There are a few times when hate speech should NOT be a crime, however, most of the time it is threatening. It is a crime to threaten or make another person feel unsafe. This is what hate speech does many times. Therefore it should be a crime and the severity of the punishment depends on what speech was used.
As the saying goes, ‘there are exceptions to every rule; especially this one.’ Of course when considering implementing certain laws or regulations, it is only common sense to weigh the positive against the negative for the implementation to be reasonable. However, this is not the case with something as vital as freedom of speech. Many classify any belief that negatively generalizes a certain group (based on gender, race, sexual orientation, etc.) to be hate-speech. Of course, as a morally just, democratic, and free society, it is our essential responsibility to ensure such fundamental rights as the freedom of choice, or the freedom of expression for instance. But what many don’t realize is that true freedom cannot under any circumstances be conditional. An order in which the people are allowed to believe and say what they want, under the condition that it’s approved of by a higher court, is not true freedom. As there is no person capable of making the absolute judgment of which beliefs are correct and which are incorrect, it is only logical to conclude that no authority has the right to discriminate against certain beliefs, due only to their perceived nature. And since no single, pre-established belief or attitude can possibly appease to everybody, it is crucial to grant people the right to freely believe and express what they will, regardless of the inevitable, and subjective disagreements of a certain fraction of the population. The reason we must allow The discontent of some towards the personal beliefs of others is at times an inconvenience (as most anything to do with democracy can be), but is always a necessary sacrifice for our society to be as we call it – free.
We must tolerate all forms of speech, even "hate speech". The most unpopular and most hated forms of speech are the ones that need to be the most defended, and if we don't, we will not have any freedom of speech at all. For it to work, speech has to be free.
Yes, it is granted that all may have a freedom of speech, but your speech can have a negative effect on many. This being said, the negative effect has even caused that of death and constant harassment. Hate speech is a topic that maybe considered controversial, however it is not taken into a serious effect. In addition, I think that although hate speech is protected by the 1st amendment and "Threatening and Constant Harassment" is not protected, they go hand in hand. The fine line that exist is quickly crossed in countless situation regarding a number of topics. That being cyberbullying, homophobia, racism, and etc. Hate speech is not a light topic, and it shouldn't protected by 1st amendment, as to make these hateful and derogatory terms that are constant and can cause damage on their lives.
Though many people would argue hate-speech is considered free speech, it can have negative effects, such as making people feel unsafe or threatened. Robert Elliot was entitled to his free-speech, despite his hateful, and threatening rant. That led to bloodshed, because hate-speech isn't taken seriously. Cyberbullying has also had effects such as these, but the victims can never be protected from this type of freedom. And today, anyone can be a victim.