


But you still get into trouble. For example - how often are crimes
of violence not "hate crimes"? The question is then who are you
hating? If its another gang member, then its better than if
the person you hate is of a differnt color? 

Also, is it realistic to declare that crimes of hate are worse
than crimes of gross negligence? (Like random drive by shootings
where they can't be hate crimes because the shooter doesn't know
who he is going to hit - he just shoots into the crowd).



First, I heard today that there is a good chance that the U.S. instead
of New York is going after the bombers. This means no capital punishment.

Secondly, double jepardy does help keep the government from going after
you for first one murder, then the next, etc. A "sovereign" has essentially
one chance with a single fact pattern (such as the World Trade Center bombing).
That is why the bombers will in all probability be tried for all the
deaths, as well as the property damages, as well as conspiracy, at once.
Of course, as we discovered in the Rodney King case, there are two
"sovereigns", neither of which can try you twice for the same crime.