Crimes are known to be one of the reasons to why laws and police forces were created. In the two readings about hate crimes, it will provide readers more insight on each writer’s opinions. The hatred and cruel intentions towards others can be frightening. With the comfort of safety and protection, people have become more expressive, but with the sense of caution. Having laws, gives us the strength to open up towards each other and, through the analysis of these two articles, it demonstrates the importance of hate crimes and crimes in general. Based on the judgment about hate crimes, the struggles of stopping violence and a person’s freedom has become the conflict between these two readings.
According to Jesse Larner’s article called “Hate Crime/Thought Crime,” he discusses the crimes that were caused by racial and stereotyping. These were referenced as hate crimes, in which, several people have experienced it before, and some were unable to survive from the ...view middle of the document...
According to Liberman, he believes that a crime and a hate crime should be given certain punishments due to the criminal’s motive. In the story of Marcelo Lucero, it demonstrates that a person can be enraged to attack the other, in order to defend oneself from being mistreated. This murder case sets as an example to show that people are targeted because of their personal characteristics().
Through the analysis of Liberman and Larner’s writings, they contain accurate explanations in describing their opposing views of what a hate crime should be qualified as. Compared to crimes such as murder or kidnapping, the term, hate, expresses more insight on the endangerment of certain groups of people. Hate crimes are very similar to crimes because in both offenses, someone is targeting another person with an act of violent behavior or the desire for him/her to die. However, hate crimes contain more anger and motivation to commit the crime, than the actions of regular felonies. The creation of hate crime laws provides restrictions and awareness towards violent criminals to lessen their ability to target a specific groups of people freely.
In conclusion, these crimes will continue with or without the existence of laws. The grudge portrayed towards certain types of people or groups will only increase if others do not favor change. Larner and Liberman both have evidential information that describes whether a hate crime should be labeled as it is or put in the same category as an offensive crime. In Larner’s article, hate crimes should be seen for the crime only, and not the criminal’s personal motive. The involvement of the criminal’s intent would destroy his/her freedom of the First Amendment. While in Liberman’s argument, he explains that Larner’s view on hate crime does not contain enough substantial evidence to convince the government with their own ideals. Disagreeing with Larner, Liberman found that a criminal should be given a harsher punishment based on the crime being a hate crime. Favoring that a criminal’s punishment should be extended for being a hate crime, this should cease the continuation of targeting specific groups of people. The protection of others is essential, and without restriction on certain offenses it can lead to more violence.