Since there's so many rabid conservatives on these boards I thought I would post this for your consideration and comment.

Is killing liberals a hate crime? From Slate Magazine On-line

Jim David Adkisson, who confessed to opening fire in a Knoxville church last weekend, told police that he was motivated by a hatred for gays and liberals and, in particular, that "liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country." Authorities are now investigating the shooting as a hate crime. Do liberals get special protections under the law?

Not in Tennessee. The Volunteer State has two laws dealing with crimes motivated by hatred toward a particular group of people, but neither one specifies "political affiliation" or anything similar as a protected characteristic. The first law, Section 40-35-114 of the Tennessee code, allows a court to enhance the sentence for a crime committed because of the victim's "race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or gender."

That could still apply to Adkisson, since he was targeting homosexuals as well as liberals, but any enhancement to his sentence might be superfluous: If convicted, he would likely face multiple life sentences or the death penalty. The second state law makes it a felony to intimidate someone for exercising his or her civil rights, and specifically mentions "race, color, ancestry, religion or national origin," leaving out both political and sexual orientation.

Just a handful of states designate political violence as a "hate crime." West Virginia makes it a felony to target a person because of "race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, political affiliation or sex." Oregon includes labor unions as well, protecting "race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status, political affiliation or beliefs, membership or activity in or on behalf of a labor organization or against a labor organization, physical or mental disability, age, economic or social status or citizenship of the victim."

The District of Columbia defines "bias-related crime" according to "race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibility, physical disability, matriculation, or political affiliation." Iowa also protects political affiliation, and the Louisiana code mentions "creed."(The federal government, like most states, does not include political affiliation in its definition of hate crimes.)

Actual prosecutions of hate crimes based on the victim's political affiliation are rare in the United States, according to legal experts. Annual crime compendiums from the individual states mentioned above occasionally categorize hate crimes as politically motivated, though such cases often involve another protected trait like race or religion. The Anti-Defamation League does not include "political affiliation" in its model legislation for anti-hate laws.

If he was motivated by hatred for gays and liberals...a crime motivated by sexual orientation falls under hate crime.

Murder is murder.
Hate crimes? Whoever thought up that one possessed very little or, to be precise, no logic at all!!

We need a new consideration for people committing crimes. As those who attack or kill another out of hate get longer sentences, those who attack or kill out of their love for their victim should get lesser sentences. We can tag it as a "love crime".

We also need to start considering those who commit crimes because they either like or dislike their victim. Maybe even consideration for those criminals who are indifferent towards their victim.

And why limit "emotion charges" to crimes related to just sexual orientation, race and political leanings. We need to add wealth, kind of pet you own and type of car you drive. That's for starters!

Oh yeah, our criminal justice system definitely needs to be revamped!

I don't care for the whole hate crime thing myself. Motives can be complex things.

Judges (in some cases) can factor the murderers motives in sentencing.

Let's say we have a dead 80 year old woman. Suffocated in her bed with a pillow. If her murder was her husband of 50 years who was relieving the pain caused by terminal cancer, or a thief who was silencing his victim, or a man who told everyone he hated old people and they should all be killed, should the sentence for each be the same?

Right on!

State or Federal.

Many States have had a form of Hate laws for years. Mostly due to lynchings of Blacks.

Federal Hate law, S. 1105 and H.R. 1592 or Matthew Shepard act, is new. It was pushed by the GLBT org.
http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/hate_crimes_main_page/2007_legislation

http://www.hatecrimesbill.org/

There was a Federal Hate Crime law enacted in 1969, but the crime only authorized jurisdiction when it occurred during a Federal Crime.

The last I looked the new bill was being threatened by Bush for Veto. However the Senate did try to slip it in as an attachment to a bill which would limit funding for the Iraq war based on a timetable for troop withdrawal. I think it was vetoed by Bush!

The law would tack on an automatic ten years to any sentence of a crime defined as a hate crime, and would move trial for the accused to Federal court.
Ten years, even if the crime is just a beating. It doesn't have to involve Murder!

I love you so much, I'm going to kill you. <- Insanity

If someone kills another person, it's out of hate or insanity. So lock them up or give them a straight jacket.

If a person loses their life at the hands of another. The only person who can determine the nature of the crime is dead. The case then rests on the murderers side off the story or the evidence gathered. This is bias against the victim. The logic that is being currently used in the judicial system is that anyone not involved in the murder knows what the best form of justice is for the victim.
The best system is a strict set of values not based on the mental aspect of any crime but solely on the action!!

It has been argued that the law is unconstitutional.
It favors certain groups and increases punishment unfairly based on that favoritism.