The Instigator
SitaraPorDios
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
imabench
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

This is a hate crime.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/20/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,210 times Debate No: 36870
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (29)
Votes (2)

 

imabench

Con

Writing a letter and being a massive dick doesn't constitute a hate crime, it only means that the author is a terrible excuse for a person and is a massive dick, but its not a hate crime since no real 'crime' was committed here
Debate Round No. 1
SitaraPorDios

Pro

I completely disagree. Everyone has the right to feel safe and be free from abuse. Abuse is not a right.
imabench

Con

It would only be abuse if the person who wrote the letter actually walked up to the disabled child and physically assaulted him. Being a mean dick also isn't a crime in this country so this can't be considered a hate crime since people have the right to say what they want (free speech) and mailing a letter isn't illegal....
Debate Round No. 2
SitaraPorDios

Pro

Lovely. Then KKK people should be able to write letters to black people calling them n****rs and telling them to kill their children. Verbal abuse is not and should not be protected under freedom of speech laws. You cannot threaten someone's life, you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded building and rightfully so. Your rights end where someone else's begin. There has to be a balance.
imabench

Con

" You cannot threaten someone's life, you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded building and rightfully so. Your rights end where someone else's begin. There has to be a balance."

And no one's life was threatened in the letter, It was just some crazy lady rambling telling them they should move. Thats not a threat of any kind so by extension it also isnt a hate crime....
Debate Round No. 3
SitaraPorDios

Pro

Saying that someone should be killed for no good reason based on disability is a hate crime.
imabench

Con

No it isnt though, thats just your own freaking opinion!

Threatening to kill someone is a crime, saying that someone should be killed though isnt which is what happened in the letter. This letter certainly isnt a hate crime either because like ive already said, NO CRIME WAS ACTUALLY COMMITTED.
Debate Round No. 4
SitaraPorDios

Pro

I do apologize, but I disagree. Morally speaking, no one has the right to abuse. Perhaps I shall challenge you to a follow up debate on how morality can differ from legality, but that is beside the point. In many countries (Britain, Canada, and so on), abusive speech is a crime, as it should be. Note that i speak of actual abuse, and not just plain rudeness. Example: N*****rs should die: abuse. Eff you: rude, but not abuse.
imabench

Con

"In many countries (Britain, Canada, and so on), abusive speech is a crime, as it should be"

In Canada though (the place the letter incident happened) hate speech laws focus on hate 'propaganda' and only applies to speech that is horrendously discriminatory against an entire group of people..... It does not outlaw or criminalize people being doo-doo heads who sent not nice letters...

http://en.wikipedia.org...






"Note that i speak of actual abuse, and not just plain rudeness. "

Plain rudeness is EXACTLY what we're talking about here with this letter! The letter was rude but not actually abusive, therefore its not a hate crime since for the thousanth time, NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED.

Vote Con

Debate Round No. 5
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Look at the score and you can see that I not only addressed them all, but I beat them too :)
Posted by SitaraPorDios 3 years ago
SitaraPorDios
No, it is not. You need to address my arguments or admit defeat. I am not here to play games.
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Its still better then any of your arguments you made in the debate
Posted by SitaraPorDios 3 years ago
SitaraPorDios
Ah, the good old fashioned ad homenim. Nice. Well played. ;)
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Well its no wonder why you lose over half of your debates now.... You cant even see how your own arguments are riddled with more logical fallacies then mine are.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
SitaraPorDiosimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: This could have been so much more intensely debated...Pro's examples were good. Con used sources. I don't really think anyone "won" per se. I wasn't sold on either side of the "it might not be a crime" debate.
Vote Placed by medic0506 3 years ago
medic0506
SitaraPorDiosimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: The winning point was that no crime was committed, so the win goes to Con.