People such as Janet Reno said these crimes are different because they affect communities and not just individuals. I do not contend that all crimes are equal. However, this type of legislation punishes ideology and not the action. Just because the person's beliefs are unpopular does not mean they deserve a greater penalty. The existence of hate in a crime can be used for proving a motive, but that's it.
Every individual is part of some community.
I see favoritism in the law because it does not punish crimes against communities such as the rich or poor, political groups, or groups based on physical appearance. Another problem I see is that hate crime legislation places an unreasonable amount of burden on the judicial system, namely the juries, by having them make subjective judgments about the motives of the apprehended. Also, crimes can also be committed through motives of lust, greed, pity, or love. Concerning hate crimes, we are placing an arbitrary value judgment on the motive of a person committing a crime. I would also like to show an implication of hate crime legislation in another area.