by prejudice based on race, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of state, local or tribal hate crime laws.
I wonder how the bright light bulbs who came up with the H.R. 1592 Bill consider a case where a black man offends a black woman (saying “ho”), than she calls him a “good-for-nothing nigger.” Do we have two hate crimes here? Or do they think if some one commits a hate crime, then you can commit a hate crime back and it’s OK? You noticed, in my example, she didn’t simply call him “trash” (so blasé) or another non-victim-group-based insult, she went for the horrible, the denigrating and racially based term “nigger,” that is, a HATE crime word.
Then you have a situation where a homo rubs against someone in a purposeful harassment action, and the victim says, “You homo shit!” The homo will sue for hate crime, evidently.
You have a heterosexual guy call a woman a “bitch,” and she calls him back “a sexist pig,” then we have two hate crimes ( they are both insults based on gender!)
I find the topic of “hate crimes” so amazingly fascinating, nothing, NOTHING could be more Orwellian in an Animal Farm way (and that goes for many countries, the U.S. being one of many foremost examples).