There are no Hate Crimes in America and any facts you hear or see reported to the contrary should simply be ignored as irrelevant to the debate on whether we should have a federal hate crimes law.
Nebraska saw a 3 percent increase in violent crimes reported to authorities in 2008 compared to the previous year, the state Crime Commission said Wednesday. Hate crimes increased by 14 percent. […]
During 2008 there were 98 incidents reported involving crimes motivated by hate. This is a 14% increase from the 86 reported in 2007. Racial bias accounted for 62.2% of the total hate crimes while Sexual bias accounted for 14.3%. Ethnic bias accounted for 12.2% and Religious bias accounted for 11.2%. Of the hate crimes reported, 36.7% involved destruction of property and 33.7% involved simple assault.
Because we all know that hate crimes law being proposed by the Democrats would be used to silence God fearing patriotic right wing Christians, etc. by denying them the 1st Amendment right to free speech. Even if the law that is being proposed doesn’t say that:
SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by, the Constitution.
Well, we all know you can’t trust judges to follow the law. And we all know how zealous federal officials are about investigating and prosecuting these so=called hate crimes already. Nosy bastards:
KANSAS CITY, Mo. – A Kansas City man who was the driving force behind an effort to bring civil rights-era offenders to justice is preparing to meet with Attorney General Eric Holder to jump-start efforts to find criminals because “people are dying and memories are fading.”
Alvin Sykes is widely credited with the idea behind the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act, which authorized up to $135 million over 10 years for investigations of civil rights-era killings and established a permanent cold case unit in the Justice Department.
Why can’t these people just let it go? Don’t we have enough problems in this country without stirring up all these ancient animosities. I mean, no one makes a big deal about race anymore, right?
Should GOP senators treat Sonia Sotomayor as contemptuously as Democrats treated Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito, they should expect Hispanic hostility for a generation. […]
They archly demand that conservatives accord a self-described “affirmative action baby” from Princeton a respect they never for a moment accorded a pro-life conservative mother of five from Idaho State, Sarah Palin.
Well, okay, maybe some folks have a residual hangup on race. And maybe a few aren’t too happy about teh Gay either.
The Seattle Times is reporting that owners of well-known Seattle gay bars have received anonymous notes that threatened to poison customer’s drinks with toxic ricin. Bar managers are maintaining a “business as usual” stance, and don’t expect the threatening letters to greatly impact business — but that doesn’t mean they’re not alerting drinkers to keep a watchful eye on their libations. They have also posted signs warning patrons.
The letter claimed, “I have in my possession approximately 67 grams of ricin with which I will indiscriminately target at least five of your clients.”
But murderous impulses? Perish the thought.
Houston, TX – The dignified notice of services attending the interment of Seaman August Provost appeared in the Houston Chronicle on July 9th: ”SEAMAN AUGUST “B.J.” PROVOST III 29 A courageous soldier, passed away (Thurs) 06-30-09 while serving in the U.S. Navy @ Camp Pendleton in Oceanside, Ca. Visitation (Fri) 07-10-09 from 10am-11am @ Wright Grove Missionary Baptist Church; 9702 Willow Street. Funeral services will begin at 11am. Interment: full military honors will be given in his honor at Houston National Cemetery – (Gate-time 2:30pm). Boyd Funeral Home.” As a gay sailor who had not yet been outed and discharged under the provisions of the 1993 DADT law, August Provost was eligible for “Full Military Honors.” […]
Seaman Provost was brutally murdered, shot multiple times as if by execution. His body was found partially burned in a guard shack, probably the work of a killer intent on covering up his gruesome handiwork. Seaman Provost had confided in his family and to his same-sex lover that he had been harassed for being gay for the better part of a year by someone on base. But he would not report any of this to a superior, lest in the name of the same body of law that now covers him with honor, he be investigated and summarily drummed out of the military for being a homosexual. So, someone finally worked his evil, and Seaman Provost died, vulnerable and unprotected, a gay man like so many tens of thousands of others who vow to protect and defend the very nation that will not do the same for them. May the family, and Seaman Provost’s bereaved lover, to whom the honors of the nation refuse to extend in President Obama’s America, find comfort for their loss.
So Senators, when it comes time to vote on this hate crimes bill, just ignore the reality and vote like FoX News wants. Because the only hate in this country that deserves to be punished is the hatred of liberals for Real Americans like Sarah Palin. Just ask David Letterman.
I’m willing to bet that if there was a series of bombings at Christian Identity churches, the GOP would be falling all over itself to pass hate crimes legislation of their own. It’s easy to be sanguine about other people’s suffering.
These are terrible acts, but do we need separate legislation against “hate crimes.” Is not the existing penal code enough? That’s what I’ve never fully understood. I may be missing something.
Because hate crimes are acts of terrorism. In most cases they are consciously intended to be acts of terrorism. A terrorist murders people or threatens to do so, and we have laws against crimes committed for the intent to terrorize. This is the same thing. A hate crime doesn’t just affect the victim, it is a crime directed at an entire group. Do you really think all those lynchings happened in the South merely because someone wanted to punish a particular black man?
Neither do I.
Yeah, that’s a good point. I just worry about double-jeopardy a little bit. You get charged with murder and a “hate crime” for the same act. It reminds of the police in the Rodney King incident being charged with violating his civil rights. If memory serves (I haven’t googled it), they were first acquitted (unjustly in my view) by an all white jury of whatever assault charges and such. Then, they were charged with the civil rights violation so they could be tried again. What does one make of that? On the one hand, justice was arguably ultimately served. On the other hand, we seemed to violate a precept of justice in doing so.
the key word is “seem”.
You can violate someone’s civil rights by beating them nearly to death with batons.
Let’s use a different example. They put Al Capone away for tax evasion. But let’s say that they had first prosecuted him for murder and lost. Would a subsequent conviction for tax evasion be any less valid?
The reason that it ‘seems’ like double jeopardy in the Rodney King case is that they were tried twice for the same actions. But they were accused of different crimes in each case.
Assault and use of deadly force are crimes. Denial of civil rights is a crime. One was local, one was federal.
Thanks for clearing it all up for me.