On Jul 9, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Chris Gehlker wrote: > > On Jul 9, 2009, at 5:36 PM, Arno Hautala wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 20:11, LuKreme<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The reasoning is that a crime that is motivated via hate toward a >>> minority group is a greater crime than one that is not. A hate crime >>> is a crime against a person AND a crime against society at large. >> >> Isn't every crime one against society? Someone stating that they >> aren't going to play by the rules of society; that they're more >> important than the concerns of others. In addition, the victims of >> violent crime typically spread much further than the individuals >> against which the crime was directed. > > I'm with Arno here. I googled "why are hate crimes worse than regular > crimes" and got a lot of hits but nothing that appeared to be a > reasoned answer to the question. People who support hate crimes > legislation don't seem to feel compelled to explain their reasoning. A > lot of people seem to share my confusion. Unless they give the feds a > means to prosecute criminals that would otherwise be given a pass, > they don't seem to make sense.
That was the initial point of them. Same with the various election monitoring laws. That is how i support there use. It's the only real argument that makes sense in the context of criminal behavior. --Larry _______________________________________________ OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters List hosted at http://cat5.org/
