Definition of Hate Crimes: Too Ambiguous?

I've been doing some thinking lately, and doesn't it seem odd how hate crimes are usually only "race on race" or "straight against gay (and vice versa)," etc? It just doesn't make sense to me how there are so many groups of people that it's impossible to tell exactly what a hate crime is? Let's take this example.

Let's say that, hypothetically, I hate racists. I think they're the filth of the earth and need to just go lie down in a hole and die. They're stupid and ignorant, not to mention the fact that they go around killing babies and kicking puppies in their spare time. It is a well known fact that I hate racists because I own a business that refuses service and jobs to them.

Now that we have the discrimination established, let's get a situation. I see a white man robbing a black man and yelling, "GIVE ME YOUR MONEY YOU STUPID BLACK!" Naturally, I go in the protect the guy. In doing so, I push the racist pig to the ground, break his arm, and knock him unconscious while screaming, "SHUT UP YOU FILTHY RACIST PIG! I OUGHT TO KILL YOU FOR THINKING LOW OF THIS ORDINARY MAN!" I get him to a hospital and leave, paying him no more mind and considering it lucky that he didn't actually die. Later in the week, I'm arrested for assault and the racist also tries to get me for hate crime too, but to no avail.

The question is this:
Was this a hate crime, and was it right not to convict me of it?

 

He tried to get you arrested for a hate crime? You reacted because somebody was being attacked and you wanted to help them. That is in no way a hate crime.

However, since you didn't stop at pushing the man into the ground you did branch into unnecessary assault... though if the man had been arrested and put through the system he probably wouldn't have received as much punishment as he deserved, so that's a slightly grey area.

Now, the man's crime as 'hate crime'? The only way to tell, really, is to find out what his motive was in robbing the man - was he robbing him because solely he was black and he thought the man deserved it? Or was he just robbing him because he needed money and that was the first person he targeted (with the 'stupid black' thing just being an insult he thought up in the heat of the moment)? In this case, though, it doesn't really matter. He can't have had any noble reason for doing so.

 

I don' t know anything about laws, really, but isn' t "hate crime" just a denomination ? I mean whether a murder is a hate crime or not you' d be convicted for murder and the "hate crime" denomination wouldn' t have any impact on your punishment, right ?

As for your example, if you attack a man BECAUSE he' s black then you attack him for his looks and that qualifies as a hate crime. If you attack someone because he' s Christian then you attack him for his convictions and it qualifies as a hate crime. If you attack someone because he wears a tutu/is overtly gay then you attack him for his tastes, it's as dumb as attacking someone because he likes marmalade and it qualifies as a hate crime. If you attack someone for being racist then you attack him for being a plain moron. Yes, being racist qualifies as a conviction, but science has proven that it' s an erroneous conviction. Science however will never prove that God doesn' t exist nor that being gay (or liking marmalade) is "wrong". Nonetheless, if you murder someone for being racist that' s still a murder.

 

Can we change the situation a bit? Instead of a white man robbing a black man, let's just have the white man loudly telling his friend about how much he dislikes Native Americans. It removes the complication of you defending someone, and focuses on how you're attacking someone specifically because of his beliefs.

 

That could work. To be honest, I used the robbing example because that way it was clear that he was actually racist and not joking around with his friends. I do still get the idea though. But yeah, that works well.

 

I'm not too hot on my law. Is a hate-crime actually a crime, or is it just a label society puts on a crime if it's done of out hate (usually for an ethnic, religious or gender specific reason)? Will you get a harsher punishment if you shoot two black men specifically because they're black, as opposed to shooting two random people?

 

From the little I can remember, a hate crime is the use of violent actions against a minority group because of being in that group, usually motivated by a hate for that group.
I don't think exactly racists would be considered a minority. Group. At least, not one the state would encourage and as such wouldn't be defendable in court. Though you've made me wonder a little bit now. Do hate crimes include sub-cultures like Emos, Chavs, Guidos, etc? Probably not but I wonder.

 

Sub cultures are more of a "how you look" type thing because you can change the way you dress and the way you talk, but you can't change your nationality and maybe your ethnicity (depending on who you identify with).

 

No, sub cultures by definition have a culture. This means they have their own set norms and values, art, fashion, music, language uses, etc.
You could thereby discriminate against them since you don't accept their cultral characteristics, but it's difficult to know one way or the other.