Hate speech vs. Free speech

Hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) happen when an influential mind targets a victim because of their membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, disability, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, or political affiliation.
 
A "hate crime" can take two forms: "hate crime" generally refers to criminal acts which are seen to have been motivated by hatred of one or more of the listed conditions. The second kind is hate speech, which is speech defined as crime. While hate crimes are rarely debated, the hate speech concept is controversial, as criminalizing speech can be seen as impugning freedom of speech. Incidents may involve physical assault, damage to property, bullying, harassment, verbal abuse or insults, or offensive graffiti or letters.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that hate crime statutes which criminalize bias-motivated speech or symbolic speech conflict with free speech rights because they isolated certain words based on their content or viewpoint .
Some have argued hate crime laws bring the law into disrepute and further divide society, as groups apply to have their critics silenced.
Some have argued that if it is true that all violent crimes are the result of the perpetrator's contempt for the victim, then all crimes are hate crimes. Thus, if there is no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly for the same crime based on who the victim is, then different defendants are treated unequally under the law, which violates the United States Constitution.
And now for the cop-out by the nine asshole justices at the Supreme Court 

..(thanks for nothing)

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that penalty-enhancement hate crime statutes do not conflict with free speech rights because they do not punish an individual for exercising freedom of expression; rather, they allow courts to consider motive when sentencing a criminal for conduct which is not protected by the First Amendment.

So the added five years isn’t a penalty, MMMM

I think its time to set limits on the term of these nine lazy ass judges at the Supreme…. No more term for life.., they should be voted on by the people..

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Another Gay for Pay Model makes it big

This issue of Qnotes: Cruising the Parks for Sex.

Banks claim they were defrauded by Regent Media