I know there may be a few instances where people are in jail for harmless crimes, but for the most part,
Or a few million instances, depending on your view of personal drug use. But anyway, I agree that this probably doesn't have much to do with prison overcrowding. I have no idea how this relates to hate crime legislation though. And I disagree this has to do with naive expectations for rehabilitation.
This stuff is hard because, for pretty good reasons, we generally don't imprison people for crimes they haven't committed. There are exceptions, of course, and I'm guessing those exceptions will continue to expand in response to horrible cases like this.
Agreed on the nonviolent drug crimes, certainly it's much more sensible to let those offenders out and keep the violent ones locked up.
As for "hate crimes", it's true that topic relates to the Sowell case only indirectly (would he be treated differently as a white man killing black women?). It's a sore subject for those of us on the right because we think it allows the left to have their cake and eat it too. Considering the exact same crime to be worse for strictly political reasons is IMO dangerous. It contaminates the justice system.
You do realize that hate crimes work both ways, right? You don't have to be white to be guilty of one. You also must realize that hate crimes have an intent element or mens rea not present in non-hate crimes.
Let me try to explain. Beating someone up for their money or b/c you are an a&&hole is not the "exact same crime" as beating someone up because of their race/gender/religion/ethnicity/sex orientation/etc. The intent is different and the impact on the victim is totally different. Essentially what you are saying is that all homicides and other broad categories of crimes should be grouped together for purposes of sentencing (regardless of intent). In other words, a man who kills in the heat of passion is the same as a man who carefully plans and commits a murder. Thankfully, our laws are not so simple minded.
