Hate crime laws: Are hate crime laws practical, cost-effective?

  • Hate crime laws are practical and cost-effective.

    Hate crime laws are practical because we need to protect the freedoms of everyone in a free society. Racism cannot be tolerated, or no one is really free. These laws are as cost-effective as any other law. They are an important protection against bigotry and racism in our socity, and their revocation would be disastrous.

  • Without hate crime laws there would be more crime.

    I believe they are worth having because without them there would an increase in violence. I believe its the governments duty to protect its citizens from hate crimes that are usually targeted towards minority groups. I think some people feel safer knowing that hate crime laws are there to protect them.

  • Only hate crime within a higher crime, not hate crime.

    If even America’s crimes declining as hate crime reportedly declining, why would more investigate on hate crime rather than a crime to save time, taxpayers, or prison time (with education given to them as they wouldn’t do again from on.) They must looking back dots, not forward dots (modernization and future) to ensure prison population to extremely low level and well-mannered. This played role of reducing overcriminalization & over-prosecution.

  • Calling it "hate crime" is unconstitutional.

    A person commiting a crime should be punished for the crime itself, not for his thoughts while commuting the crime. Whether you realize it or not calling it a "hate crime" just because you dislike a certain group of people is a major invasion of privacy as it severely limits our freedom of thoughts and freedom of speech. And also thoughts aren't always linked with actions

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.