Tastycles will judge. Thread will be open until Sunday. MRC will affirm the topic. Resolved: Special punishment for hate crimes is an abridgement of the right to a fair trial and the right to avoid cruel and unusual punishment.
Well, MRC isn't here. I was given the green light to go so I'll go. OK. First things first. What is a hate crime? Its a legal name for discrimination or racism on a "law breaking" level. So whats the difference between a regular crime and a hate crime? Well the hate crime revolves around a form of racism. Whether its race, color, age, sex affiliation, etc. For a reason, people believe these crimes need extra punishment. Why? Killing a woman for money is just as bad as killing a homosexual for being one. You are taking a person's life. It doesn't matter what's the reason, its not right. The person needs to face the consequences. Because it was a "hate crime", the person in question has pissed off an entire social group of people. In the case of the example, the second criminal angered the homosexual group because he killed one for being one. While the first person, who killed a woman for his/her own gain, didn't really do as much wrong? The general public is somehow smaller than the homosexual social group? I'm not saying that "hate crimes" have lesser importance than regular ones. I'm saying they are one in the same. People shouldn't carry extra punishment to "haters". Because it is exactly what defines a "hate crime". I've learned in life that "when it comes to discrimination, there is no discrimination". Point being that there will always be racism. An example being "hate crime". Its basically reverse discrimination. You are condemning a person to a to a deeper extent than to others because he/she condemns a certain group of people. You're no better than he/she is if you stoop to his/her level. I'm not really too well versed in the subject so I'll leave it there for now. As a disclaimer I have nothing against homosexuals. I don't approve but I certainly do not condemn. I have two homosexual co-workers one of my superiors at work is one as well and we get along great. He does piss me off with his antics however.
Mantaur Rodeo Clown Persuasiveness: You say it worst, when you say nothing at all 0 out of 15 Punctuality: Poor. 0 out of 10 Grammar, spelling, punctuation: Technically, you didn't get anything wrong, but I don't do negative marking. 0 out of 10 On-topic-ness: What topic? 0 out of 10 Quality of responses: Well, lets just get our original posts out first, shall we? 0 out of 5 Total score is 0 out of 50 Riaku Persuasiveness: Not very persuasive. You defined a hate crime, but didn't really say why it was the same as any other crime. I didn't get an overall conclusion on the topic as it relates to the question. You were not debating whether or not hate crimes are usual crimes, but the punishment of them. It's as if you only did half of the debate. 4 out of 15 Punctuality: You made one post, which was late, but you were waiting, to be fair. 7 out of 10 Grammar, spelling, punctuation: Nothing too obvious. The expression is "one and the same", for future reference. Too many short sentences made it seem disjointed, but on the whole, very good. 9 out of 10 On-topic-ness: You missed ideas about cruel and unusual punishment, but that was marked down earlier. I have absolutely no idea why you started talking about gays in your workplace, but the rest was focussed. 5 out of 10 Quality of responses: None to make, unfortunately. 0 out of 5 Total score is 25 out of 50 Result I think Killjoy was uncomfortable with the topic, and it did show, but the effort he made was commendable. I think he could have done better, but ultimately he didn't need to. Killjoy wins by 25 points to 0[/QUOTE]