Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Hate Crimes Bill: Justice for Sale

Hate Crimes Bill: Justice for Sale

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Since I wrote about the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 earlier this week, I've had an opportunity to help write a press release on the issue for the Republican Liberty Caucus, and made it the subject of my latest Poolside Chat video (see below). In the process I spent a lot more time looking over the legislation and found even more to be worried about.

The original complaint remains the same. Hate crimes laws like this destroy the idea that everyone is equal under the law. The first truth held to be self-evident in our Declaration of Independence is that "all men are created equal," but when you start dividing them into groups and giving those groups special legal protections you are making some more equal than others. That's not equality at all. It's the tyranny of privilege in the service of political correctness.

What I discovered on a closer reading of the bill is even more troubling than my original concerns. Included in the legislation are extensive provisions for providing grants from the federal government to local law enforcement specifically for investigating and prosecuting hate crimes. This program is similar to programs from the War on Drugs, which blurred the line between state and federal jurisdiction and provided incentives for gratuitous investigations and prosecutions to keep the federal dollars coming in.

Under the grant program local law enforcement can get grants for up to $100,000 a year and material assistance from federal agencies. In return all they have to do is let the feds, who are normally limited to prosecuting interstate crime and crime on federal property, come into their jurisdictions and play an expanded role in pursuing hate crimes. Of course, if they want that federal money to keep coming they need to find and prosecute hate crimes. This leaves law enforcement actively looking for crimes which they can define as hate crimes to justify the federal grant money they are receiving.

When there's a profit motive you can guarantee that investigators are going to find hate crimes everywhere and prosecutors are going to pursue convictions as hard as they can. There won't actually be any more hate-motivated crimes than there were before, but there will certainly be more people spending extra time in jail because it was profitable to add a hate crimes charge to the case against them.

The situation is reminiscent of the Fugitive Slave Law which was in place before the Civil War, where judges were paid $5 if they ruled that the accused was a free man, but $10 if they ruled that he was an escaped slave. Not surprisingly a lot of free blacks were forced into slavery under this law in a gross miscarriage of justice which helped to push the nation into civil war.

This hate crimes bill doesn't just make us unequal under the law and criminalize thought, it also puts justice up for sale, using federal money to finance a boom in the hate crime industry.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “When there’s a profit motive you can guarantee that investigators are going to find hate crimes everywhere and prosecutors are going to pursue convictions as hard as they can. There won’t actually be any more hate-motivated crimes than there were before, but there will certainly be more people spending extra time in jail because it was profitable to add a hate crimes charge to the case against them.”

    Good point, Dave. I just wish you were consistent in application of this thinking. For example, this ought to have been one paramount objection with respect to the issue of the privatization of the prison industry. I don’t recall, however, your opposition to the idea – or not at least on these grounds.

    What I’m saying, in effect, is that you would be far more convincing if you were to apply certain rules of thumb – like the one in question – in an evenhanded way and regardless of the ideological divide.

    I’m not saying you’re doing this deliberately; hence the suggestion.

    Roger

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Another point, Dave, since we’re on the subject:

    “Hate crimes laws like this destroy the idea that everyone is equal under the law.”

    I find this statement somewhat problematic, if not obfuscating. My understanding of “equality under the law” has to do with equal protection for any two citizens – everything else being equal (e.g., both the rich man and the poor man commit the same offense and get equal representation). But your notion of “equal under the law” appears to stretch the concept beyond what may well be its “natural boundaries.”

    Any comments?

    Roger

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Roger, I actually ran for office against a woman who is the leading advocate in Texas of prison privatization.

    I have no objection to the basic idea of privatizing prisons, but when there is money to be made in the process by law enforcement and by legislators the system becomes corrupt very quickly.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, but the situation isn’t that different between the two cases, for there is a profit motive and great potential for collusion between public and private interests. And we both know that there have been abuses, not to mention a motivation on the part of the political machinery to push for tougher crime bills and longer mandatory sentences. So the very idea may be somewhat suspect, in spite of all the pragmatic arguments to the contrary in terms of saving the buck.

    Roger

  • Doug Hunter

    Roger, I think you have some good points in regards to private prisons. They will find a way to keep them full for profit’s sake.

    Nalle, This is a great strategy by the leftists. It will pander to it’s current voters then, when they pay people to manufacture hate crimes where none existed before, they can claim that hate crimes have skyrocketed since Obama took office. It’s part of the hate based divide and conquer strategy of the left. The more hate and distrust based on race, religion, class, sex, orientation, etc. the better the leftists do.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Thanks, Doug. That’s the first acknowledgment to the effect I’ve heard yet from a conservative.

    BTW, you might give a quick glance at my general argument against privatization, a BC piece “Politics and Ethics: Moral Foundations of a Just State.”

    (I would have given you the link, but it’s rather difficult given this site is still far from being fully operational.)

  • Doug Hunter

    Roger, I don’t consider myself very conservative, especially with my very libertarian social views. My primary values are freedom and liberty followed by fairness. Those are very difficult and abstract concepts to defend hence the reason neither party represents them well. They are difficult because inherent in freedom and liberty is the concept of making the ‘wrong’ use of it. Freedom to do the only the right things isn’t really freedom at all.

    I will check out the piece soon.

  • Clavos

    There’s nothing wrong with the link coding, Roger, I’ve put several into comments the last few days; the most recent was within the past hour.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Doug, I just used the first word that came to mind; I hate labels myself because they’re so misleading and unfair; but I had to refer to a class of people. So I hope you do understand.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Could you tell me on what thread, Clavos. (I see that many features are getting corrected, like the url and name not disappearing as they used to.)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    BTW, Doug, I’m in total agreement with you on #7.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    To add: the problems and most of disagreement has to do with applications – not the general principles, I should hope.

    I’m excluding of course all ideologues and unclear thinkers.

  • dee

    This is the most effed up logic I have ever read. In theory, yes everyone is created equal under the law, unfortunately for gay people, black people, etc. you have to count on men and women to uphold these laws. That’s where the problem starts. There would be no need for a law like this, and all the extra crap included in it, if people wouldn’t act on their own beliefs and think they can decide what is right and wrong. Once people start following the constitution, and not their own beliefs, then there would be no need for a law like this.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Welcome to this site, Dee. And follow it more closely if you want to see more of the same.

    Your fresh voice is welcome.

    Roger

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    It will pander to it’s current voters then, when they pay people to manufacture hate crimes where none existed before, they can claim that hate crimes have skyrocketed since Obama took office.

    I think this is a very real, very serious concern. I wouldn’t swear that this was the intent behind the way this bill was set up, but I think it is very likely to be the result which it produces.

    BTW, everyone DIGG this article using the link at the top. We’re trying to see if we can increase the awareness of some of our BC politics articles using DIGG.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    This is the most effed up logic I have ever read. In theory, yes everyone is created equal under the law, unfortunately for gay people, black people, etc. you have to count on men and women to uphold these laws. That’s where the problem starts.

    But if people aren’t upholding the existing laws, why would you expect them to uphold this law any more successfully. Racists and bigots in law enforcement will resent the hate crime law and probably be more likely to just let hate criminals off in order to avoid legitimizing the law at all.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dave,

    I’m really having a problem with your last comment, and I mean it respectfully.

    You speak first of “people not upholding the existing laws.” And then, in the next sentence, you refer to “the racists and bigots in law enforcement.”

    Could you please clarify. Are you suggesting now that the judges are racists and bigots, or you speak of the juries? Either way, this would suggest a serious problem, far more serious than anything discussed thus far.

    Roger

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Roger, I was just working from Dee’s premise. She said that the laws on the books weren’t being enforced equally on a racial basis. That implies that there is a racial bias in law enforcement and the justice system. And sure, same for the juries.

    That’s her idea, not mine. My answer to the issue is quite different. The reason why more blacks are in jail is social and cultural, not a product of bigotry for the most part. As the DC school voucher program (which Obama is going to kill) demonstrates, if you get the black youth out of the ghetto and away from that culture, they don’t get involved in crime and they succeed and prosper like anyone else.

    Dave

  • zingzing

    dave, if you don’t want to look like some awful, privileged republican, espousing ideas about how the white man is constantly put upon, for heaven’s sake, DON’T call it your “poolside chat.” it’s fuckin’ hi-larious, really. poor man. i’m not saying you ARE a racist, but you could read between the lines and find that. you could also find the middle aged man with nothing better to do than laze about the pool and think about his conspiracy theories.

    calling the legal system “equal” is also a fucking joke, and i think you know that. but… i think if murder/assault is based on hateful (racial, sexual-identity based…) motives, it should incur extra punishment. that said, it should work both ways. if a white man beats up a black man just because he’s black, a black man who beats up a white man just because he’s white should get the same punishment.

    if this bill starts listing off groups who get special attention, then i think that’s a bad thing. but it doesn’t. everyone is still equal under the law. if you’re worried that it will target white people, i guess you admit that there is a racial bias in our law system. and i guess you only get worried about it when this bias could affect you. which is troubling.

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    How many ways are planning to publish the same article?

  • Baronius

    Zing, all murder/assault is based on hateful motives.

  • zingzing

    yes, baronius, that’s why i qualified the term with “racial, sexual, etc.” so as to point out that the term “hateful” coincides with the use of the word “hate” in “hate crimes.” and that’s why i put those qualifiers directly after the word “hateful,” hoping that no one would get confused and make the dumbass comment you just made.

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    Is picking on Dave’s video a hate crime?

  • Clavos

    Is picking on Dave’s video a hate crime?

    Only if you’re not a straight WASP.

  • zingzing

    but, how does the fact that i hate america play into this question?

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    Now wait a minute Zing, I thought you hated women and it was Ruvy’s turn to hate America?

    I guess that’s what I get for missing staff meetings…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Who accused you of that? Can’t see the comment.

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    Roger! I’d think it was obvious-even to you-if you disagree with Dave, it follows that you hate America.

  • zingzing

    oh yeah… women… ok, america’s alright compared to them bitches. yuck! god, i can’t get the taste out of my mouth. gonna gargle with a little baby’s blood here… hold on… ok. that’s better. now what? oh yeah… women… gah! there’s that taste again. every damn time i put one in my mouth it’s just… feh. how i hate them.
    but i love them…

    roger, no one accused me of hating america, at least on this thread. it was a joke. all dems hate america, don’t you know that? ask a republican. they can see into the hearts of all men with stunning clarity. my heart, they tell me, is black.

    anyway, i picked on dave’s video. jet asked if it was a hate crime to hate on dave’s video. clavos said what he said and i said what i said. dave’s an american. and i, according to republicans, hate americans. (kind of like ruvy.) therefore, if i pick on dave’s video because it’s american… it’s convoluted and it didn’t really work out. but it’s there if you look hard enough. still not very funny though.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “all dems hate america, don’t you know that? ask a republican. they can see into the hearts of all men with stunning clarity. my heart, they tell me, is black.”

    That’s for sure. It’s their number one premise. That’s one reason, BTW, why all discussion is futile. We’re just jerking each other off, without ever cuming.

    Piss-poor sex, to say the least.

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    I… uh… no, never mind

  • Baronius

    In that case, Zing, your comment makes less sense. You say that crimes commited with “hateful (racial, sexual-identity based…) motives” should be punished more, but you give no reason why.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I sense a feeling of frustration.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Jet,

    We still need the “Fresh Comments” section streamlined to reflect only the Politics, or whatever other section you’re perusing.

    Have you raised this with our esteemed editors?

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    The editors are a little cranky right now, but yes, it’s been brought up several times.

    It’d sure’s hell make life easier for everyone. I’m more interested in getting the e-mail notifications for posted comments on older articles reactivated.

    SOME NEW VISITOR MIGHT THINK I’M IGNORING HIM AFTER HE ASKED A SERIOUS QUESTION ON MY DIABETES ARTICLE BECAUSE I DIDN’T KNOW IT’D BEEN POSTED

    I know calm
    calm

    Ahhhhhhhhhuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmm

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Good point. You said there’s a way of getting around that by subscribing to RSS feeds. Would that work?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Anyways, I feel greatly relieved for having thrown extra baggage off my shoulders. It’s been draining me with no sight of resolution. It’s done!

  • zingzing

    baronius, that’s what the argument here is, isn’t it? (but how does my comment make less sense now?)

    hate crimes do more than just affect the victim. they are designed to scare members of the victim’s social group. like the guy who was killed in a nightclub for being gay… the intended message was that “gays aren’t welcome here.”

    say a white man (like you, but not you,) was killed in a nightclub in a black neighborhood, just for being white: white people shouldn’t come here. or say a black man looked at your sister and, because he’s black, you kill him: black men shouldn’t look at my sister.

    hate crimes also tend to cause riots and destruction, especially when they aren’t properly handled.

    this legislation needs to be carefully worded, so as always to punish the action, not necessarily thought, but when the action has intended consequences far beyond the scope of normal murder, that needs to be taken into account. (that kind of thing is also very hard to prove, and that’s how it ought to be.)

    also, those who commit hate crimes should also be forced to wander around like pedophiles, telling everyone in the neighborhood they might kill you if you’re the wrong color.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Very good reasoning, zing. I like especially your analogy to pedophiles. I suppose there’s no objection here from the conservative community, because Megan law reinforces the Christian values. But why should they object to similar such treatment when the crime is against gays or people of color. You tell me!

    And Ruvy accused you of being deficient in legal reasoning.

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    “But why should they object to similar such treatment when the crime is against gays or people of color.”

    Roger, you’ve asked and answered your own question-kudos to the maximum in efficiency

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, I’m doing my best, Jet, to try to impart some light on the uneducated and the ignorant. (Reminds me of Samuel Jackson’s like in Pulp Fiction – I should use it more often to strike at the wicked, with the equalizer! And don’t think I’m not tempted to be the shepherd!)

    Anyways, I’m running out of resources, but at times, the inspirations strikes.

    Thanks.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Should be “line.”

  • Clavos

    also, those who commit hate crimes should also be forced to wander around like pedophiles…

    In Miami, we don’t let ‘em wander, we make them all live under a bridge — waterfront living at its best.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Is is anywhere to where you’re berthed?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Like a bunch of nomads – the wondering Jew syndrome. Ruvy should be ecstatic.

  • Clavos

    Is is anywhere to where you’re berthed?

    No, I’m allowed to live with the decent people — I’m offensive, but not sexually, just in my politics and my manner.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I was just kidding, Clav! I looked at the link you provided. Too bad there aren’t any pictures.

  • Clavos
  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Thanks.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Shoot, Clavos. Compared to the Philippines, it’s Ritz-Carlton. And obviously they’re not starving because the four-legged criters are still around.

  • Clavos

    They’re being treated better than they deserve, IMO…

  • zingzing

    well, that’s nice, clavos. they kind of do the same thing by sticking all the racists in texas… oh, no they don’t. damn it. texas: the hate crime penal colony. it’s a dream.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Still a damn shame. With all the money in the stimulus package, one would think they could allocate a shelter to house mere 50 some people.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Can you imagine, zing, being locked up with people of a like mind? A convict’s dream.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Perhaps we should set up a reservation. Give them a fucking state for all I care. Oklahoma would be fine with with. Then they could finish one another off.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    How many ways are planning to publish the same article?

    Four?

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    dave, if you don’t want to look like some awful, privileged republican, espousing ideas about how the white man is constantly put upon, for heaven’s sake, DON’T call it your “poolside chat.” it’s fuckin’ hi-larious, really. poor man.

    Zing. I live in Texas. Even poor people have pools, either above ground behind their trailer, or in their apartment complex.

    i’m not saying you ARE a racist, but you could read between the lines and find that. you could also find the middle aged man with nothing better to do than laze about the pool and think about his conspiracy theories.

    Conspiracy theories? What conspiracy theory would that be? The concerns in this article are pretty far from far fetched or speculative.

    calling the legal system “equal” is also a fucking joke, and i think you know that. but… i think if murder/assault is based on hateful (racial, sexual-identity based…) motives, it should incur extra punishment. that said, it should work both ways. if a white man beats up a black man just because he’s black, a black man who beats up a white man just because he’s white should get the same punishment.

    Why? Explain your reasoning. Is the dead guy any deader because the person who killed him was of anothe race?

    if this bill starts listing off groups who get special attention, then i think that’s a bad thing. but it doesn’t. everyone is still equal under the law. if you’re worried that it will target white people, i guess you admit that there is a racial bias in our law system. and i guess you only get worried about it when this bias could affect you. which is troubling.

    I don’t give a rat’s ass who it targets for special privileges or for special punishment. I just want people treated the same.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “the hate crime penal colony”

    The entire state of Texas qualifies, don’t you think, zing?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    zing,

    I’d bring up the pedophile argument (or any crime against humanity). Why aren’t pedophiles treated as equal once they paid their dues to society?

    This should constitute a violation, then, of “the equal treatment under the law” principle.

  • Clavos

    well, that’s nice, clavos.

    They are convicted sexual predators, zing.

    Scum. Animals.

    But, maybe some “haters” will come along and lob a Molotov into their little “community.”

    I’d love to sit on that jury…

  • Clavos

    With all the money in the stimulus package, one would think they could allocate a shelter to house mere 50 some people.

    Money (or the lack thereof) isn’t the reason they’re there, Roger. It’s because the areas ruled (by law)off limits to them are so large (the areas are centered around where kids congregate, such as schools, plus a large radius around the school, etc.), that they overlap, leaving only the middle of Biscayne Bay (which is where the bridge is, in the middle of a causeway crossing the bay) as an area where they are allowed to live by law.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, Clavos. But in that case, I’d say that hatred is blind as regards who are the victims. Women and minorities, in that vein, are somewhat like children and defenseless – though I’m aware that I’m stretching the analogy.

  • Clavos

    Sorry, Roger, I have no idea what you mean in #62.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But how in that case can you control their movement? They surely have a freedom of movement.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, crime against minorities and/or women may be looked at with the same lens as against the children – regardless of the differences in kind or degree.

  • Clavos

    They surely have a freedom of movement.

    They’re all wearing ankle GPSs, but yes, during the day, they can go to work (some of them, maybe most, have jobs), go grocery shopping, etc. They just can’t live within X number of feet of a school, playground, park, etc., and they are subject to a (I believe) 10 PM curfew and must be back under the bridge by then. The police and their POs regularly come by and check on them.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m done for today. I’ll take your response tomorrow. Perhaps I express myself more clearly in #39.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I’d love to sit on that jury…

    Think you just disqualified yourself, Clav…

  • Ruvy

    I see that none of you decided to actually discuss Dave’s article, except Dee way up at comment 3 or so.

    1. Jet, take a lesson from Dave in how he milks a subject to death. It’s a great writer’s trick.

    2. No matter how you look at this, “hate crimes” legislation is a bad idea. This is because some groups get favored and others don’t, and who gets favored is a matter of politics, not justice.

    3. Stick the profit motive of continued budgeting under the wheels of a corrupt concept, and you ensure its continuance, like Dave’s most appropriate example, the Fugitive Slave Act.

    4. Finally, as I live in a country that has “hate crimes” legislation on the books, the blunt fact of the matter is that they never get enforced equally. Arab Israelis can riot and scream “kill the Jews!” and nothing will happen to them. A Jew who wears a T-shirt saying “no Arabs, no terror” will get locked up, and the judges will throw away the key.

    I realize the so-called liberals (and the drunks) on this site don’t want to read the truth or hear facts, but laws like this only encourages a fascist regime of “liberally oriented” political correctness.

    And the Blessed of Hussein is slowly grinding your freedoms to death while you stand there like fools and argue bullshit.

  • Clavos

    And the Blessed of Hussein is slowly grinding your freedoms to death while you stand there like fools and argue bullshit.

    True, Ruvy, but there’s not a hell of a lot we can lawfully do about it until the next election.

  • Ruvy

    there’s not a hell of a lot we can lawfully do about it until the next election.

    You’re a smart boy, Clavos. You don’t need a law book to carry out the trash to the dumpster. ‘Nuff said….

  • Doug Hunter

    The current sex offender system is a stupid travesty of justice. Too often it lumps statutory rape and indecent exposure (pissing on the side of the road when drunk for example) in with violent rapists and hardcore pedophiles. There is a girl who has been registered for 12 years for giving her classmate a BJ as a sophomore in high school (she turned 17 and he was 2 weeks shy of his 16th birthday) She shouldn’t be forced to live under a bridge in squalor for the rest of her life. Neither should my wife’s parents who started dating at 14 and 17 (that was quite common a generation or two ago) They shouldn’t be outcast or forced to register or kicked out of there house. It lunacy and only a lunatic would support it in it’s current state.

    By all means take the man who fondles the 7 year olds in his elementary school, cut his nuts off and stick him under a bridge for life. But really, let’s use some damn common sense in determining who is a sexual predator and who is a harmless youth out having a good time.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    As Ruvy points out, the core problem here is the enactment of a double standard into law. You can’t have a valid justice system which uses one standard for one group of people and another standard for another group of people. It’s Orwellian, elitist and tyrannical.

    Dave

  • zingzing

    dave: “I live in Texas. Even poor people have pools, either above ground behind their trailer, or in their apartment complex.”

    that’s not quite true. and the point still stands. i mean, do it wherever you please, but don’t blame me for what it looks like.

    “Conspiracy theories? What conspiracy theory would that be? The concerns in this article are pretty far from far fetched or speculative.”

    yes, that’s true. but you’re standing on a slippery slope.

    “Why? Explain your reasoning. Is the dead guy any deader because the person who killed him was of anothe race?”

    you’re totally playing at being this ignorant. hate crimes aren’t just about the victim, it’s about telling other people of that victim’s social group that they should be afraid. that’s what makes a hate crime a hate crime. and it’s not just “another race.” come on. you can’t even act this dumb. it doesn’t make it a hate crime if a white man kills a black man, but if the white man killed the black man BECAUSE he was black, then it’s getting there.

    “I don’t give a rat’s ass who it targets for special privileges or for special punishment. I just want people treated the same.”

    what group does it give special treatment to? or special punishment. they actually go out of the way NOT to identify any group for privilege/punishment, but you must have missed that. it treats everyone the same except people who would hurt someone just because they’re different. i think you’re acting like a paranoid white man. you see “hate crime” and all you see is minority victims and white defendants. but that’s not how it is.

    “As Ruvy points out, the core problem here is the enactment of a double standard into law. You can’t have a valid justice system which uses one standard for one group of people and another standard for another group of people. ”

    NAME ME THESE GROUPS. you’ll notice that everyone is included.

  • zingzing

    ruvy: “You’re a smart boy, Clavos. You don’t need a law book to carry out the trash to the dumpster. ‘Nuff said….”

    aww, he just said someone should kill the president. ain’t that sweet?

    ruvy, just what freedoms is obama destroying? hmm?

    “I realize the so-called liberals (and the drunks) on this site don’t want to read the truth or hear facts, but laws like this only encourages a fascist regime of “liberally oriented” political correctness.”

    ruvy, you obviously couldn’t tell a fascist from a tea kettle.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “Zing, all murder/assault is based on hateful motives.”

    That’s false. Go rent “The Godfather.” Michael Corleone: It’s not personal, Sonny. It’s strictly business.

    “It’d sure’s hell make life easier for everyone.”

    If you were both interested in that, you wouldn’t act the way you do around here.

  • Jordan Richardson

    “all murder/assault is based on hateful motives”

    Or mental illness. Or cultural distinctions. Or what EB referred to. And so on. This debate hinges on the inability of some individuals to see a larger picture and discern that there are, indeed, different types and motives to commit crimes.

    Any society, especially a society with intentions of moralizing to the rest of the world, needs to address those various motives with a comprehensive ideology that serves justice first and sends a message second.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Also, I love that Ruvy continues to subtly and not-so-subtly advocate violent overthrow of the government. Brilliant stuff and hilarious, too, were he not being 100% serious.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Good comment, Jordan, but it won’t make a dent and you know it.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, there are ulterior motives involved – the apparent disagreement over Israel policy,

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Yet, they all keep on saying that motives aren’t important.

  • Doug Hunter

    That’a interesting Jordan. It’s not an inability to see, it’s I don’t care. Take the mental illness thing for instance, it’s arbitrary and unfair how it is applied. It’s set up on completely faulty premises to start with, then applied horribly separating ‘good’ mental illnesses (like ones that make you drown your own children) from ‘bad’ ones (like those that make you rape, murder, and dismember little boys).

    The good mental illnesses get you off, the bad ones you just hope the defense doesn’t have a good enough lawyer. It’s really silly and discriminatory and needs to be dropped.

    I believe in treating people fairly and trying to hold to some objective standards of behavior.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Zing, FDR did fireplace chats. A home witha working fireplace is far more likely to signify wealth in modern Texas than a pool is. But once it opens up in 2 weeks I’ll make sure to do some chats from the YMCA pool. Then maybe I’ll do the pool at the county park down the road. Happy?

    As for the bill singling out groups, have you read it? It gives a list of specific groups it considers protected. It’s not nearly as broad as you seem to think that it is.

    And the point is that we already have laws on the books against making terroristic threats against groups or inciting a riot. The hate criminal can be charged under those if his crime is accompanied by a threat or incitement.

    And you lose any argument that there’s racism in my concern here, because one of the largest groups of prosecutions under state hate crimes laws is for black on white crime, so the racist argument doesn’t work.

    Dave

  • Ruvy

    Also, I love that Ruvy continues to subtly and not-so-subtly advocate violent overthrow of the government. Brilliant stuff and hilarious, too, were he not being 100% serious.

    Hey boys! I’m just talkin’ ’bout takin’ out the trash. Me? Advocate the violet what? Who? I don’t understand such thinking!

    But – unlike most of you, I do know what a fascist is and isn’t. That is something I understand very well, having talked to real fascists, Italian soldiers in Mussolini’s army, as well as having studied the concepts the fascists advocate.

    Now as to blowing Obama away, that’s the last thing I want to see. Obama is the target marker. All the assholes in the Israeli government who bow to Obama are the ones we in Israel need to get rid of, in one way or another – the sooner the better. You blow Obama away, you take away my whole reason for backing the scumbag.

    But you guys need to think of what it says in your declaration of independence – when a government pursues the imposition of tyranny, etc., (I know that isn’t the exact quote – they were awful long-winded in those days) it’s your sacred duty to institute a government that will protect your rights. It’s your declaration of freedom, boys. If you are unwilling to stand by it, then you deserve to lose that freedom.

    As for rights lost, let’s start with something simple – like habeus corpus – and work our way out from there.

  • Clavos

    I believe in treating people fairly and trying to hold to some objective standards of behavior.

    “objective standards of behavior?”

    That is so last century, Doug!

    You’re never gonna get the “progressives” to agree to that foolishness!

    Sheesh.

  • Ruvy

    By the way, Jordan, I thought I’d remind you. The American declaration of independence is the bedrock of the concepts that make America what it is. Its first paragraph is the closest thing Americans have to a civil creed defining what America means.

    When Americans walk away from that creed, they walk away from their own destiny and the freedom the boys in blue fought for when they tried to drive out the British from 1776 to 1781. Having been an American once, this is something I understand very well – better than any Canadian could.

    Remember, you Canadians stayed under British rule.

  • zingzing

    ruvy: “As for rights lost, let’s start with something simple – like habeus corpus – and work our way out from there.”

    say what? bush did that… and obama is shutting gitmo down. so where do you see obama taking away habeas corpus? concrete evidence, please, not just your usual empty platitudes.

    “But – unlike most of you, I do know what a fascist is and isn’t.”

    and how would obama qualify then? i want concrete evidence, again, not ruvy-tudes.

    “Having been an American once, this is something I understand very well – better than any Canadian could.”

    ruvy, with the amount of things you’ve been (burger flipper, homeless, alcoholic, american, jewish, fascist-interviewer, israeli, torah-expert, fish juggler, time traveler, repressed masturbator, father, brother, sister, lover), you could claim you understand the world better than god himself and actually believe it.

  • zingzing

    but everyone else sees how warped, violent, politicized and dangerous your worldview is.

  • Ruvy

    Just got back from a neighbor who is hosting a bunch of families from the northern Twin Cities – places like Coon Rapids and Champlin, for those of you with some familiarity of the state.

    What I found was a remarkable resemblance to my world view in these folks. Reading zing’s remarks reminds me of how varied America truly is.

    Some big pointers I got from these Americans. Kids are being cheated out of a decent education in schools in Minnesota. The economy and the layoffs are the worst anyone remembers. I gotta emphasize, this is not what I told them – this is what they told me.

    What I did tell them was that I viewed Americans far differently from the way I viewed their government, that their government did harmful things here, but that they were a super bunch – and this was something they all understood. Funny how many of you can’t figure that concept out….

  • Ruvy

    Maybe my neighbor should host you all for a barbecue out in the Samarian mountains. You actually might learn something….

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    1 – Jet asked a good question. That’s why I’ve been avoiding posting again on Universal Health Care.

    2 – It was brought up before that any accusation of an ‘attempted’ crime is based on evidence of the INTENT of what was attempted…and so it goes with hate crimes. If there is solid EVIDENCE that the crime was committed not because of a personal conflict but because that person belonged to a certain group, then you have a strong likelihood of a hate crime.

    It’s really not that complicated.

    And as I’ve stated before, I’ve been on the wrong side of this proposed law. If this law had been in place – and if I’d been caught – let’s just say my life would have been much different…but I’ve thought long and hard about what I did (and while there was no lasting physical harm, I will not describe it further), and I should have faced justice and publicly pilloried for what I did.

    And if this law had been in place and I knew it, then perhaps I wouldn’t have committed the crime to begin with.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Ruvy,

    “Reading zing’s remarks reminds me of how varied America truly is.”

    But can’t you see that that’s just the beauty of it all – that we can have the assholes and the saints, and the upright persons and the perverts, the morons and the intellectuals, you name it, walking hand-in-hand and loving it. It’s a miracle and I love every minute of it.

    Only in America!