Crime Why the narrative that a "hate crime" is somehow worse?

[Koro_11]

I just stumbled onto this youtube video of some sicko riding around in his scooter and just randomly shooting unsuspecting pedestrians. He didn't know any of them, and he had no reason or motive whatsoever, just gunning down whoever he felt like at the moment.


I found this extremely disturbing, I can't imagine what a piece of shit one would need to be in order to have this capacity.

Meanwhile whenever you hear the media talk about someone who committed a "hate crime", it always feels like they're hinting that this is not just a crime, this is a HATE crime, as if that somehow makes it worse.

That feels off to me, because while murder is murder and the result is basically the same, I can at least somewhat grasp how one could kill a person that they actually hate. If the dude on the motorcycle went out and shot someone who he hated it would still be bad, but I could at least imagine myself under some circumstance doing the same, whereas I could never relate to someone just killing whoever just for the fuck of it, with complete disconnect.

I just don't think calling it a hate crime makes it any worse, it's a really pointless label in my opinion. If anything killing someone you're completely indifferent about is even more disturbing to me.

Thoughts?

 

[Cool Hand Luke]

Maybe he hates everyone?

 

[panamaican]

I've never heard anyone describe a "hate crime" as worse than killing a random person unless it was mass shooting based hate crime which combines the random killing component with a prejudicial element, essentially doubling the bad.

The way I've always heard the news is that killing multiple people is always worse than killing 1 person. Targeting children is worse than targeting the elderly which is worse than targeting people in the middle. Prejudicial driven killing is worse than non-prejudicial killing. Targeting random people is worse than targeting someone intentionally.

Killing multiple people randomly is always worse, on the news, than one prejudice driven killing, while killing multiple random people due to prejudice is worse than killing multiple random people without prejudice.

 

[Koro_11]

I've never heard anyone describe a "hate crime" as worse than killing a random person unless it was mass shooting based hate crime which combines the random killing component with a prejudicial element, essentially doubling the bad.

The way I've always heard the news is that killing multiple people is always worse than killing 1 person. Targeting children is worse than targeting the elderly which is worse than targeting people in the middle. Prejudicial driven killing is worse than non-prejudicial killing. Targeting random people is worse than targeting someone intentionally.

Killing multiple people randomly is always worse, on the news, than one prejudice driven killing, while killing multiple random people due to prejudice is worse than killing multiple random people without prejudice.

Why tho, why is killing multiple people due to prejudice worse than killing multiple random people without prejudice?

You say no one describes a "hate crime" as worse, but you just did in your last sentence.

 

[maximus__]

I just stumbled onto this youtube video of some sicko riding around in his scooter and just randomly shooting unsuspecting pedestrians. He didn't know any of them, and he had no reason or motive whatsoever, just gunning down whoever he felt like at the moment.


I found this extremely disturbing, I can't imagine what a piece of shit one would need to be in order to have this capacity.

Meanwhile whenever you hear the media talk about someone who committed a "hate crime", it always feels like they're hinting that this is not just a crime, this is a HATE crime, as if that somehow makes it worse.

That feels off to me, because while murder is murder and the result is basically the same, I can at least somewhat grasp how one could kill a person that they actually hate. If the dude on the motorcycle went out and shot someone who he hated it would still be bad, but I could at least imagine myself under some circumstance doing the same, whereas I could never relate to someone just killing whoever just for the fuck of it, with complete disconnect.

I just don't think calling it a hate crime makes it any worse, it's a really pointless label in my opinion. If anything killing someone you're completely indifferent about is even more disturbing to me.

Thoughts?

It comes down to the mentality or mens rea. A hate crime is specifically targetting someone for their race, religion, gender or similar vs just wanting to kill.

One person just wants to kill and end life because it's life.

One person wants to kill someone because of who they are, and the reason they are targetting them is because of that only to destroy that specific group.

It's like Pedos vs rapists. Most people would agree doing that to a child is more heinous than any other group. It's th specific targetting of that group as opposed to the actual act that makes it so bad, because choosing to do tht is bad enough without then doing it to a child to make it even worse.

 

[Koro_11]

It comes down to the mentality or mens rea. A hate crime is specifically targetting someone for their race, religion, gender or similar vs just wanting to kill.

One person just wants to kill and end life because it's life.

One person wants to kill someone because of who they are, and the reason they are targetting them is because of that only to destroy that specific group.

It's like Pedos vs rapists. Most people would agree doing that to a child is more heinous than any other group. It's th specific targetting of that group as opposed to the actual act that makes it so bad, because choosing to do tht is bad enough without then doing it to a child to make it even worse.

Ok, and what if I want to kill pedos and rapists. That would be considered a hate crime since they are a specific group. So you think that would be worse than if I just killed random people?

 

[Osculater]

Dang, I should had gotten a Ghost gun before they became cool

 

[Source]

Ok, and what if I want to kill pedos and rapists. That would be considered a hate crime since they are a specific group. So you think that would be worse than if I just killed random people?

No that wouldn’t be a hate crime as those wouldn’t be considered protected classes.

 

[maximus__]

Ok, and what if I want to kill pedos and rapists. That would be considered a hate crime since they are a specific group. So you think that would be worse than if I just killed random people?

If you are a pedo or a rapist it would be a hate crime to you and your community (eww).
You are still targeting someone because of who they are. It's no different to Police targeting people because of their criminality vs their ethnicity. The only issue is the majority of the population would be ok with that and sympathise with the reasoning for your example. It doesn't mean it's not a hate crime though they wouldn't be covered under any legislation I know of. It's just more relatable than killing specific people because of their religion, race or sexual preferences.

 

[Neph]

I just stumbled onto this youtube video of some sicko riding around in his scooter and just randomly shooting unsuspecting pedestrians. He didn't know any of them, and he had no reason or motive whatsoever, just gunning down whoever he felt like at the moment.


I found this extremely disturbing, I can't imagine what a piece of shit one would need to be in order to have this capacity.

Meanwhile whenever you hear the media talk about someone who committed a "hate crime", it always feels like they're hinting that this is not just a crime, this is a HATE crime, as if that somehow makes it worse.

That feels off to me, because while murder is murder and the result is basically the same, I can at least somewhat grasp how one could kill a person that they actually hate. If the dude on the motorcycle went out and shot someone who he hated it would still be bad, but I could at least imagine myself under some circumstance doing the same, whereas I could never relate to someone just killing whoever just for the fuck of it, with complete disconnect.

I just don't think calling it a hate crime makes it any worse, it's a really pointless label in my opinion. If anything killing someone you're completely indifferent about is even more disturbing to me.

Thoughts?

The victims are essentially random, unknown to the perpetrator and completely innocent, which strikes fear at us since it could well have been us or anyone else.

With a hate crime there's every reason that the murderer would continue to kill since the motive is 'these people exist'.

 

[Koro_11]

No that wouldn’t be a hate crime as those wouldn’t be considered protected classes.

What the hell is a “protected class”.

 

[Neph]

What the hell is a “protected class”.

I'm not sure it relates to hate crimes but

United States​

US federal law protects individuals from discrimination or harassment based on the following nine protected classes: sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity[3]), race/color, age, disability, national origin, religion/creed, or genetic information (added in 2008).[clarification needed] Many state laws also give certain protected groups special protection against harassment and discrimination, as do many employer policies. Although it is not required by federal law, state law and employer policies may also protect employees from harassment or discrimination based on marital status.[1] The following characteristics are "protected" by United States federal anti-discrimination law:

• Race – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Religion – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• National origin – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Age (40 and over) – Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
• Sex – Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Civil Rights Act of 1964
  • Sexual orientation and gender identity as of Bostock v. Clayton County – Civil Rights Act of 1964[4]
• Pregnancy – Pregnancy Discrimination Act
• Familial status – Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII: Prohibits discrimination for having children, with an exception for senior housing. Also prohibits making a preference for those with children.
• Disability status – Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
• Veteran status – Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
• Genetic information – Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

Individual states can and do create other classes for protection under state law.

Presidents have also issued executive orders which prohibit consideration of particular attributes in employment decisions of the United States government and its contractors. These have included Executive Order 11246 (1965), Executive Order 11478 (1969), Executive Order 13087 (1998), Executive Order 13279 (2003), and Executive Order 13672 (2014).

 

[Source]

What the hell is a “protected class”.

Hate crime laws, explained

In 1968, Congress passed the first federal hate crimes law. Additionally, 46 states and the District of Columbia have hate crime laws, which differ greatly.

www.splcenter.org

 

[kahiljabroni]

It's pretty absurd imo. It's also extremely one sided. Basically codifies reverse racism.

 

[ShadowRun]

Media love the baiting with hate crime talks. They think people fall for it and the sensation sells. That’s why the actor faked a hate crime, they change Zimmerman pic to make him look more white etc… it’s ok both sides

 

[Roop Holstry]

South Park said it best. This episode has to be over 20 years old now.

 

[panamaican]

Why tho, why is killing multiple people due to prejudice worse than killing multiple random people without prejudice?

You say no one describes a "hate crime" as worse, but you just did in your last sentence.

I'll assume you meant to include random in the first part of your query.

As to why? Because now you're targeting a group out of prejudice and we have a general negative outlook on prejudice in this country. There's no reason being against prejudice would stop at the act of murder.

You might as well be asking "Why is killing a 3 year old child worse than killing a 30 year old man? It's still murder." Because society uses age in evaluating the seriousness of the crime.

Are you opposed to any differentiation in how we perceive criminal acts or only in the context of hate crimes?

 

[djacobox372]

I think when you look at the extreme crimes, like murder, the significance of it being a "hate crime" is less important.

However if you look at lesser crimes, the motivation becomes more important. For example: tagging a storefront with random graffiti just for the thrill and notoriety doesn't seem nearly as bad as tagging swastikas on jewish owned businesses.

 

[Koro_11]

I think when you look at the extreme crimes, like murder, the significance of it being a "hate crime" is less important.

However if you look at lesser crimes, the motivation becomes more important. For example: tagging a storefront with random graffiti just for the thrill and notoriety doesn't seem nearly as bad as tagging swastikas on jewish owned businesses.

But that doesn't ring true with all lesser crimes.

For example stealing from big corporations seems less odious than just stealing from random places which could sometimes turn out to be small mom and pop shops that are struggling to make ends meet.

 

[Koro_11]

I'll assume you meant to include random in the first part of your query.

As to why? Because now you're targeting a group out of prejudice and we have a general negative outlook on prejudice in this country. There's no reason being against prejudice would stop at the act of murder.

You might as well be asking "Why is killing a 3 year old child worse than killing a 30 year old man? It's still murder." Because society uses age in evaluating the seriousness of the crime.

Are you opposed to any differentiation in how we perceive criminal acts or only in the context of hate crimes?

But prejudice could be anything, I think you're just assuming it's racial prejudice or something along those lines.

What about the example I pointed out earlier, what if I chose to target pedophiles... this is a specific group I might hate and therefore I'm committing a hate crime against this group. This would clearly be more understandable and less odious than just killing random people with no rhyme and reason.

If you think that example is too extreme, then you can even dial it back to something less obvious like political opposition. If one detests communists, or Trump supporters for example, and decides to kill one because of it, while it's still murder I can kinda wrap my head around this hate crime because the person doing the killing feels a strong negative emotion towards this group. While some psychopath who just decides to kill whoever on a whim just seems much more disturbing and wrong in my opinion... I can't relate to such a person in any way because there is no predictability to it.