The entire concept of a hate crime is a fallacy. A white man killing a black man should be treated just as a white man killing a white man or a black man killing a white man. The crime is murder, race is irrelevant. Hate crime legislation is just the opposite. It gives heavier punishments by discriminating in favor of certain minorities and creates a new classification for crime that makes no sense. Hate itself is not a crime. What's a crime is harming the person or property of another. The person's race or gender is irrelevant to it. To make the group-identity of people the basis of crime and punishment completely negates the concept of "blind justice" and "equality under the law".
We already have laws against murder. We already have laws against assault. We already have laws against arson. We already have laws against trespassing. ENFORCE THEM. There is no need to pass new laws with these special interest group classifications. It makes no sense to make new laws making it a special classification of crime based on what minority group the victim belongs to. A crime is a crime, no matter what group the victim belongs to; what group the victim belongs to is not what determines a crime, what determines a crime is what damage to person or property the victim suffered. Simply enforce the common crimal law and treat everyone as individuals, not based on group-identity.
Furthermore, due to the nonsensical views of contemporary liberalism, hate crime laws are starting to be applied to speech. In other words, speech that might offend any kind of minority group is being deemed as a "hate crime"; the crime of "hate speech". But it is very clear what it really is: it is free speech (more specifically, free association as defined/determined by private property rights), regaurdless of wether or not we agree with what the person is saying. It should be very clear what making this a "hate crime" is: censorship. It borders on if not embraces the idea of "thought crimes". And it isn't just that this censorship can be applied to racists and the like, it can easily be construed to censor much of what would be considered casual speech, or anything that a comedian can currently get away with. Such laws are written with such open-ended language that the possibilities for free association violations are endless.