Should "political affiliation" be added to the hate crimes law?

[CTLawGuy]

Say you are driving along in your car with your anti-Bush sticker on it, and some psychotic freeper pulls up next to you in his gas-guzzling SUV (with a Bush sticker on the back), with his freeper buddy in the front seat. The buddy rolls down the window and unbeknownst to you, as you are listening to your favorite tunes on CD, he points a shotgun and your head and pulls the trigger. A bullet blasts through and shatters the drivers' side window milliseconds before lodging in your brain. the force jerks your head to the right, and as your consciousness dims, you notice your car riding off the road into a tree. The freepers drive off, snarling and laughing.

Should this be considered a hate crime?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

1. Yes, absolutely

[Killarney]

2. See the other thread about the LTTE

that says liberals should be beheaded.

This is getting out of control.

I can't stand conservatives, but I don't want to do physical harm to them. They on the other hand, do want to hurt liberals.

[CTLawGuy]

4. I did

thats why I wrote this :)

but thanks though!

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. Yes it should!

...and I'm sure that Jessica "slut" Simpson would be oh so "bubley" if this were to GOD FORBID Transpire.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=1417105&mesg_id=1417105&page=

[FreedomReload]

5. Freepers Could Use Such A Law To Their Advantage....

Most do have a persecution complex.

[CTLawGuy]

6. kick

[orthogonal]

7. No.

Should (premeditated murder motivated by ideology) be considered a hate crime?

Since we already have laws against murder, why take the chance that hate crimes laws could be used to suppress "crimethinking" dissidents.

[CTLawGuy]

8. hate crimes law

do not make new crimes, they are used to enhance sentences of already existing crimes based on said crime's motivation.

If we believe that someone who murders people simply becuase of their race are more dangerous than someone who murders over gambling debts, we have the right to lock them away for longer.

[Amarant]

10. You don't understand hate crimes laws

They take in to account the MOTIVE and allow for higher sentence for a worse motive.

Don't you think someone who beats someone because they are black should be eligible for a higher setence than someone who beats someone because of a heated argument between the two of them? Don't you think ones motive makes him more dangerous than the other?

[Akbar]

9. Imagine What This Would Lead To

I can imagine a repub claiming to be a victim of a hate crime because someone stopped him from beating up a homosexual.

[Amarant]

11. Uhhh

That argument would have absolutely NO basis in law and is ludicrous at best.

By your logic (under current hate crimes law) if I subscribed to a religion that told me to beat anyone who didn't also subscribe to my religion - and I went to go do so - and someone stopped me I could claim they committed a hate crime against me under the same argument. It doesn't work that way.

If you have a right to your beliefs - political or otherwise. That right to have your beliefs does NOT extend to when those beliefs lead you to commit illegal acts. This established law.