The Instigator
PryorPirate93
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
Johnicle
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points

Hate Crime enhancements are unjust in the U.S.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,826 times Debate No: 3271
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (11)

 

PryorPirate93

Con

Hate Crimes Enhancements are unjust in the U.S. I negate this resolution because it's wrong. Enhancements are just because they rightly punish the accused. When someone is attacked for their beliefs why should that go unpunished. How is it just on society's part to not protect its citizens from slandering for being born or for their beliefs.
Because there are many instances where people are attacked for something out of their control. The following are attacks for things out of the victims control:
Sexual orientation
Race
Ethnicity
Disability(stuttering,parapalegic,physical handicap,ect.)
Identity
Gender
Age
Johnicle

Pro

Good Luck to my opponent as I hope that this will be a good debate. Before beginning with my specific arguments, I would like to define a few terms (from dictionary.com)...

1. enhance- "to raise to a higher degree; intensify; magnify"
2. hate crime- "a crime that violates the victim's civil rights and that is motivated by hostility to the victim's race, religion, creed, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender "
3. unjust- "Violating principles of justice or fairness"

-Now to my arguments for the round...

1. Hate Crime jurisdiction is unjust.
Why must people have to spend more time in jail not because they commit a crime against someone, but because they commit a crime against someone specific. In order to be just in giving people their due, you must look to the crime committed, not who it was committed against.

2. There is no way to prove that the crime was provoked by improper means.
When your trying to prove that a crime was a "hate crime", you have to see that it is impossible to know FORSURE if it was provoked improperly (remember innocent until PROVEN guilty). If I kill a person, it is just to give me life in jail because it was my first crime but it is UNJUST to give me the death penalty just because the person I killed a minority.

3. Enhancing hate crimes is unjust.
When you increase the penalty for a crime because it was considered a "hate crime" is unjust due to the previous arguments not to mention that your trying to fix a permanently broken system. Hate crimes simply have too many flaws to ever increase its use and to call that use just is simply imprudent.

-Onto his arguments.

He seems to believe that if someone attacks someone because of one of their beliefs that the criminal will go unpunished, that is simply a logical fallacy. People who ATTACKS someone should go punished, but to increase that punishment because of WHY he/she attacked is what is unjust. If I killed two people, (one because he breathes loud and one because he is old) should my penalty be different between the two... no... it is unjust to do so.

(I am going to include this next argument as attacking something he said before but still add it to my case)

4. Hate Crimes can be anything.
Look to his list of possible hate crimes. He said that Sexual orientation, Race, Ethnicity, Disability(stuttering, paraplegic, physical handicap, etc.), Identity, Gender, and Age can all be categorized into hate crimes. Identity could be anything. If I killed someone, what if they happened to be African American. And for that matter, how general is "identity". Anyone's identity could be seen as bad. Someone being murdered for being in the foot fetish club could be identified as a Hate Crime? Pick anybody, and you can identify them in any sort of "group" to make it a hate crime. Enhancing this severely flawed system is simply unjust... so please vote Pro.

Thank You!
Debate Round No. 1
PryorPirate93

Con

PryorPirate93 forfeited this round.
Johnicle

Pro

This is unfortunate as any forfeited round of debate ever is. This leaves me with no other choice than flowing through all of my arguments and since my opponent has not yet posted any "official" arguments, as of now, Pro is the only side to vote for... let us hope that my opponent will be able to post in his final round but even then it may be too late.
Debate Round No. 2
PryorPirate93

Con

FIRST OFF THANKS FOR ACCEPTING THIS DEBATE DUDE!!!!!
I see you debate or something cool!!!!
Anywayz......
This is not my first official case. I made some points in my first case too!!!
I will start by building my case up first then attacking my opponents case.
First let me clear the water for my opponent.
This case is about openly shouting slurs or being open about pinpointing who your attacking and why. For instance Lawrence king was shot in the back of the head by the boy he openly told he liked. Why cause the boy he liked had a problem that he was liked by a homosexual boy. Everyone thought that Lawrence was a weird kid because he dressed in drag and wore high heels. So is it right that the boy who shot Lawrence in the head got a hate crime enhancement when people found out that Lawrence was going to die. Yes!! Why because he killed another individual for openly sharing his opinions and sexual preference. So my opponent is saying that he thinks it is wrong that Brandon McInerney got tried as an adult and got only 50 years in prison.
I will now attack my opponents case.

How are hate crime enhancements "Violating principles of justice or fairness"?!?!?!?!?
Is it fair that people are becoming victims of hate crimes!?!?!?! The victims are treated unfairly so why should the defense get treated any better?!?!?
Not saying that they are treated unfairly. Personally I think that Brandon should get the death penalty...thats just me...
"If I kill a person, it is just to give me life in jail because it was my first crime but it is UNJUST to give me the death penalty just because the person I killed a minority."
Okay homosexual is a minority so my opponent is saying that if he shoots two gay dudes because they are gay (which is out of their control) he shouldn't be killed for killing two other individuals because they are gay.
I used gay as a primary example because it isn't talked about often as race gender, etc.
If someone killed you or one of your family members because you were white (it happens) you would be okay if the person who killed you got 50 years in prison?!?!?!?!?
The obvious choice is CON!!!!!!! PLEASE VOTE CON!!!!!!
Johnicle

Pro

Thanks you to my opponent for posting his last speech. Let's begin by going to his arguments and then going to an over look to the round.

His argument about Lawrence and the hate crime enhancement is ridiculous. He killed a guy… that punishment should be the exact same as someone else who kills someone. Enhancing that crime because someone sees it as a hate crime is unjust. Every crime committed could be proven as a hate crime or disprooven as a hate crime. This enhancement of an opinion is unjust. Sure his incentive to kill someone was bad, but so is the incentive to kill ANYONE. Every murder could be seen as a hate crime… Pointing one out and punishing one person more is unjust.

Onto the definition of unjust.

Hate crime enhancements violate justice and fairness. It fails justice by giving improper dues… Think about it… hate crime is an opinion. If there are two white people and one kills a white person and one kills a black person, they both should receive the same punishment because they both had bad incentives. Enhancing the murder of the black person is unjust because his incentive to kill was just as bad as the other persons. This also proves that it is unfair… therefore unjust.

Next argument about the victim of a hate crime… If someone is killed by someone in a hate crime and there is someone killed regularly, they both died. He is acting like because it is a hate crime, it is worse… WRONG. They both still die.

Again down to the ‘killing minority = death penalty… killing normal person = life in jail'… That is unfair and gives improper dues therefore is unjust. Who you kill should not change the fact that you killed someone.

The homosexual example is the same as a minority example.

(50 years in prison) argument I would be okay with them getting the exact same as everyone else who killed someone.

I would like you to flow through my second argument. It is so hard to determine if a crime is a hate crime… you have to see that you WILL end up with unfair dues… therefore, it is unjust. I can only see a Pro vote as Hate Crime enhancements are unjust in the U.S.

Thanks for this great debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by PryorPirate93 9 years ago
PryorPirate93
I didn't think I was that bad.....
Good job though yo......;)
I guess I'll stick to middle school tournaments...
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 11 months ago
KingDebater
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by krattyk10 9 years ago
krattyk10
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by meganlg43 9 years ago
meganlg43
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ronnyyip 9 years ago
ronnyyip
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by shaqdaddy34 9 years ago
shaqdaddy34
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by PryorPirate93 9 years ago
PryorPirate93
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by liberalconservative 9 years ago
liberalconservative
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by PhillyEgls20 9 years ago
PhillyEgls20
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Teddy_Bear 9 years ago
Teddy_Bear
PryorPirate93JohnicleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03