As the world is becoming one global village, migrations are becoming very common. Unless the acts of hate are punished, the country will gradually deteriorate. It is normal to have feelings of hate toward a particular community or country, but when it leads to violence, it must be checked and hatred should be minimized through awareness programs.
Acts of hate should most definitely be criminalized. Nobody should be targeted for arbitrary reasons, and anyone who harasses or attacks a person for arbitrary reasons should be severely punished. Nobody should live in fear simply because they are of a different race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, or ability.
We have all seen that hate which is not checked can spiral out of control, with an example being Hitler. Hate can be easily defined by set criteria. In no way should freedom of speech be used as an excuse to commit a hate crime. At some point the sensible people of the world will come to the conclusion that we need to live together in peace in order to survive.
I believe acts of hate should be criminalized. Hate crimes have been going since humans inhabited the Earth. People have hated on individuals who are different in color, sex, sexuality, and beliefs for too long. Many have died or gotten injured from hate crimes. If we would make prison sentences longing and fines more costly, people may stop hating on people who are different from them.
I do feel that hate crimes should be punished. If a person is being attacked just for being themselves, that person should see justice served. There is nothing wrong with disliking someone but, if you causes person harm you should be punished. A lot of people have gone unpunished for crimes they have committed. A law should be in place and criminal action should be taken.
Acts of hate ought to be illegal if for no other reason than to provide a deterrent to those who may have a desire to do something hateful to someone or someone's property. Some people have very strong opinions about certain things, and have no self control when it comes to acting on their impulses. I think punishing people for their ignorance is a very good idea. It will help set an example for young people who may be swayed by their fear of punishment. Peer pressure, mob mentality, can lead to acts of hate, but the possibility of legal retribution might be enough to stop them from acting impulsively.
It would be patently unfair not to consider the motivations behind a person's crime in deciding their punishment. If someone sets out with the intent to physically or psychologically torture another person, then they deserve to face the consequences of their actions. At the very least, they should be made to atone to society through performing community service and, in more severe cases, they should be given jail time.
Acts of hate should be criminalized because they represent a systematic threat to a society. It is not enough to treat a criminal the same as any other criminal who might be guilty of assault, robbery, murder, etc. if they are driven by a hateful ideology. Targeting a specific individual for a crime based on a hateful ideology creates broader social problems than random crime.
When it comes to hate crimes they can result in prejudice. People may say rude things that could cause someone to commit suicide. doing things like what happened at an army mans funeral with people saying god kills soldiers because of homosexuals is wrong period.
Acts of hate are already illegal. A hate crime usually has an element of illegal activity implied. It would be hard to come up with an example of an act of hate that didn't already include some type of misdemeanor or felony. Therefore, the argument has already been resolved in the majority of cases.
A crime should be a crime no matter why you commit it. It shouldn't matter if you kill someone because you hate them or not. When we start punishing extra because hate is the root of the crime, it then becomes a thought crime. We are punishing more because of how the criminal thinks. And that, my friends, is the downfall of America.
As a hate crime is meant to prosecute a person who has done said crime, but because of a persons, or used a persons religion, race, sexual orientation etc. against them. Understandably it is ridiculous to harass or hurt another because of their lifestyle or attributes, this is done and seen everywhere on an everyday basis. ALL who have taken this poll has directly or indirectly displayed some sort of hate sometime in their life towards another because of their lifestyle and/or attributes, be it because they are/were from a different area or school, or simply because a way a person dressed. So if a child shoots up their school because they were picked on themselves, but displays hate towards those who they murdered, it wouldn't be a hate crime, yet hate is the motive. Not if a person makes a prank phone call harassing another because of their religion, their crime has risen from a Misdemeanor to a Felony... As for Government and those who impose hate laws, you should take a look in the mirror. Although laws are here to protect, hate laws are biased themselves, because you treat criminals as less of a person, by taking away rights, and putting a societal label on them in which is almost impossible to remove.
Hate is an emotion, to make emotions is to make thoughts illegal. Thoughts can not be proven, with out a reasonable doubt., therefore should not be illegal. If they committed a crime and the reason was 'hate' the penalty should not automatically be higher. This violates freedom of speech and thought.
If you are trying to make every hateful action illegal then NO. Hate crimes are crimes. They are already illegal. Someone being hateful to someone else may just be them expressing their RIGHT to free speech. In the US at least, that's a right not to be infringed upon by the government. So again, no, all hateful things should not be labeled as illegal.
What is an "act of hate"? It becomes a big hassle to determine whether or not something is an act of hate, and it is patently unfair to consider the motivations behind a person's crime in deciding their punishment. If I set out with the intent to physically torture another person, how am I worse than someone who set out with the intent to get a coke, but ended up physically torturing another person? You both did the same thing; your motivations are irrelevant.
Acts of hate come in thousands of forms and in tons of varying degrees. The problem with trying to criminalize hate is the matter of where to draw the line. Instead of trying to pinpoint the motive behind an act (hate, jealousy, etc), the penal system should be focusing more on the act itself. Killing someone out of hate should not hold a stronger penalty than killing someone out of fear/jealousy/etc. The end state is still that someone was killed.
Any criminal act deserves punishment. But, to impose extra punishment because it was done for a certain reason, it makes no sense to me. A crime is a crime, and the reason behind it should have no bearing on the punishment set forth.
There are already laws against violence and degradation. Trying to get inside the mind of the criminal to determine their exact emotions and motivations is not possible. Therefore, the process of determining which crimes are hate crimes will always be somewhat arbitrary. Arbitrary application of the law is abominable and hurts both the victims and the families of the perpetrators.
There are few of us who condone an act of hatred. But an "act" of hate can take many forms.
If a criminal act is committed as an act of hate, then it should be punished with greater severity than a similar act committed in the heat of passion or any reason other than hatred.
If an act of hate takes the form of speaking with hatred or joining a group that engages in speaking with hatred, do we have the right to criminalize these acts? The Ku Klux Klan has been in existence for over a hundred years. They are not known to be a warm and fuzzy group of people. We allow them to exist because we can not tell them what to say--or not say--without in effect "muzzling" every other citizen.
We have the right of free speech and, like it or not, that applies to people who speak with hatred as well as the "good guys."
We now have an additional problem of deciding what to do about the Internet. Should bullying on Facebook or Twitter be considered a hate crime? It certainly stems from hatred.
We need new laws--new legal decisions to guide us online.
There is no difference in the severity of the crime between the brutal murder of a gay man and the brutal murder of a straight man. Both crimes speak equally of cruelty. Both crimes should be punished with equal severity.