House set to pass new "hate crime."

The House of Representatives is preping itself to pass another hate crime bill. Unlike the hate crime bill of 1968 which enhanced punishment only for crimes against people engaged in activity protected by the federal government, this one would enhance punishment for crimes against people because of their race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. The big problem with hate crimes is that they criminalize thought by making the motive of a crime, a crime in itself. Don't get me wrong. I am not in favor of hatred. But "hate crimes" in this country consitute seven one-hundreths of one percent of all crimes, most of those are misdemeanors. This is nothing more than a "feel good" law. It is the kind of law Democrats absolutely love because it does nothing at all while making appear that something has been accomplished.
The bill is also another questionable use of the interstate commerce clause of the constitution to increase federal power. The bill states that it has the right to pass such a law because affect interstate commerce and are committed using items that crossed interstate lines. Yea. Right. The fact is that the Supreme Court has already rejected such reasoning. Hopfully President Bush will veto this piece of legislation when it reaches his desk.
Criminal laws should be focused on behavior; not attitudes. This bill only serves to further pull the government further into the dubious role of stigmatizing certain politically-incorrect thoughts and attitudes. In addition, the law raises certain questions. Are all rapes to be considered a hate crime because the victims are all women? It also seems to play down the seriousness of those crimes that do not fall under the category of hate crimes. For example, when in 1989 a group of Blacks and Hispanics raped and beat a white jogger it wasn't considered a hate crime because the same group also beat some Hispanics. In short, they were equal opportunity offenders. So the rape and beating of the jogger wasn't considered quite as serious. Well, tell that to the lady who was raped and beaten to an inch of her life.
The bill also discriminates between groups. It is apparently okay to hate someone who falls within certain groups. For example, the guy who killed those students said he hated wealthy people. But that is okay and not considered a hate crime because affluent Americans are not one of the protected groups. Once more I doubt if they ever will be because if Congress made hatred of the rich a crime, most Democrats would be on very thin ice indeed.

 

Fixed it for you :thumb: .

 

The original was more correct. It has been the Democrates more than the Republicans that have promoted class hatred in their campaigns.

 

dang bengal buddy, can i get a paragraph break up in here?

i agree with everything you said. this is another issue where politicians cater to unsophisticated thought.

 

True. However, most Democrats hate most Republicans. Most Republicans hate most Democrats, and most Independants hate both sides. The vast majority of them are rich. Therefore making hatred of the rich a hate crime, would mean hating politicians would be a crime.

 

He said "class hatred", and even without reading his post, I'm sure he's speaking of the way the dems keep the blacks/low income/hispanics up-in-arms. Too bad most blacks/low income/hispanics are too stupid to realize that the dems are using them as pawns. Oh well, maybe they'll figure it out one day...then again, maybe not.

 

Shall we start with John Edwards "Two Americas" and work from there?

 

Give me a break will you? Just listen to their campaign ads. The Democrats make a big thing about America offering the best opportunities for success, and how anyone can become a millionaire. But God help you if you actually accomplish those dreams. In their campaigns they constantly pit one class against another.