Ken Goldstein. “The Case For Hate Crimes Statutes”. The 13th Story. Retrieved 2.03.08 – “There is a great difference between a bar fight that spontaneously erupts over a girl and laying in wait to attack a stranger because of a group they belong to. The criminal in the second case poses a far greater danger to society, and should pay a far greater price.
Trying an incident like that without hate crimes laws, however, often leads to charges of simple assault, and maybe a weekend spent picking up litter as the punishment. And the following weekend the racist winds up targeting another black man, or gay man, or Jew, or Asian, or whatever, to beat the crap out them for the simple reason that he doesn’t like them.
There is also a great difference between desecrating a house of worship and painting graffiti on a highway overpass. In this case the first criminal poses a greater risk to the security and safety of the community. But without hate crimes legislation they are both charged under the same vandalism statute, and perhaps jail time is avoided altogether.”
“Hate Crimes and Their Punishment – Part II”. The Barking Dingo. December 3rd, 2004 – “When a person commits a hate crime, the murder (lets use a lynching) is the tool (like the gun) in order to commit a crime (terrorism). So, If a person lynches another person in order to terrorize a community, the person has committed two crimes, not just one. He has intended to commit murder and he has intended to commit terrorism. The result is a greater impact and therefore deserves a bigger punishment. The difference is that the tool used to commit the crime is also a crime.”
Comment & Debate