Are there no Liberal Parties Anymore? Conservatives Clamp Down on Freedom

[Diocle]

It's not where hate is viewed as a legal concept. It's where crimes inspired by hate is viewed as a legal concept and carry a longer sentence. However, redundant hate crimes are redundant. Misogyny based hate crimes when you can already charge someone with gender based hate crimes? Is she also going to push for Misandry based hate crimes in an equal society? And then, thus, we have two redundant hate crimes in the world where a law is already passed and enforced regarding gender based hate crimes? What is she smoking and can I have some?

How can you prove that hate is directly inspiring a crime? I could show you that with the most moderate speech you can imagine, I could easily inspire a crime, without running any risk of being pursued by law in any possible way.

The truth is that with such laws, you* are just compressing and limiting the political rights of citizens, and seen that this freedom of expression was one of the most relevant aspects of British and Western history, you are just throwing into the toilet the best part of Western identity, the one that we (whatever is our political belonging) should be proud of. Congrats.



* "you" as indefinite pronoun, of course.

[Heathen Hammer]

It's not where hate is viewed as a legal concept. It's where crimes inspired by hate is viewed as a legal concept and carry a longer sentence. However, redundant hate crimes are redundant. Misogyny based hate crimes when you can already charge someone with gender based hate crimes? Is she also going to push for Misandry based hate crimes in an equal society? And then, thus, we have two redundant hate crimes in the world where a law is already passed and enforced regarding gender based hate crimes? What is she smoking and can I have some?

Subjectiveness of the notion of "hate" is pretty much the main problem here. It is especially problem in UK, were individual freedoms are being eroded by the ongoing retreat of democracy in favor of all-powerful state.

[Aexodus]

One thing the OP has no considered , probably because he';s in scaremongering mode is the chances of these proposals becoming law. I can sugeest it is nil, given that Brexit is consuming all legislative time, causing even the Finance Bill to drop measures. S much hot air.

The pornography law has been passed in Parliament. It’s happening. Current speech laws are already too far.

[mongrel]

The pornography law has been passed in Parliament. It’s happening. Current speech laws are already too far.

I stand corrected, that is presuming that the new rules are introduced by negative procedure via Statutory Instrument. With Brexit however, that still isn't safe, laying needs approval by both May and a commitee led by Andrea Leadsome, and they may drop anything making a noise in the media.

Edit: looks as if the law will be implemented by BBFC guidance.

Still , like with many of these kinds of thread, I'm curious about what the detriment is, in actual , tangible form, other than disappointment for incels too shy to use ID.

How can you prove that hate is directly inspiring a crime:

Breivik provided pages of proof. Thomas Meir said what was on his mind when he killed Jo Cox. The pair responsible for so-called Sharia patrols were locked up because they posted evidence of their antics on Youtube. Any more stupid questions?

[Diocle]

I stand corrected. Still , like with many of these kinds of thread, I'm curious about what the detriment is, in actual , tangible form, other than disappointment for incels too shy to say their real names.



Breivik provided pages of proof. Thomas Meir said what was on his mind when he killed Jo Cox. The pair responsible for so-called Sharia patrols were locked up because they posted evidence of their antics on Youtube. Any more stupid questions?

Beware it's not stupid asking if you can scientifically define the direct relation between hate (definition please) and crime, because actually it's plainly impossible, being hate a moral category and not a social action. You can't turn moral categories into crimes, Catholic Church did it for 1700 years, burning alive legions of women and men for this same reason. Sin is different from crime.

[Aexodus]

Can anyone explain to me a mugging inspired by hatred should be punished more harshly than a mugging inspired by envy, or greed for wealth?

Hatred isn’t a good thing usually, but neither are a lot of other things that we don’t punish such as jealousy.

[Quintus Hortensius Hortalus]

Can anyone explain to me a mugging inspired by hatred should be punished more harshly than a mugging inspired by envy, or greed for wealth?

Hatred isn’t a good thing usually, but neither are a lot of other things that we don’t punish such as jealousy.

Well, hate is an issue which is widely discussed in society and is seen as a general problem and worse as the others, so politicians need to do something because this looks good to voters. And passing a new in which something is forbidden doesn't cost anything and it looks like you are actually doing something by actually doing nothing. And some media a cheering because it's a measure everyone has to like.

The other examples you give is what everyone more or less is so we tend to 'excuse' people for things they do when we can understand them.

[mongrel]

Can anyone explain to me a mugging inspired by hatred should be punished more harshly than a mugging inspired by envy, or greed for wealth?

Hatred isn’t a good thing usually, but neither are a lot of other things that we don’t punish such as jealousy.

Inevitably because it aggrevates violence.

[Quintus Hortensius Hortalus]

Inevitably because it aggrevates violence.

Ever seen what a jealous husband/boyfriend can do? It's the greatest risk for a women to be attacked in western societies. No, hate isn't worse than the other examples.

Does pleasing media and voters justify it? Isn’t this heavy handed? It does cost something, there’s specific police groups devoted to hate crime for instance, and the courts make money by prosecuting nothing crimes.

No. Of course not. And yes the costs are obvious but they are somehow hidden. Hiring more social workers or do something really useful would simply cost more and would be deemed as useless by some groups.

[Gaidin]

Well, hate is an issue which is widely discussed in society and is seen as a general problem and worse as the others, so politicians need to do something because this looks good to voters. And passing a new in which something is forbidden doesn't cost anything and it looks like you are actually doing something by actually doing nothing. And some media a cheering because it's a measure everyone has to like.

The other examples you give is what everyone more or less is so we tend to 'excuse' people for things they do when we can understand them.

Not really. Hate crimes actually happen and have a history. Though they tend to be tied to murders and not...you know, muggings. That's a rather interesting strawman/red herring duality by Aexodus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#History

[Aexodus]

Not really. Hate crimes actually happen and have a history. Though they tend to be tied to murders and not...you know, muggings. That's a rather interesting strawman/red herring duality by Aexodus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#History

I really just generally meant a physical assault of some kind. No need for accusations.

The term "hate crime" came into common usage in the United States during the 1980s

Huh. I guess what happens in America today happens here tomorrow. Same with social justice extremism etc

[Gaidin]

I really just generally meant a physical assault of some kind. No need for accusations.

Then don't tie hate crimes to crimes they're not typically used for. A mugging is a violent robbery by the definition of its typical law. If all you have is that mugging with no murder charge with it there is no dead body. It's a very odd crime indeed with some very strange circumstances revealed in the investigation for them to not have a dead body on their hands and tying a hate crime to it.

Huh. I guess what happens in America today happens here tomorrow. Same with social justice extremism etc

Your country was quite happy to follow suit passing hate crime laws so don't try to pin this on us. Your country thought these policies were a good idea. And I'm willing to bet there's been a few where your investigators have been able to prove it's been done for sheer emotional vitriol against the other person. If you kill someone because you have some downright emotional hatred for the fact that they're god damn black or just not your gender are you saying it's not a hate crime?

[Aexodus]

Anjem Choudary was jailed for 5 and a half years and his organisation proscribed. The ultimate in 'no-platforming'. I don't see any 'phobes crying 'free dumb of speech' over that.

@mongrel Glorification of terrorism isn’t free speech

Well, hate is an issue which is widely discussed in society and is seen as a general problem and worse as the others, so politicians need to do something because this looks good to voters. And passing a new in which something is forbidden doesn't cost anything and it looks like you are actually doing something by actually doing nothing. And some media a cheering because it's a measure everyone has to like.

The other examples you give is what everyone more or less is so we tend to 'excuse' people for things they do when we can understand them.

Does pleasing media and voters justify it? Isn’t this heavy handed? It does cost something, there’s specific police groups devoted to hate crime for instance, and the courts make money by prosecuting nothing crimes.

[mongrel]

@mongrel Glorification of terrorism isn’t free speech


.

Neither is sexual harrassment , or bothering/distressing one's elders. Your point?

[Aexodus]

I’m questioning specifically if that warrants a longer sentence.

[Gaidin]

I’m questioning specifically if that warrants a longer sentence.

Ask yourself what you think of the Concentration Camps. Remember that was done just because they were Jewish. Now remember, sometimes someone is murdered just because they're black. Or just because they're a certain gender. Or just because they're homosexual. Or just because they're muslim.

[Vanoi]

I’m questioning specifically if that warrants a longer sentence.

Yes. It sends a message that this type of behavior is not tolerated and could deter those who may be considering doing the same type of crime.

[Aexodus]

Ask yourself what you think of the Concentration Camps. Remember that was done just because they were Jewish. Now remember, sometimes someone is murdered just because they're black. Or just because they're a certain gender. Or just because they're homosexual. Or just because they're muslim.

Can you explain your point? Why does that make it a worse crime, other than appeals to emotion.

Yes. It sends a message that this type of behavior is not tolerated and could deter those who may be considering doing the same type of crime.

That doesn’t make sense, the whole point is different sentences for the same crime. You’re selectively punishing some motives more than others. That argument would make sense if it was longer sentences regardless of the motive.

Could your statement possibly be amended to ”Yes. It sends a message that this type of thought is not tolerated”?

[Vanoi]

That doesn’t make sense, the whole point is different sentences for the same crime.

You do understand the motive and intent very much determine what crime you are charged with and what sentence it could bring?

You’re selectively punishing some motives more than others. That argument would make sense if it was longer sentences regardless of the motive.

So? Do you think motive doesn't matter in a crime? Motive and intent can determine whenever you are charged with first degree murder compared to voluntary manslaughter.

Motive and intent should taken into consideration. I don't consider a guy getting beat up in a fight over money or an argument even remotely the same as a been targetted for his race, ethnicity, or religion.

[Gaidin]

Can you explain your point? Why does that make it a worse crime, other than appeals to emotion.

As Vanoi so gloriously did a great job driving a Mack Truck through your mind-hole: some motives are worse than others. And if we can prove you legitimately had a worse motive, we'll nail your ass to the wall for it.