Fight Hate by Ending "Hate Crime" Laws
Published November 30, 2006
Racial hatred was once a serious problem in America, manifested in lynchings and government-enforced segregation. But the pendulum to "combat hate" has now swung into a Kafkaesque Orwellian Zone. Our laws encourage shakedown artists and charlatans, while exacerbating rather than mitigating problems in race relations.
Consider comedian Michael "Kramer" Richards, who shouted the N-word to black hecklers in his audience. Attorney Gloria Allred now represents two hecklers and is threatening to sue Richards for "assaulting" her clients with "verbal missiles." She clames that Richards's remarks were "not free speech, but hate speech."
Then there's firefighter Tennie Pierce, awarded $2.7 million by the Los Angeles City Council because Pierce claimed he was "racially harassed" when colleagues tricked him into eating dog food. It later emerged that Pierce himself often engaged in insensitive firehouse antics, taunting a bound firefighter whose clothes was scrawled with: "Oy Vey, I'm Gay!" While the City Council reconsiders its settlement offer, Pierce's attorney is threatening to sue for a larger amount from a "downtown jury" (code for "black jury") unless the city meets her extortion demands.
Extortion is the right word. Hate crimes can either include legal speech that is illegal due to its context (usually the workplace, though Allred claims that the comedy club made her clients a "captive audience") or an illegal act, such as assault, that's punished more severely because it was motivated by hatred toward certain protected groups (i.e., killing your boss because you hate her is not a "hate crime").
Perhaps because hate crime laws are passed to appease activists, they attract two kinds of extortionists: those seeking money and those with an agenda. Jesse Jackson has made a career out of extorting money by crying "racism" (see Ken Timmerman's Shakedown: Exposing the Real Jesse Jackson). So has Al Sharpton, who in 1998 was found guilty of libel by a New York court for his role in the Tawana Brawley hate crime hoax. Ironically, publicist Howard Rubenstein has advised Richards to seek forgiveness from Jackson and Sharpton for his comedy club meltdown.
Hate crime laws encourage political grandstanding. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger called GOP congressional candidate Tan D. Nguyen's letter to 14,000 Latino voters (in which he wrote: "if your residence in this country is illegal or you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time") a "hate crime."
- Fight Hate by Ending "Hate Crime" Laws
- Published: November 30, 2006
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Politics
- Filed Under: Culture: Celebrity, Culture: Crime and Court, Politics: Law and Rights
- Writer: Thomas M. Sipos
- Thomas M. Sipos's BC Writer page
- Thomas M. Sipos's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments
Good Point! On the other end of the spectrum, should "Love Crimes" be treated more leniently? If I kill my wife, can I get off with a slap on the wrist because I love her? Wow!
Good Point! On the other end of the spectrum, should "Love Crimes" be treated more leniently? If I kill my wife, can I get off with a slap on the wrist because I love her? Wow!
I have seen hate crimes applied to white victims, but not often. WHen I worked pizza delivery in Gainesville one of our drivers was robbed and beaten. When the cops found the kids who did it, the kids told the cops they wanted to "rob a cracker" and were charged with hate crimes, but you are right that it is an unbalanced law.
and get rid of affirmative action while you're at it!
There seems to be some confusion over the term "hate crime". A hate "crime" is exactly that, a criminal offense that is motivated solely by hatred of a class of people. The possibility of civil lawsuits over Michael Richard's bigoted rant has nothing to do with a criminal offense, it would most likely be a personal injury lawsuit.
There are a number of exceptions to Free Speech in the US, one of which is "fighting words", and oftentimes a highly bigoted rant falls into that exception. Even if it didn't fall into that exception, Free Speech only applies to the government, it does not apply to private persons, who are allowed to sue if they are injured, even verbally.
Personally, I think there are too many lawsuits (and way too many lawyers), and I wouldn't award damages if I was on the jury if this case comes to trial, but I do not believe Richard's apology to be sincere, and I think he should be ostracized as much as Mel Gibson. This is supposed to be the 21st Century, where mankind has gotten past his old prejudices, and the US is supposed to be a very tolerant society. When someone wants to act against society's contemporary values (which clearly and overwhelmingly condemn racist speech) then society should reject them.
There are plenty of neo-Nazi groups running around that Gibson and Richards can join, where they can rant and rave about their prejudices as much as they want, and they will not stand out there, they would probably even be idolized -- and isn't that level of admiration what most Hollywood stars want anyway?
If one inquires concerning the divinity schools the Reveeeeeeeeeeeeen Jessee and Al not so sharp Sharpton graduated from if any would that be a hate crime? Heck. I'll just read the National Inquire.
It is amazing! When I lived in Reno, Nevada, I was senselessly beaten by four nigger thugs. They specifically called me 'white mf, etc' as I was kicked on the ground. The prosecutor actually called it a hate crime, since it was racially motivated. Charges were dropped, how ever, because there was a law suit against me, because I was the first one who threw the punch that started the melee. They demanded money from me (on the corner of Montello and Oddie)and said they would take it if I did not give it. Well, since the prosecutor wanted to use the hate crimes bill, the local activists suddenly said that this was not the reason the hate crime bill was passed. Three went to Carson city the state prison and the other ended up testifying against the other three, even though he was the one that demanded money from me. They went to jail for 'attempted extortion' not attempted robbery.
Yeah, this is easy for you to say, because you AREN'T the one who hears sniggers when you walk into a KFC. You DON'T have to face suspicious looks when you are driving a nice car! You aren't pulled over by the police when you are driving down the highway, going the same speed as everyone else on the road.
You expect society to be tolerant of african americans, when the comics we glorify can't be?
There is a book on sale, it's called "Black Like Me." Read it.
You get "sniggers when you walk into a KFC"?
So how much compensation do you want KFC, or its customers, to pay you?
Why would anyone snigger at a black man in KFC? Around here all the KFC employees are black too.
Dave
Longevity of the Roman Empire as nothing to fear from the US. We are just pip squicks in a history time frame. Our best years have come and gone. Im thankful to have participated. America is all about britney asparagus spears and KFC. The terrorists will have a cake walk. All that is needed is the welcome mat. By.
"Why would anyone snigger at a black man in KFC? Around here all the KFC employees are black too"
I suspect the staff might snigger at every customer entering KFC ...
I worked at one in Sydney in the seventies, by the way, when it was still Kentucky Fried. In the commissary, mixing up the coleslaw. It was all done by hand and I've never eaten coleslaw since.








Perhaps the first step should be addressing the proponsity of people to implement frivolous and expensive lawsuits, rather then tossing out hate crime laws on the basis of an handful of questionable cases.
I think it is the nature of any legal system that people will attempt to use it for their own advantage - whether than being political aggrandisment or personal fortune.