That is not really the point. Male homosexually had been criminalised well before Hitler came to power. The National Socialist Government merely extended the scope of the law and increased the penalties, which may not have been so much an expression of National Socialist ideology as of a general trend in Western society to crack down on sexual crimes.Secondly, not only did the Nazis made the penalties under Section 175 much more severe, but they also made prosecution easier by including not only oral and genital play, but mere licentiousness (e.g. provocative speech, the possession of homoerotic pornography, etc.) as grounds for prosecution. As a result, prosecutions went up dramatically and harsher sentences were handed out.
We will have noted how over the past quarter-century prosecution of all sorts of sexual crimes, eg rape, has been made easier and punishment has been made more draconian. For example, here in Australia it is now routine for persons convicted of non-fatal sexual crimes to be receive much longer sentences than persons convicted of murder (eg 50 years for rape, 20 years for wilful murder), which will result in rapists being more inclined to kill their victims.
The scope of the law has also been increased, such that acts previously not considered criminal or only mildly so are now includied within the definition of sexual crimes. Thus, a convicted pedophile permanently listed on a pedophile index might be a person who brutally raped a child, or at the other extreme a person who merely possessed a photograph of a naked child not his own.
Thus, exactly the same sort of toughening of the law has occurred in our own society as occurred in National Socialist Germany, except that homosexual acts per se are no longer included in the list of sexual crimes. And that toughening has occurred in the absence of anything remotely resembling a National Socialist regime; inflamed public opinion has been quite sufficient to bring about the changes.
Once again R M Schultz has missed the point. The agreement providing for convicts with sentences over a certain length to be transferred to concentration camps only came in in 1943, ie 10 years after Hitler came to power. I do not know when the homosexual laws were made more severe, but I dare say it was several years before 1943.This too is disingenuous as the harsher sentences required by the Nazi revision of Section 175 made conviction a de facto sentence to the concentration camps. Also, any SS men found engaging in homoerotic activities were sent directly to concentration camps.
Therefore, the longer sentences for homosexual offences were not introduced to enable the convicted men to be sent to concentration camps; they served their longer sentences in civilian prisons.
I understand that even before the war, the police often re-arrested certain classes of convict after they had completed their sentences and sent them to concentration camps. But that principle of preventive detention is not unknown in our own day; for example, here in Australia State governments can keep a person convicted of a sexual crime in prison indefinitely after he has completed his sentence, if they consider that person to be a danger to society.