Personal tools
 
Views

Resolved: Hate crime enhancements are unjust in the United States

From Debatepedia

Revision as of 01:55, 15 February 2008; Kantian rasmus (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Overview

Definitions

A hate crime is a crime, usually violent, motivated by prejudice or intolerance toward a member of a gender, racial, religious, or social group. In this resolution, hate crime "enhancements" refer to a heavier punishment if a crime had been committed out of racial hatred or other prejudices. For example, normal graffiti would not be punished so severely, but if a swastika was sprayed onto a Jewish temple, there is clear racial hatred behind the crime and the person would be punished much more severely. This pertains to all other aspects of crime, i.e. a lynching would be punished much more severely than a regular homicide. The United States justice system does recognize hate crimes and punishes them more severely.


Hate crime enhancements do not treat citizens fairly or equally

Affirmative

Hate crime enhancements are unjust because it punishes two equal results (i.e. assault vs. racial mugging) with different punishments.


Negative

Hate crimes enhancements are not unjust. Hate crimes should be given a more severe penalty because the harm done to the victim and society is greater.

Argument

Hate crime enhancements violate the 1st Amendment

Yes

No

Argument

Yes

No

Argument

Yes

No

References:

Further Reading

External links

Wikipedia Entries

YouTube Videos

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.