Then it shouldnt be a crime to have intent

Disagree. Establishing intent or motivation gives you the people you need to start looking at.

motive means and opportunity!

Already covered by the degree of crime system

and if i accidently run over a baby running across the street. its not the same as if i pull on the curb and run over a baby on purpose

either way the baby is dead

Charging for intent serves no purpose other than to increase sentencing for the same crime

but the crime is different

intent is paramount in determining the degree of justice ( sentencing)

Agreed, but intent shouldnt be a separate crime

Intent is part of the case and proving guilt. It shouldnt be a seperate crime

if a crime is foiled what would they be charged with?

attempted =/ intent is what ur suggesting?

I literally said that you can't charge someone with intent alone (there are acceptions, like conspiracy to commit certain crimes, but, "intent", is used in a different context, there). Separating intent from a crime does not set a dangerous, Fifth-Amendment-circumventing situation where you can be charged with the same crime twice.

Attempt

id argue attempt suggests intent

And attempt is a violation of law

The intent is not the violation of law

If you kill a guy and are charged with killing and hate, what purpose does the hate charge serve?

i see what your saying

hate crime is weird is general

legally speaking

If your not guilty of murder can you still be charged with hate?

cuz a lot of that is subjective

If yes you are in double jeopardy

If no the hate only serves to punish you for the same crime twice, double punishment

taht i dont follow

because u can be exonerated of murder and still be charged with manslaughter

for the same incident

https://youtu.be/D7xD1krG9eI

yea i happen to agree with that guy, its more of a first amendment issue then 5th

And can a white supremacist kill a jew and it not be racially motivated? Of course. The idea of hate crimes is just a way to expand punishment on idealogies that the court doesnt agree with

And how would that white supremacist prove that the killing of the jew was not racially motivated

u cant be asked to prove a negative

its the onus of the prosecution to prove it was

and our legal system is not black and white, the judge and jurors are typically pretty savvy

How would you prove the motive? Point at his tattoo?

Jurors aren't savvy, they are your peers, no smarter than you or i

lots of ways, but im not here to do a hypothetical prosecutors job for them!

I wouldnt want me on a jury

chances are u wouldn't be selected then. and a collective body of 12 people discussing facts is smarter then the average bear