But there’s never been any serious evidence that extra punishment prevents the worst crimes. A jaywalker may decide not to jaywalk if the sentence is great, but murderers and rapists don’t seem to weigh punishment—compare murder rates in states with the death penalty to those without it, if you doubt me. Hate crime laws are symbolic—and the symbolism is confused. Is one sort of human life worth more than another?”

will, there are a lot more factors that are taken into consideration besides motive of the accuser, any one of which can be twisted into saying that ’some victims are worth more than others’ by anyone with an audience gullible enough.

But I followed Mandolin’s link, and even from a perfunctory glance, I’m really liking Lu’s post number 2. You say you read that thread already, and presumably, in your own mind, discounted the arguments there. I’m curious as to your response: do you not see the parallels between hate crime and terrorism?

I’m leaving this thread now. You’re welcome to tagback! I’m subscribed to this entry, at least for another day or two; I’m happy to read what others have to say.

will, most of us learned that “No tagbacks!” stopped being a valid argument sometime after grade school.

And that can’t be an arguing tactic when mandolin has asked me to be quiet. You have to stick around to argue.

And, last, I have read a great deal about the theory of hate crimes, including the post here that mandolin suggested. When people disagree with you, it does not necessarily mean they are ignorant or, a truly bizarre notion, pretending that they’re ignorant. It may simply mean they have drawn different conclusions than you.

Sharon, we completely agree here: “where any human has been violated and brutalized, then it is a matter of hatred of all and stop thinking “your victim” is more sympathetic than “my victim” as though we were comparing whose marbles are bigger on some racial playground.” That’s at the heart of my concern with hatred laws. (But I’ll say no more about that in this thread, I promise!)

No, joe, as you’re well aware, I’m sarcastically pointing out that here we have a case of a black women accusing a group of whites of a terrible crime of sexual violence. Yet there is no public outcry as to how we should withhold judgment until all the facts are in and the accused are innocent until proven guilty–as there was in the lacrosse players’ case, well before there was any real indication that the accusations were false.

Again, I don’t know for sure that Rachel S. isn’t okay with that topic being in this thread, but it feels very painful to me, and it feels like it could easily end up in one of those crushing scenes we’ve seen on the blog when we’re talking about black women’s victimization — for instance the mess when a white man made nasty remarks to a native american woman about the rape she’d suffered, implying that she was making it up.

Clearly, I know that you’re not that kind of guy, Will, but I’ve been around this blog long enough to see the kind of hate that can get easily tossed about when a black woman is a victim of sexual violence. I’m sure people would be glad to address you on the other thread.

Again, Rachel S. can contradict me if she disagrees.

Basically, the way the hate laws are set up there has to be some indicator other than the viciousness of the crime and race of the perpetrators/victims that specifically shows the motivation for the crime was race. As I pointed out, in the W. Va case, the word “nigger” was not only expressed verbally, but was carved into the victim repeatedly and the in-bred idiots also puportedly stated that they were brutalizing her because she was a “nigger.”

No one is saying that there wasn’t racial animus in the Christian/Newsome crime, but there aren’t any facts pointing to that other than the victims’ race. Now, if the idiots in that case had been as stupid as the W. Va idiots, and had stated out right to the authorities that they targeted the couple because they were white, then the hate crime statute would attach.

Also, as I pointed out at KeithBoykin: To be clear, all of this crime comparison gets us no where when we can’t come to a consensus about the humanity of the victims in both cases. I know the black-on-white crime heralds want to wave the flag, “but what about us?” And I’m saying, where any human has been violated and brutalized, then it is a matter of hatred of all and stop thinking “your victim” is more sympathetic than “my victim” as though we were comparing whose marbles are bigger on some racial playground.

It may be otherwise, but if that’s what it is, good for her. Good for her for knowing it’s not her fault and being willing to say it to all the assholes and misogynists. Good for her for refusing to be cowed. Good for her for believing that she has a right to accuse her tormentors. If she can say, “what was done to me was wrong,” good for her. Self-blame and self-doubt are among the patriarchy’s most potent weapons. If she is free of them, good for her.