Liberaltarianism

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Hrmmm....

*Rat tries to sidestep all the land mines*

1. Killing for revenge vs killing for money vs killing cause you don't like the gay/black/Discordian/whatever.

Killing for revenge (depending on the situation) may be acceptable to me, personally because of my philosophy. However, if the government that says killing is badwrong, then they should consider it badwrong.
Killing for money is a pretty straigthtforward situation if the government says killing is badwrong, then they should consider it badwrong.
Killing because you don't like person X's color, sexual partner or religion (or irreligion) is also straightforward because if the government says killing is badwrong, then they should consider it badwrong.

There should be no difference between Premeditated murder and premeditated murder in the eyes of the law(even if I personally think that killing the jackass that raped your wife and killed your kids may be morally acceptable).

2. Negligence certainly could lead to manslaughter and it should be dealt with per the laws related to manslaughter. Negligence that has not yet resulted in harm should not be dealt with per the laws related to manslaughter, but should be dealt with per laws related to negligence. (if you have bad brakes, you are guilty of negligence and possibly reckless endangerment.... I agree with this)

3.  Somehow we came up with "just the physical aspects of the case" I don't agree with this, nor have I said that. I think that we must consider the intent of the actor. If the actor intended to kill the victim, then that is certainly worse than the actor not intending to kill the victim.

Requia brought up the only valuable point of Hate Crime laws... and I think that Hate Crime laws are the wrong way to fix the problem. If a cop isn't prosecuting the murder of a gay person as intently as he is prosecuting the murder of a random joe... then the problem is the Cop, not the law. (and maybe the society that the cop lives in)....

I don't think that Somila is an example of Libertarianism... I mean you can argue that its some form of anarchy (the chaotic lack of any sort of functioning government) but even that is different than Anarchism the political philosophy.

No, but there's no government there to keep the cream from reaching the top.

I mean, just about any American with a little capital should be able to go there and live free, right? Maybe even take advantage of the situation to make their fortune... so why do all of the guys screaming about wanting a free market not go to Somalia and take advantage of theirs?

Well, most libertarians and libertarian philosophy holds that the government is necessary to provide basic security etc so that the market can flourish. No libertarian wants "No Government" that would make them an anarchist. Most systems of Anarchy don't even claim to want No Government, they want Voluntary Association.

Somalia is a failed state... no one I'm aware of think a failed state is a good thing. Except maybe crazy people.

[Don Coyote]

That's where it gets sticky.

Accidents can be horrible, and yeah he deserves to go to prison, but negligence causing a death isn't quite as bad as actively seeking to take a life.

Even if it were the monkey.

Okay.  So we check everyone's brakes, and we find that Ratatosk's brakes are also bad, but he hasn't hit anyone yet.

So we pitch him in jail for attempted murder/reckless endangerment.

I think I like this "motives don't matter" argument.  We can throw everyone in jail.

Wait, what? I wasn't making that argument.

Well, if motives don't matter, we only need consider the physical aspects of any case, with no other considerations.  Ergo, if you have bad brakes, you are guilty of reckless endangerment at the very least.

Motive does matter.
Other wise there would only be Assualt and Murder. There would be no manslaughter, murder 1, 2 or 3. You killed someone you killed them whether it was an accident, in self-defence, as a crime of passion, or for money.

That being said, I believe that motive does figure into whether a death is or isn't manslaughter.

I'l get back to this later on the issues of bad brakes and reckless endangerment, but off the top of my head that sounds plausible. You knowingly drive around in a 2000lb+ vehicle with poor brakes, seems like saying it's ok to run around a metropolitan area waving a loaded around, or a bare blade.

[Juana]

Motive should play a part in determining sentences and such. In terms of who's a worse person, I'll rank a cold blooded murderer above the man who murdered the bastard who raped his wife. I'll rank someone who drags a black man to death behind his truck just because he's black above the sheer cold blooded murderer.

Who would you rather have back out into society sooner? I'll take crime of passion guy before I'll accept either of the other two, and I'll take plain ol' cold blooded murderer over the bigot who murdered a man because of the color of his skin. At least the cold blooded guy didn't pick their victim because of something like that.

[Juana]

Requia brought up the only valuable point of Hate Crime laws... and I think that Hate Crime laws are the wrong way to fix the problem. If a cop isn't prosecuting the murder of a gay person as intently as he is prosecuting the murder of a random joe... then the problem is the Cop, not the law. (and maybe the society that the cop lives in)....

Societies don't change nearly as fast as we might like. Hate crime laws can help get justice for those who won't get it otherwise.

[Kai]

Requia brought up the only valuable point of Hate Crime laws... and I think that Hate Crime laws are the wrong way to fix the problem. If a cop isn't prosecuting the murder of a gay person as intently as he is prosecuting the murder of a random joe... then the problem is the Cop, not the law. (and maybe the society that the cop lives in)....

Societies don't change nearly as fast as we might like. Hate crime laws can help get justice for those who won't get it otherwise.

And since when shouldn't we try to even out the biases of cops anyway? So the problem is the cop, not the law. So the problem is society.


...


A FAGGOT STILL GOT MURDERED AND NO ONE INVESTIGATED IT RIGHT.


See what I'm saying here?

[Juana]

Requia brought up the only valuable point of Hate Crime laws... and I think that Hate Crime laws are the wrong way to fix the problem. If a cop isn't prosecuting the murder of a gay person as intently as he is prosecuting the murder of a random joe... then the problem is the Cop, not the law. (and maybe the society that the cop lives in)....

Societies don't change nearly as fast as we might like. Hate crime laws can help get justice for those who won't get it otherwise.

And since when shouldn't we try to even out the biases of cops anyway? So the problem is the cop, not the law. So the problem is society.


...


A FAGGOT STILL GOT MURDERED AND NO ONE INVESTIGATED IT RIGHT.


See what I'm saying here?

I'm not entirely sure I'm reading you right (because I am very tired), but what I meant and should have said clearly, was that the Right Now society is why we need it. Society is changing, but law enforcement isn't always up to date, so to speak. It will catch up when more of the cops are of a younger generation and/or get their heads out of their asses, but that isn't necessarily right now. Shore up the moment and work on more permanent solution in the time you have.

[Doktor Howl]

Requia brought up the only valuable point of Hate Crime laws... and I think that Hate Crime laws are the wrong way to fix the problem. If a cop isn't prosecuting the murder of a gay person as intently as he is prosecuting the murder of a random joe... then the problem is the Cop, not the law. (and maybe the society that the cop lives in)....

Societies don't change nearly as fast as we might like. Hate crime laws can help get justice for those who won't get it otherwise.

And since when shouldn't we try to even out the biases of cops anyway? So the problem is the cop, not the law. So the problem is society.


...


A FAGGOT STILL GOT MURDERED AND NO ONE INVESTIGATED IT RIGHT.


See what I'm saying here?

Laws change cultures.  That's the whole point of having them.

[Jasper]

Just make negligence in these scenarios a hate crime.  Problem patched.

[Doktor Howl]

Just make negligence in these scenarios a hate crime.  Problem patched.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Requia brought up the only valuable point of Hate Crime laws... and I think that Hate Crime laws are the wrong way to fix the problem. If a cop isn't prosecuting the murder of a gay person as intently as he is prosecuting the murder of a random joe... then the problem is the Cop, not the law. (and maybe the society that the cop lives in)....

Societies don't change nearly as fast as we might like. Hate crime laws can help get justice for those who won't get it otherwise.

I think though that its bad way to use law... that is. If we want to make X illegal (even if society doesn't like it) we pass a law... in cases where someone has been killed or assaulted, there are already laws to cover that. If cops aren't enforcing current laws, then those cops need reeducation or a boot to the head.... or maybe a law saying that failure to properly investigate (and for prosecutors) to prosecute all crimes is an offense that results in termination. I understand WHY some lawmakers are pushing for anti- hate crime laws, it just seems redundant and focused on the crime, rather than the negligence on the part of investigators/prosecutors... which seems to be the real issue.

However, hate crime law is nowhere near as egregious in the philosophy of 'America' as the idea of Constitutional amendments on marriage, making abortion illegal, pushing for prayer in school... all of which strike at the very notion of the nation.  And that, is the real point of my initial comment. I may find some of what the Democrats push for to be wrong... its not completely batshit insane which is where much of the GOP's policies seem to be at this point. When we top that off with a record of financial waste, government growth and failed policies that range from Trickle Down Economics to Exporting Democracy... there's no libertarian/fiscal conservative reason I can see for supporting the GOP. They are like whitewashed graves, clean on the outside and on the inside full of death.

If I have to choose between fiscal freedom (ie lower taxes) and social freedom... I'll choose social freedom. I'd prefer both, but I'll pay more if it means I and everyone else can live as we see fit.

[Requia ☣]

Laws criminalizing bad behavior that is specific to cops and prosecutors will *never* be enforced.  Also keep in mind that the jury is part of the equation as well.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Laws criminalizing bad behavior that is specific to cops and prosecutors will *never* be enforced.  Also keep in mind that the jury is part of the equation as well.

So Sherrif Sakodonuts finds out one of his good ol' boys killed a gay kid... He does the absolute minimum required and basically lets his buddy off.

We pass Hate Crime Law

Sherrif Sakodonuts finds out one of his good ol' boys killed a gay kid... He does the absolute minimum required and basically lets his buddy off. Unless the law has some kind of minimum enforcement... then he just botches the investigation, forgets to read the guy his rights or get a warrant properly... and basically lets his buddy off.

If the enforcers of law don't enforce the law, whats the value of more law which makes something illegal... illegal?

[Requia ☣]

One of the key parts of hate crime legislation is that it allows for requests that federal or state officials (depending on if its a state or federal law) get involved.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

One of the key parts of hate crime legislation is that it allows for requests that federal or state officials (depending on if its a state or federal law) get involved.

Sure, but IMO that should be the case with any sort of crime if the Good Ol Boys aren't doing their job... not just hate crimes.

[Doktor Howl]

I'm on the fence on hate crimes legislation.

I am utterly opposed to laws concerning hate speech, though.