I've never been fond of hate crime laws, just because the seem to be so subjective, esp. along the fringes. Here's another reason against them: abuse of such laws by the police.
❝ On Sept. 23, 2016, Robbie Sanderson, a 52-year-old Black man from North Carolina, was arrested for retail theft by in Crafton, a small town near Pittsburgh. During the arrest, Sanderson called police “Nazis,” “skinheads” and “Gestapo,” according to an affidavit of probable cause filed by the Crafton Borough police. For that, he was charged with a hate crime. ❞
That stemmed from this part:
❝ After Sanderson called the police derogatory names, the affidavit states, he also told them “that’s why motherfuckers are killing y’all out here” and “all you cops just shoot people for no reason.” And police said that Sanderson told one officer, Brian Tully, that he was going to find his wife and have sex with her. ❞
That part qualified for 1st degree misdemeanor "terroristic threats" — but Pennsylvania's ethnic intimidation / hate crime law boosts the severity by a tick. Since the police claimed that the ethnic intimidation showed a racial bias behind the terroristic threats, the crime was filed as a 3rd degree felony.
All of which sounds very different from what most people would call terroristic threats, or how they might view the normal way that ethnic intimidation works.
Of course, as the article notes, the ethnic intimidation part is sort of there more as a bargaining chip than anything else. The vast majority of such cases reviewed showed the charge was dropped, usually (as in this case) as part of a plea deal. That's how a lot of these charges are used by police and prosecutors — "Well, you're looking at 25 years when we put you away, but if you cop to this graciously reduced reduced set of charges, it means you'll only do 5" — and thus why they are tossed around so easily and quickly and imaginatively.
A Black Man Called The Cops Nazis–And Was Charged With A Hate Crime
A Pennsylvania hate crime statute is being used by law enforcement to punish angry arrestees.
I'm philosophically against laws that escalate the charges based upon the identity of a victim, simply because it implies that some are more worthy than others. A crime against a gay ROTTP* veteran police officer is, in my view, just as bad as a crime against a heterosexual SRATP* bone-spur Geek Squad person.
*Race Other Than The Perpetrator
*Same Race As The Perpetrator
And in this case, I'm not quite sure how ethnic intimidation applies. Calling someone a Nazi or Gestapo isn't a racial insult per se (I personally am not a Nazi, and neither are you).
The unnamed anti-Latino slur seems more on point, as does the white ——— one. I guess that the Gandhi — slur was directed at someone of Asian heritage.
P.S. It's interesting how the list of items stolen is selective. Sanderson is said to have stolen over $100 worth of stuff, but the only two items named are beef jerky and shoe inserts. Unless he stole a lot of jerky and Dr. Scholl's, I assume that Sanderson took more valuable items, or perhaps items that may not engender sympathy in readers (alcohol, perhaps).
I would provide more info, except that the Appeal article seems to be the only thing out there, except for a Reason article that quotes heavily from it.