A kind Gentleman on here found my piece from this morning in Goiogle cache and has kindly sent it me so here it is as was... (I have left the definition bit out as that is above)..

Thank you SG :-)

It has its grey areas BUT is designed to try and add weight to sentencing when a crime against someone is known to be hate based. Hate crime in the UK, as with some other types of crime, has extra penalties added on if shown to be motivated by hate. Also, I believe that if something is percieved to be hate based then the law can try and intervene earlier to 'nip it in the bud' and stop it being escalated. In short, I do not think our law discriminates against free thought or speech but it does try to stop it going beyond what is reasonable comment and opinion into actions that are
wrong.

Each case is very much looked at on its own merits, as while many hate
crimes have similarities, each has their own particular motivations. If someone gets beaten up, say, as they walk past a night club as it is letting out, then that would clearly be assault or GBH. But if the same person was attacked as they passed and someone shouted hate comments as they carried the attack out, that would suggest they are not being singled out at random but that the attack was hate based.

The victim is still traumatised and injured and that carries a penalty BUT if that person has been singled out just because of various traits then extra offences are committed. The law and sentence reflects that.

Sometimes the difference is so subtle that only the person it is aimed at would know the offence (as some bigots are very subtle how they say and do things: others often hide behind humour or some sort to make a hate comment). The victim can tell you the difference between someone making a comment/expressing a view to someone who is being horrible. Some hate crime is an extension beyond bullying and no-one would have a problem identifying bullying when they saw it. Hate crime can be more subtle and is not always 'in your face'.

People in certain minority groups are more likely to experience hate crimes. Some people in minority groups discriminate against other minoriy groups or people within their own community so no-one suggests that people in minority groups are all innocent. Ultimately all people are individuals, in a minority of one, and individuals are all capable of hate and incitement. The majority never would do so.

Lots of grey areas - as with a lot of law - but certainly required, IMHO, and something people should be more aware of and try to understand. No-one should be singled out and picked on because of differences they have. Ultimately we all have far more in common with each other than we do differences. We are all human. Live and let live. Discuss, comment, opine: but it can never be right to let hate be a good reason to cause someone harm just because they appear different to what is considered normal. When we have a proper definition for 'normal' then mabe we can say what is abnormal
but I doubt 'normal' will ever be satisfactorily defined for all. We are all so different.

I'll shush now

mp

---

If you have a post deleted because it was anonymous, I'm happy to retrieve the deleted text, and it's usually easy for me to find it.
-Joe Offer-