I’m pretty sure I can find some analysis on the issue if i google enough but I’d like to pick the brains of the eminent(cough) personalities visiting this blog.
Okay, Racially aggravated crimes are crimes which are motivated partially or wholly due to race issues. They are treated as more serious than similar crimes which are not racially motivated and criminals are therefore given harsher punishments. This is case law in the UK.
Considering that this is a distinction and an exception to “equality under the law” rule, is there enough justification for the same? Furthermore, why is equality under the law such an important principle? Especially since we live in a society rife with distinctions?
Expanding from here, is it good to have such distinctions in law where the enormous public interest value is taken into account? Should celebrities, for example be given harsher punishments due to their role model status and the extensive media coverage such trials receive?