Something for the left to think about regarding hate crime laws
We read:
"As a libertarian, I find Republican Congresswoman Virginia Foxx’s comment that Matthew Shepard’s death was a ‘a hoax that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills’ as reprehensible as anyone on the left ever could. Although she’s now apologized for the remark, she’s yet another good example of why the Republican Party continues to lose elections.
However, some of the well-meaning arguments used by the left regarding hate crime legislation make no sense to me, either. Most of my progressive friends are fairly bright people — and they are certainly smart enough to know that they probably won’t control Congress and the White House forever. It seems that the progressive movement is promoting a slippery-slope issue which will ultimately be used to target the left side of the aisle should the social conservatives ever take over.....
If you don’t think social conservatives will do everything they can to define those in opposition to their agenda as hate-mongers, think again. They already call folks opposed to the Iraq War or the Patriot Act part of the “Hate America” crowd. With control of Congress and the White House, it would be easy to expand the definition of hate crime to suit their purposes.
Source
The writer above appears to be some sort of Left libertarian who has swallowed the media hokum about the Shepard death. Shepard's cruel death was drug related. His homosexuality was incidental to his murder. See here, for instance.
The writer does however have more insight than most Leftists in that he apparently sees the hate in Leftists and thus realizes that they could be tripping themselves up with this legislation. Thinking ahead is not a Leftist talent, however. The emotion of the moment is all that matters to them. But a GOP President who is less of a gentleman than GWB is not at all hard to imagine. GWB even endorsed Arlen Specter! A less kindly President might find much in Leftists that he could prosecute. Obama seems keen to prosecute former Bush officials so a future GOP president might resort to prosecutions of political opponents too. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
11 comments:
"The writer above appears to be some sort of Left libertarian who has swallowed the media hokum about the Shepard death. Shepard's cruel death was drug related. His homosexuality was incidental to his murder."
You are so full of shit.
Anon 1:18:
Try doing some research. You know, that thing where you look up actual information and facts about a case?
"GWB even endorsed Arlen Specter!"A perfect example of why many of us call the GOP the Stupid Party.
Not stupid, just weak. The Republicans seem to think politics is a game that must be played by some set of gentlemanly rules, which is why they lost everything. The only way to defeat the left is to play by their rules, meaning, take the gloves off! Lie as they do. Manipulate the facts as they do. Make outrageous statments, then simply blame them for making those statements, as they do.
One of the main reasons Juan McLoser lost the election is because he's a weakling who insisted on playing "by the rules". He also failed to understand that he wasn't just running against Obomber, but the leftist media as well.
Anonymous 1:18 -
Got our panties in a twist, do we?
That was a great argument you made for your viewpoint.
Chances are pretty good that Shepard was killed because he was gay, even if his killers were high on drugs at the time. The possibility exists that there were other motivations though. We'll never know for sure.
Prosecuting for a 'hate crime' doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Crime is crime no matter how the perpetrator feels about the victim.
A man was killed. The death was on purpose. Prosecute those that did it.
Seems simple so what difference does it make what twisted reason the murderers had? What difference does it make what the person murdered had as a religion, his skin pigment or even if he was a she. The fact he did things in his bedroom I think immoral also matters not at all. Punish vicious killers without regard to who they chose as a victim.
Simple seeming concept to me but apparently not.
Murder is murder.
Bobby said "was targeted for his homosexuality. Criminals like easy targets, gays are often perceived as easy targets." Does that mean there should be a hate law against murdering women, too?
All this crap has gone too far. A life is a life. You kill somebody you should pay the price. The orientation or color of the person should not be taken into consideration at all.
"Does that mean there should be a hate law against murdering women, too?"
---Actually, there are laws against murdering women aside from the coverage they already get with hate crime legislation.
"All this crap has gone too far. A life is a life. You kill somebody you should pay the price"
---I agree, but the people who oppose enhancing hate crime laws should support repealing them in their entirety instead of favoring one category instead of another.
Bobby, what is the difference between a hate crime, and a non-hate crime?
Can a crime be commited against someone without some degree of hatred? If so, name it.
The "facts" are simple here. So-called hate crime laws were specifically invented to pander to gays and blacks, and we all know it. Why is assaulting a gay or a black any worse than assaulting anyone else?
The only thing that law does is to create a special class of people, who have protections above and beyond those granted to the rest of society. This is clearly unconstitutional, assuming someone cared about the constitution more than votes from gays and blacks.
A less kindly President might find much in Leftists that he could prosecute. Obama seems keen to prosecute former Bush officials so a future GOP president might resort to prosecutions of political opponents too. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.Well said. I, for example, could easily find a lot of treasonous acts perpetrated by Democrats currently in power and seek the death penalty for. There's Harry Reid openly and publicly giving the enemy moral support against U.S. forces in Iraq by publicly claiming "The war is lost." There is Obama aiding and abetting the enemy making predatory war against the United States by releasing top-secret information about exactly how far the military and CIA are willing to go to get information out of enemy operatives so the enemy can train for that. There was Nancy Pelosi's visit and meeting with Assad of Syria, which though it doesn't rise to the level of treason, still violated a law on the books, though I forget the name of the Act right now. A few hanged or guillotined Leftists who are outright traitors to the U.S. may well be what is needed for the country and society to survive. Few if any countries or societies can survive treason.
"Can a crime be commited against someone without some degree of hatred? If so, name it."
---Google "crime of necessity."
Sure, all crimes have a certain degree of hatred, and society makes different laws to treat them accordingly. That's why murder and manslaughter carry different penalties.
"The "facts" are simple here. So-called hate crime laws were specifically invented to pander to gays and blacks, and we all know it."
---It's not that simple, this issue has to do with juries. There was a time that juries weren't sympathetic to black, gay, women and other minority victims, so people proposed hate crime laws. The idea was to enhance crime sentences, so a horrible crime woudn't be given 8 months just because the jury didn't like the victim. Compare it to Jessica's Law, O'reilly knows that sometimes child molestation isn't punished as it should be, so he supported Jessica's Law to ensure that the most heinous child molesters get 20 years in prison instead of 6 months or probation.
"Why is asaulting a gay or a black any worse than assaulting anyone else?"
---It's the difference between killing a woman and killing a prostitute. Society doesn't treat everyone the same, juries are biased, good defense attorneys will paint their clients as pillars of the community while portraying the victims as worthless scum. Hate crime laws where created to help the prosecution avoid that prejudice by reminding the juries that the person killed or beat up was an actual victim.
Or, let's say you kill a bunch of illegal aliens for fun, and you live in a community that hates illegal aliens. What are the chances the jury will convict you?
Here's the story I'm refering to.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/44478372.html
That's why I have mixed feelings about hate crime laws.
Post a Comment