[throwaway9143]

They don't need to reasonably define a hate crime. Being scared of a hate crime is enough. And if they're scared, they've been given reason to be scared. And the person giving them a reason to be scared should be watched. If you don't want to be locked up for a hate crime, then don't scare people into thinking you're going to hurt them.

[LightHugger]

In general i see one very easy solution to this problem. People who want everyone else locked up for thoughtcrime can be locked up for threatening the human rights of their peers, and everyone else can move on with their lives. Your own standards getting applied to you is always fair.

[allarm]

> If you don't want to be locked up for a hate crime, then don't scare people into thinking you're going to hurt them.

You know it doesn't work that way, and you know it well. Otherwise you wouldn't have used a throwaway account.

[snehk]

> And if they're scared, they've been given reason to be scared.

We've just had elections in the EU and you won't believe how many people are scared of migrants. Now everyone can just say they're afraid of being victims of a hate crime committed by said migrants. What an amazing idea. /s