7
   

What's Wrong with the Hate-Crimes Bill

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 Aug, 2009 08:37 am
The Folly of Hate-Crime Laws
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Quote:
The real purpose of hate-crime laws is to reassure politically significant groups -- blacks, Hispanics, Jews, gays, etc. -- that someone cares about them and takes their fears seriously. That's nice. It does not change the fact, though, that what's being punished is thought or speech

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/03/AR2009080302222.html?hpid=opinionsbox1


Damn straight! which is why hate crime law should be found to be unconstitutional. It is also bad policy, it reinforces the victim culture and by pandering to fear we empower fear....always a bad move.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Aug, 2009 02:14 pm

It is only by the most egregious, flagrant violation of constitutional limitations of power
that government can allege that it has jurisdiction over the emotions of any citizen.

The only basis for such legislation is naked usurpation of power,
overthrowing the Constitution that created the usurper, Frankenstein-like.

Its a daylight robbery, in front of everyone.





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Aug, 2009 02:18 pm
@dyslexia,
dyslexia wrote:

aren't "cop killer" crimes hate crimes?
these go back much further than 1968.
Is killing a cop any different than killing anyone else?

This is criminalizing conduct,
or more precisely, adding penalties for a particular infraction.

It does not purport to be concerned with anyone 's emotions.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Aug, 2009 05:59 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
It is only by the most egregious, flagrant violation of constitutional limitations of power
that government can allege that it has jurisdiction over the emotions of any citizen

absolutly true. It alarms me how few people are awake enough to realize how thoroughly individual rights have been trampled by the do-gooders, using fear as their sword to off liberty.

we are absolutely becoming a police state, with those who cross majority sensibilities being the criminals. Being a criminal used to be about depriving others of their rights, now it is about disturbing their peace of mind by believing something that they don't want to believe and don't want to be true. An individual's rights to his own counsel have been abolished, now all who refuse to assimilate to the groupthink are criminals.

our society and our laws are very sick.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Oct, 2009 07:35 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
House Votes to Expand Definition of Hate Crimes Sign in to
Published: October 8, 2009

WASHINGTON " The House voted by a wide margin on Thursday to expand the definition of violent federal hate crimes to cover those committed because of a victim’s gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

Skip to next paragraph Blog
Democrats and advocates hailed the 281-to-146 vote, which put the measure on the brink of becoming law, as the culmination of a long push to curb violent expressions of bias like the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming college student.

“Left unchecked, crimes of this kind threaten to ruin the very fabric of America,” said Representative Susan Davis, Democrat of California.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/us/politics/09hate.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1255051596-rflkwOHY4nGR/gNcWl2qGA

America, moving in reverse at warp speed. Hate crime law was always a bad idea, now as we add hates to the list of hates worthy of retribution by the collective upon undesirables we shall see a chilling effect on free speech.
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Oct, 2009 04:57 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
House Votes to Expand Definition of Hate Crimes Sign in to
Published: October 8, 2009

“Left unchecked, crimes of this kind threaten to ruin the very fabric of America,” said Representative Susan Davis, Democrat of California.



Indeed. One does wonder how the fabric of America handles crimes of equal magnitude that do not fit one the Hate Crimes categories. Double stitching?
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Oct, 2009 05:08 am
@Eorl,
Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Oct, 2009 06:10 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
House Votes to Expand Definition of Hate Crimes Sign in to
Published: October 8, 2009

WASHINGTON " The House voted by a wide margin on Thursday to expand the definition of violent federal hate crimes to cover those committed because of a victim’s gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

Skip to next paragraph Blog
Democrats and advocates hailed the 281-to-146 vote, which put the measure on the brink of becoming law, as the culmination of a long push to curb violent expressions of bias like the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming college student.

“Left unchecked, crimes of this kind threaten to ruin the very fabric of America,” said Representative Susan Davis, Democrat of California.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/us/politics/09hate.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1255051596-rflkwOHY4nGR/gNcWl2qGA

America, moving in reverse at warp speed. Hate crime law was always a bad idea, now as we add hates to the list of hates worthy of retribution by the collective upon undesirables we shall see a chilling effect on free speech.
The congressmen rape the idea of federalism.
Thay overthrow the Constitution that constitutes the government that rapes that Constitution.
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Oct, 2009 06:58 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Thay overthrow the Constitution that constitutes the government that rapes that Constitution.
well sure thay do, that's part of their job description. Explain.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Oct, 2009 12:39 pm
@dyslexia,
dyslexia wrote:

Quote:
Thay overthrow the Constitution that constitutes the government that rapes that Constitution.
well sure thay do, that's part of their job description. Explain.
greed for usurped power
0 Replies
 
JeffreyEqualityNewma
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2012 04:33 pm
An appeals court has tossed out a lawsuit from three Michigan pastors challenging the constitutionality of the Hate Crimes Act.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled that the Christian ministers had not established standing to challenge the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which offers harsher punishments for individuals who commit violent acts on individuals due to their sexual orientation.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/08/appeals_court_hate_crimes_act_doesnt_suppress_anti.php?ref=fpnewsfeed
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/15/2019 at 09:25:23