In an article on the Times last February, I had shared my views as to why I think that 'hate laws' introduce inequalities before the law while appearing to promote equality, and actually create more problems while doing nothing at tackling the causes of inequality.
And proof of that is ironically the judgement of the case that has actually prompted the amendments to our hate legislation. Because the attack was not proven to be motivated by hate due to discrimination of the type defined by law (i.e. sexually oriented, gender, racial, religious, or whatever else the legislators decide to add), then you're fine with a slap on the wrist.
You can beat people up for as low as €500.
What about doing the obvious thing to do, and raise penalties for any physical violence on anyone and for any reason, without requiring the court to enter into the merit of whatever prompted it: whether it was hate, envy, anger, or merely love?
In my opinion, motives and emotions should only be considered to lower the degree of aggravation, in cases of crimes under heat of passion. Otherwise we start trampling in the ground of thought-crime. And that starts to make things unreasonably complicated and illogical, as happened in this particular case.
And proof of that is ironically the judgement of the case that has actually prompted the amendments to our hate legislation. Because the attack was not proven to be motivated by hate due to discrimination of the type defined by law (i.e. sexually oriented, gender, racial, religious, or whatever else the legislators decide to add), then you're fine with a slap on the wrist.
You can beat people up for as low as €500.
What about doing the obvious thing to do, and raise penalties for any physical violence on anyone and for any reason, without requiring the court to enter into the merit of whatever prompted it: whether it was hate, envy, anger, or merely love?
In my opinion, motives and emotions should only be considered to lower the degree of aggravation, in cases of crimes under heat of passion. Otherwise we start trampling in the ground of thought-crime. And that starts to make things unreasonably complicated and illogical, as happened in this particular case.
Comments
Post a Comment