Riginslinger... I think we differ in that I see hate crime as an individual crime itself, which carries a sentence, but one that is usually combined with another crime, i.e. assault, murder, intimidation etc. and so gets extra tariff. I do understand your slant though and can respect that opinion.

akenaton... some of the examples you use I would put under the added hate crime legislation. Others should hold much higher tariffs than they appear to IMHO. Your point is taken. What I have been at pains to point out, as I see, is that whilst murder is indeed murder, the stimuli differ and it seems so therefore is the tariff. Quite often the law in itself is adequate but some of the sentences handed out are rediculously lenient based on tariff allowances that could have been used. The pressure on the Courts now to keep people out of the overcrowded prisons seems to drive sentences down rather than up in the UK. Add to that early realease, good behaviour, etc and we have many victims that appear let down by the law.

Maybe what we could all would support would not be a Hate Crime law but proper sentencing with ALL reasons for the crime taking place being taken into account and holding their own extra penalties?

I am not saying people should be put in shackles for what they think. However, much of what we are all capable of thinking should never ever be put into action. Most have opinions and the majority, thank heavens, are not willing to abuse, assault or kill someone else for having a different opinion, lifestyle, race etc, etc.. I believe the Hate Crime Laws are there to try and quell that kind of action.

If that is liberalism then I plead guilty

Best wishes

mp