(please scroll down for updates)
Article here makes the case for hate crime laws. It’s not a bad article but it presents a couple of points that re-enforces our case against hate crime laws. The author brings up perhaps the most visible and celebrated hate crime and that is the torture and murder of Matthew Shepard back in 1999. The author argues that the horrific nature of the crime against Matthew Shepard is cause for the enhanced penalties of hate crime legislation. We counter: precisely what is it about being tied to a stake, beaten and eventually murdered that does not warrant being prosecuted to the full extent of the law and then being served the harshest sentencing possible? That Matthew Sheppard was gay matters not one iota – and isn’t that the whole idea of justice?
Secondly, is a point the author fails to mention. Author gives several examples of what he would consider hate crimes including the Holocaust museum shooter and the Fort Dix terror cell. But guess which still-recent but apparently not-so-high-profile assassination he fails to mention? Yep, it’s the terrorist attack on our own soil just one month ago that dare not speak its own name. It’s this unfathomable air-brushing of a murder of a U.S. service member by an Islamic jihadist that bolsters our contention that despite their good-intentions, hate crime laws will be used as political footballs.
But do you know why else you should reject hate crime laws and in particular, the hate crime legislation that is being considered in the Senate right now? Because the Attorney General says it’s un-constitutional, that’s why.
In Testimony for the Senate Judiciary Committee Attorney General Eric Holder was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) if the federal hate bill S. 909 will equally protect all Americans from violent crimes? Holder explicitly says the hate bill will not provide equal protection to most Americans. Holders says that the bill is to protect specific groups that have a history of being targeted by violence because of the color of their skin or sexual orientation.
(italics, ours)
Now, that does not seem to possess the empathy that we were hoping for. What more reason do you need to reject this excrable piece of garbage than for the top law enforcement official of the land to verify that it violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. We appreciate Mr. Holder's forthrightness in this matter.
We’ve been shouting this from the mountaintop for years now and here it is in black and white: Hate crime laws are driven by agenda politics, nothing more, nothing less.
Embrace the hatred of hate crime laws.
(UPDATE #1):Here’s something you might want to consider when you are pondering the true nature of hate crimes
Akron police say they aren't ready to call it a hate crime or a gang initiation.
But to Marty Marshall, his wife and two kids, it seems pretty clear.
It came after a family night of celebrating America and freedom with a fireworks show at Firestone Stadium. Marshall, his family and two friends were gathered outside a friend's home in South Akron.
Out of nowhere, the six were attacked by dozens of teenage boys, who shouted ''This is our world'' and ''This is a black world'' as they confronted Marshall and his family.
The Marshalls, who are white, say the crowd of teens who attacked them and two friends June 27 on Girard Street numbered close to 50. The teens were all black.
Read more, here.
The amount and degree of subjectivity, alone, in deciding who does and who does not get prosecuted under hate crime laws should be enough to drop them like a bad habit.
(UPDATE #2):So, how do you get a little hate-crime legislation passed? You include it as an amendment to a $680 million defense appropriations bill and schedule a vote on it for 1 in the morning, that’s how.
Here’s Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina speaking on the appropriateness of this amendment and its logic.
Posts
7 comments:
If I recall correctly, after correcting for the relative populations, black on white crime is about 8 times more common than the other way around. Opening up the standards for hate crimes might swamp the legal system.
I've given BwD's very valid question: Why is "hate crime" unto its own?, quite a mental wrestling over the last several weeks.
Isn't a guy killed for being X,Y, or Z still just as dead as a guy gunned down for the contents of his wallet?
It gave me pause for thought. Then I came across this in today's UT (and while were at it, thank god for the informative power of the embattled newspapers. Long may they wave)...
Public Safety
16-year-old under arrest in racist graffiti incident
2:00 a.m. July 12, 2009
EAST COUNTY: A 16-year-old was arrested Friday night on suspicion of writing racist graffiti, including a swastika, on a minivan owned by an interracial family in Mount Helix, the Sheriff's Department said.
The graffiti, which was written June 30, also included threats of lynching, said the van's owner, Maria Lee, a Latina married to a black man.
Her husband, Michael Lee, said yesterday that the juvenile who was arrested stopped by their house on June 30 and told them that he thought he knew who was responsible, but didn't give any names. His parents came by Thursday and told the Lees that their son had confessed.
It was the second time the Lees have been a victim of racist vandalism.
Shortly after moving into the neighborhood five years ago, someone carved a pair of swastikas on their home's porch posts. No arrests were made.
“It'll be awhile before we feel a little more comfortable,” Michael Lee said. “Two times in a lifetime is two times more than I need.”
Detective Ed Southcott said the teen appears to have acted alone and has not been connected to other vandalism. –K.D.
Now, on the face of it, what the teen did is no more of a biggie than jut a simple nuisance: He defaced someone's private property, and should be prosecuted for that damage. Maybe pay for a new paint job to that section of the property.
I think that would be BwD's argument.
But the truth is a whole world of damage was done to the victims. Their world was violently changed. I would guess that a fear is now omnipresent and consistently palpable. Fear of what happened, and fear that it could happen again -- just because of who they are.
That's why hate crime legislation exists. To give jokers like our teenager pause for thought, and to raise the stakes if they do go through with it. And more importantly, to give some meager justice to those who are victims of it.
- Mongo
I wasn't aware that the Nazis had it in particularly for Latinas and blacks. So, on the hate-crime scorecard is the kid credited-back some points because the target of his graffiti weren't Jews?
Let's say someone tags my car out front of my house in Spanish and which says some very derogatory things about my whiteness and how I don't belong here, etc., etc.
How do you score that one? As a white male, I'm certainly not on "favored status". Worse yet, my Spanish is suspect so I don't even know what the person wrote... until it was translated for me.
Should I now feel threatened? The defense could argue that since I had no idea what was tagged, I couldn't possibly feel threatened at the time I first saw the grafitti.
But then I produce documentation that proves, yea verily, I do have both some Native American and Jewish blood in me. Game on. And then I present my latina girlfriend, though not being the target of the grafitti, was traumatized on my behalf because she does understand spanish.......
Have fun sorting out the hate-crime legislation scoring manual.
And race ya to the bottom of the slippery slope?
I wasn't aware that the Nazis had it in particularly for Latinas and blacks. So, on the hate-crime scorecard is the kid credited-back some points because the target of his graffiti weren't Jews?
(Ummm, well, there is that concept of "The Master Race", and then there's the rest of us...)
Let's say someone tags my car out front of my house in Spanish and which says some very derogatory things about my whiteness and how I don't belong here, etc., etc.
How do you score that one?
(My guess is that it can be prosecuted on a hate crime basis, as it fits into the legal definition presented on that rock-bottom authority: Wikipedia).
As a white male, I'm certainly not on "favored status".
(Ha ha ha. You're joking, right??? -- says the slave after being locked shoulder to shoulder on a slow sailboat from Africa only to be greeted with a WHHOOOP-ASHHH! and a new welt, and the native American walking along the Trail of Tears, or the dude in the commercial with a tear rolling down his cheek when the litter hits the ground from that 70's TV commercial)
Worse yet, my Spanish is suspect so I don't even know what the person wrote... until it was translated for me.
(Did the Ricky Martin phenomenon do nothing for you??)
Should I now feel threatened? The defense could argue that since I had no idea what was tagged, I couldn't possibly feel threatened at the time I first saw the grafitti.
(You're telling me somebody has deliberately damaged your property and you don't feel threatened? What kind of wreck do you drive??)
But then I produce documentation that proves, yea verily, I do have both some Native American and Jewish blood in me. Game on. And then I present my latina girlfriend, though not being the target of the grafitti, was traumatized on my behalf because she does understand spanish.......
(Well, given that the graffiti said something about your white hiney not belonging, your Jewish and Native American qualities are completely irrelevant to this cause of action -- and get a new car before the hot latina bails on your sorry butt -- so sayeth Judge Mongo)
Have fun sorting out the hate-crime legislation scoring manual.
("Landsnatching". Land. Land. Land... "see snatch". Here it is Hinkley v. Missouri. Hinkley 7, Missouri 0. You see, Taggert, it can be done)
And race ya to the bottom of the slippery slope?
(Ebony and Ivory live together in perfect harmony. Side by side on piano keyboard. Oh lord. Why don't we????
RIP Michael. I love your multicoloredness!! - Paul is Dead, too.)
Hi.
Sincerely,
14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Re: Update #2...
Sneaking your way into legislation is just bush league.
Signed, Guns in National Parks
C'mmon, 'fess up. How long did you stay up thinking up that one?
Post a Comment