Two drunk idiots cruise town looking for some gays to beat- up and decide to attack a gay man who happens to also have a CCW permit. As he is attacked, the proud CCW permit holder blasts holes in his attackers’ chests saving the two drunk idiots from being charged with assault and a hate crime.

6 posted on 10/28/2009 10:05:13 PM PDT by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy

Should be that the perps be charged with Robbery and Aggravated Battery with great bodily harm in all instances no matter what the verbal exchange was.
Same crime in all three senarios. Same loss. Same injuries.


7 posted on 10/28/2009 10:17:50 PM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy

The two thugs can be acquitted of the beating and robbery in the appropriate local court and still be charged with hate in a federal court and convicted there. The USG uses “civil rights” violations to put people in prison after they are acquitted of the actual crimes charged. It is good for imprisoning members of proscribed groups when you can’t get them for actual crime.


8 posted on 10/28/2009 10:21:34 PM PDT by arthurus ("If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, don't shoot an abortionist." -Ann C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

1) A guy walks up to a girl in a bar and tells her what he’d like to do to her. She throws a drink in his face. The Bartender has the Bouncer toss him. The cop outside arrests him for Disorderly conduct.

2) A Gay guy walks up to a guy in a bar and tells him what he’d like to do to him. The guy throws a drink in his face. The Bartender has the Bouncer toss him. The cop outside arrests the Bouncer, the Bartender and the guy for a Hate Crime. The bar’s license is suspended until the owner and Staff attend Diversity Training.


9 posted on 10/29/2009 7:10:20 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson