Hate crime laws punish free thinking

David Burke David Burke is a third-year
political science student. E-mail him at [email protected].
Click Here for more articles by David Burke

Recently, hate crimes have been a popular topic in both the
public forum and in our very own school newspaper. With all the
recent discussion I realized that much of the scrutiny surrounding
hate crime legislation has shifted away from the fundamental issues
of the legislation onto more superficial and secondary
topics.

With regard to this issue, the public should be focusing on
three fundamental questions: 1)What does hate crime legislation
hope to accomplish? 2)What are its chances of achieving those
goals? 3)Is the legislation justifiable? The answers lead to a
clear-cut case against hate crime legislation because its benefits
are small compared to its enormous costs.

The answer to the first question is simple. Hate crime
legislation is intended to deter future hate criminals and to ease
the minds of Americans who are disgusted by violent acts committed
out of hatred.

I think that the answer to the second question is just as simple
but more frequently ignored. Hate crime legislation will not deter
many future hate criminals. People do not commit crimes based upon
the possible punishments to which they will be subjected if they
are caught. No potential murderer is going to think ?Well, I would
really like to commit this hate crime but now that my prison
sentence would be 25 years instead of 20 years, I?ll just call the
whole thing off.? Hate crime legislation will not deter future hate
criminals just as the death penalty does not deter future
murderers.

As for easing the minds of Americans, I know personally that I
do not feel better if a criminal goes to jail for 12 years instead
of 10. I would feel better if I knew that the criminal would get an
education in prison. I would feel better if I knew that the
criminal would leave prison as a vastly more peaceful and
enlightened individual than when he was admitted. But until that
happens I will not sleep better at night knowing that hate crime
legislation put a criminal behind bars for a couple more years.

I think that the answer to the third question is the most
important. Hate crime legislation punishes thought in a
frighteningly Orwellian way. Apart from the difference in
punishment that is already exercised to distinguish between
premeditated and spur-of-the-moment crimes, hate crime legislation
adds another layer of thought-punishment by effectively making
certain beliefs illegal.

It?s hard to disagree that many people have actively hated
others at some point in life. Technically, many people can be
considered racist, defined as the belief that race accounts for
differences in human character or ability and that a particular
race is in some ways superior to others. Many others are
homophobic, defined as the fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay
men.

But people have a right to be racist or homophobic! A racist has
the personal right to believe that the white race is supreme just
as anyone has a personal right to believe in God or hold a hatred
of rapists or murderers.

It is ridiculous to increase a criminal?s jail sentence just
because they hold one of the beliefs above. That?s what hate crimes
legislation does. Hate crime legislation is an infringement upon
freedom of thought.

How can we define hatred and know what varying degrees of it
should correspond to increased prison sentences? Since we can?t
make those kind of decisions, beliefs and thoughts should not be
punished. Hate crime legislation will not deter criminals or do a
service to society.?It is an infringement on freedom of thought
that should be dismissed.