Capitol Ideas

By csforensics

March 24, 2006 08:17 AM | Link to this

I believe they should, although in some cases crimes are not related to race, religion, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation.

Most of the times a crimes are committed by the criminal because he/she sees a window of opportunity.

What the general public does not see are the crimes against race, religion, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation in the white-collar settings. In these cases it is very hard to prove because you do not see the violence you see with street crime, and is much harder to pinpoint.

By PAT

March 24, 2006 08:46 AM | Link to this

CRIME IS CRIME - YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR RACE SHOULD NOT MAKE YOU MORE IMPORTANT THAN A STRAIGHT WHITE PERSON THAT GETS MURDERED.

By Todd

March 24, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this

As a minority, I would like to see a harsher penalty for hate crimes. csforensics is correct though that not all crimes against minorities are a hate crime and can be difficult to prove.

However, sometimes you have a blatent outcry of discrimination such as a racial epithat, among other words being used during the crime which would indiciate a hate crime.

People have got to learn that this sort of behavior is unacceptable and subject to a penalty. Especially in the South where so many people think this goes on all the time, it would show that this area is attempting to revive itself as a region where everyone is welcome.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this

It’s not about being “more important”, it’s about the intent of a perpetrator. There is a difference in someone shooting someone as part of a robbery, and someone shooting someone because that person is black or hispanic or gay, or, yes, even white.

Crimes that are committed because of prejudice are generally far more brutal and vicious than crimes committed, as someone earlier said, because of a window of opportunity. They SHOULD be punished more harshly.

Surprise! If someone murders someone because they are white, it would be a hate crime too! However, I challenge you to find a case where a white heterosexual was tied to a fence and pistol-whipped to death, or tied to the rear fender of a truck and dragged through the countryside.

The real truth is that people who oppose hate crimes legislation are probably bigots themselves.

By Dano

March 24, 2006 08:56 AM | Link to this

This law might be well-intended, to punish gay-bashers, racists, religious wackos, et al, but WATCH OUT the first time it’s enforced when a black African-American kills a white European-American! Then the law itself will be called racist!

By Atl Pearl Girl

March 24, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

I agree with many of the other comments that CRIME IS CRIME….they need to be STIFF on it all, and carry through to get these people off the street to make it safer..PERIOD.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this

It’s a sad fact that we have to have laws such as these because many judges( Former Chief Justice Judge Roy Moore in Alabama)refused to penalize to the full extent of the law crimminals who targeted homosexuals, just like some southern judges did for crimes against blacks. If judges judged by the letter of the law and left their personal religious beliefs outside the courtroom, we may not need these types of laws, but we do. Too many judges felt it was okay to beat up a gay man or woman. Moore actually apologized, in front of the mother of a gay man that was killed, to the murdered he sent to prison before he sentenced him. It’s no wonder that whacko idiot is off the bench, the man is insane and not qualified to judge a poop scooping contest, much the less a court of law.

By Ms Tel

March 24, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

Pat, ignorance like that is why we definitely need strickter laws for hate crimes not on for the minority community but also for those who choose to live there lives different from other..sexual orientation, religion etc. Hate crimes can go both ways, but if we know that its a hate crime and treat it the same as another crime it is not fair, because these crimes are completely different.

If you are killing me for my purse or car is one thing, but if you are killing me or hurting me because my skin is black or white and I choose to be with another woman or man is malicious. Most crimes are committed because someone wanted something the couldn’t have I look at hate crimes the same way.

By Jo

March 24, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

Whether we’re talking about rape, murder, robbery, arson, vandalism, etc, a brutal vicious crime IS just that..a brutal, vicious crime & should be treated as such. The end result, after all, is still the same. Yes, it’s often difficult to determine that a specific crime was motivated by bigotry as opposed to just being random/window-of-opportunity. But The 72John brought up an extremely valid point. Certain (yes, homophobe-centric) crimes tend to be more brutal & the defendant should DEFINATELY be shown the same mercy he/she visited upon the victim: NONE!

By Jim Chapman

March 24, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

“Hate Crimes Law” is really misnomer. It should really be Thought Crimes Law. Thought Crimes Law? That’s exactly what it is! “Hate Crimes Law” really presupposes that the minds of humans can be read. People who are in favor of “Hate Crimes Legislation” are in favor of a society as depicted in the book “1984” by George Orwell.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

That’s a rather broad and, frankly, innacurate assumption. For one thing, THOUGHT crimes don’t involve action. Hate crimes, on the other hand, certainly do.

Also, why assume that there isn’t a greater burden of proof for hate crimes to be prosecuted as such? Prosecutors wouldn’t be relying on “mind-reading”, but on evidence.

I stand by my point - if you oppose hate crimes legislation, it’s probably because you yourself harbor hatred towards one or more groups of people. You don’t want to be forced to admit that your bigotry is wrong.

By J. Painter

March 24, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this

Yes, punishment for these crimes should be more severe. However, let’s not forget that a hate crime does not mean when a white person does something hateful to a black person. It works BOTH ways.

jp

By jpc

March 24, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this

Be careful what you wish for Statistics show that black on white crime is by far more prevalent than the other way around. These laws may result in unintended consequences for blacks. I’m sure familes of or white victims will be trying to apply that law too. You can’t have it both ways folks.

By Dan

March 24, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this

It is a ridiculous idea. PC run amok. How can you judge a person based on what you believe is in their mind. The irony is the proposers of such inane ideas, think they are standing up for free thought when in fact they are simply standing up for their thoughts. The law should be applied evenly for everyone period.

By Van

March 24, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

I do not understand the concept of “Hate Crime”.

Did I rob you because you were black or gay or mexican or purple skin? Or did I rob you because you had something I want?

I can see an overeager D.A bringing charges as a hate crime when there was just plain greed involved becuase the victim was blue, green or gray.

Were the Korean merchants during the Rodney King riots guilty of hate crimes? Was the Mayor of New Orleans guilty of hate crimes when he did not order the school buses to aid poor, majority black people to evacuate?

How far can we take this concept? Can a conservative (fill in your choice) be convicted for a hate crime against a liberal (same choice)?

The concept of this kind of law is ripe for abuse and corruption. All crime is equal, but some crime is more equal than others. (apologies to Orwell).

By msteven

March 24, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

Let me put it this way..Read my text. IF you attack ANYONE calling them racial slurs/names while causing body harm. That IS a HATE crime. Therefore your punishment should be SERVERE. It makes NO difference If you are a Black committing a crime towards a White or vice Verse. A MESSAGE should be Clearly Sent that we Will NOT TOLERATE YOUR IGNORANCE in our Society TODAY. In the Past Many Hate crimes against Both races have been committed and the culprits have received slaps on their wrists sending the wrong message that its OK. It is NOT. ThereFore.Depending On the situation(each case is different) You should receive the maximum punishment so it may send a clear message to others thinking of doing the same thing. We are all HUMAN. We are all EQUAL, and We all Bleed RED. Those of you who beg to differ..there are Eight other planets in our Solar System(10 now)Pick ONE, board a rocket..and take your misrerable sorry worthless behind off of our beauiful Planet. We have NO need for such trash! and Your NOT fit to live amongest us.

By Van

March 24, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

msteven, set me straight again.

You said “We are all EQUAL, and We all Bleed RED”, but you want the law applied differently depending on the perceived motive?

Is ther a list of unacceptable “racial slurs/names”? Is calling a french-canadian a froggy qualify? How about using ther term “Indians” to reference the native americans?

By msteven

March 24, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this

JPC Its quite apparent you dont KNOW the HISTORY behind racial crimes in our country. Its quite apparent YOU DO NOT KNOW what the JIM CROW laws were about and what it stood for. Its quite apparent you have no knowledge of the lynchings that occurred unprovoked to blacks begining from the time We were first brought over from the dark continents. Its quite apparent you Fail to realize the death count of Blacks caused by the KKK, its quite apparent that there will never be an Even count of the number of blacks already killed by whites during the Civil Rights..Please Check your local library and History Books. Not to mention an Entire town inhabited by Blacks murdered by Whites..Surely you Jest(joke).Please Spare Us.

By Syed

March 24, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this

Being a minority, an alien worker,I think for hate crimes should have harsher punishment.However, unless the motivation is race, religion or sex, it shouldn’t be called hate crimes, just becaue a black kills a white and vice versa, it doesn’t have to be hate crime unless race was the motive. I am from Bangladesh andwe usually do not complain about racism. In my opinion, if we take text book defintion of Racism, Black people are more reacist than any other racses out there. I will share a little story about my little experience of white racism.

It was a day in 2000, in front of Benihana in downtown. I , with 3 of my friends sitting on a parked car, waiting for a friend to come otu of Benihana. A white, older gentleman was parking his towncar behind us, and he was too close. He hit us, but it was just a scratch. We got out, saw the paint of his front bumber to our rear bumper. But he denied, we told him, we don’t want anything. He thought we were trying to scam him. We showed the paint in our bumper and told him again, we don’t want anything and it’s just a scratch.He kept denying, after like 2-3 mins, an older white lady was walking by, she stoped and said , she ‘saw’ the whole incident from ‘behind’ the towncar and she is ‘positive’ the man didn’t hit our car. I wish I had that kind’o eyes. Standing Far way behind the car, She saw that the ‘front’ bumper of that car didn’t hit our’s. She was well dressed, looked liked posh middle age midtown woman. All these, despite our repeated saying that we DON”T want anything, it’s just a scratch. Then the gentleman and woman just left. We were mad and called the cops and told him the story. We showed him [A black person] the paint,and asked him to give us a report, he said there nothing he can do and he left. That memory still irritates me. I have no grudge over the older gentleman, Towncar is a heavy luxury car, he probably didn’t feel the bump. But that woman, ah. She was way far behind, not possible to have a visual.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this

Van do you have a comprehension problem? Because if you do. I suggest you return to grade school. THis applies to all races not just Black or White. Dont try to put a race stamp on what I said..also..If the shoe fits..you know the rest.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Ok I wont tally back in forth on this subject. What I stated was clear and concise. Makes NO difference to me what your race is. IF you committ a crime towards any race BECAUSE of that race, and I am on the JURY. I will VOTE for the Max. So for all of you (BIGOTS) AND THATS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE IF YOU THINK ITS OK TO ATTACK SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK OR WHITE OR HISPANIC. You need to fry. No exceptions, no buts. Myself Included. and IF I include my self for max punishment. You know I will NOT spare ANYONE else! This includes my family if they are found guilty accorrding to the law.

By Charles

March 24, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Typical political garbage. The politicians want to distract us from what there are doing with things like “Hate Crime” legislation.

A person who is assaulted or killed is just as assaulted or dead regardless of whether or not racial (sexual, religious, national, etc.) bigotry had anything to do with it.

As it stands now, we hear every prosecution of a minority is due to racism, sexism, etc. ad nauseum. This simply gives lawyers another bite at the apple.

By the way, MsTel is an idiot saying there is a difference (presumably to the victim)as to whether or not the victim was robbed or killed for the enrichment of the criminal or the bigotry involved. Having been robbed in the past, I can say it made no difference whatsoever to me what the motive of the thief was. I was still out of my possessions and seriously put into a bad spot because of it.

ALL CRIME IS HATEFUL!

By msteven

March 24, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this

What Knocks me off of my feet is when folks on these blogs twist your words. I clearly stated the law applies to all. Yet a select few, with Reading Comprehension handicaps still want to think I am favoring Blacks or trying to make the law to benefit Blacks whereas I clearly stated it dosent matter. Whatever. The fact remains. You need to Fry, if you hate someone because of the color of their skin, and want to harm them or take their life. YOU are NOT GOD. You did not create life. Therefore You have no right to take it. sorry if you disagree. But then again..I dont care.

By Maggie

March 24, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

I am a minority, and I think the proposal is stupid. A “crime is a crime- is a crime”. Too hard to prove, or even worse, every interracial crime will fall ino this category (?). This is a waist of tax payer’s money

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

March 24, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

You people are not that dumb, so stop acting like you can’t understand what qualifies as a HATE CRIME.

It’s not robbing someone at gun point who is black or white or gay. It’s not breaking into a white person or black persons house to steal a TV or Radio. It’s not a carjacking. It’s not a white person robbing a black owned business or vise versa.

By Denial

March 24, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this

How quickly we forget…it was just 3 or so years ago that a major photo exhibition came to Atlanta called Without Sanctuary, which chronicled Jim Crow and lynching.

There was open debate in this city about even showing it, not because anyone refuted the facts therein,but because it was potentially “inflammatory”…

That exhibition(and book, which you can buy on Amazon) documented racially-motived violence in the US, and particularly the south. Of particular note was the number of victims; at least 5000 people, almost overwhemingly black(some jews and hispanics and even whites), were murdered, raped, castrated, burned alive or beheaded(!) here in the US during the Jim Crow years up to the present(The James Byrd murder was one of the last exhibits).

Those are just the ones that are documented. Some organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center believe the number is at least 3 times that.

No other motives, other than race were determined in the 5000.

We forget that the longest running terrorist organization in the US, the KKK, was formed here in Stone Mountain, GA. We also forget that the one of the founding members was Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, implicated but never tried or convicted in the murder of over 300 Black US Troops at the Battle of Fort Pillow, after they had surrendered…

Yet, we memorialize the Confederacy in that same Stone Mountain, GA. See the connection?

The KKK and sympathizers are responsible for killing more American citizens than the Taliban and Al-Quaeda combined. The KKK, Aryan Nations, and the Order are all quite similar to Al-Quaeda; few card carrying members but tons of sympathizers and believers willing to individually act in support of “the cause”

Yet, how many KKK members have been brought up on charges with the Patriot Act or are currently sitting in cells in Gitmo?

0, Nada, Goose Egg.

Where was/is the “Shock and Awe” campaign to rid us of domestic terrorism? Where is the “fight them over there so that we don’t have to fight them here” campaign against this type of violence?

The inconsistency between what we say as a people and what we do is why we need these laws. The truth is that there’s an undercurrent of supremacy reinforced by ruthless violence in our society, and that it’s been here since the beginning of the US. Until that’s expunged from our consciousness, we need these laws.

Until then, there’s an river running through Atlanta, and it’s not the ‘Hooch, it’s “De-NILE”…

By T-Man

March 24, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

Hate crimes need to be punished harshly. To be free of hate is one reason this country was started. Just look at the messages in this blog, do you really think there is not a problem with acceptance of race, religion, sex or national origin. There is and until America say’s it is going to be harsh with those that make this the reason for their crime. We all won’t be free.

By Denial

March 24, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

Msteven, I’m with you. If you attack another person on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation…you fry. Do it twice, we fry you once, resucitate you, and fry you again…Heck, I bet we could raise a lot of money for charity by auctioning off the right to pull the lever on Ebay.

Doesn’t matter what race I am, you are or anything else. One law, equally applied to all.

Why is that threatening to anyone? Not like Hate Crime laws are going to cost a lot of money when compared to the interest we’re paying on the ever-growing deficit…

By Mike

March 24, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

the72john I had read your posts before and I am astonished at your level of ignorance. This law is RACIST. This law is to broad. In your robbery example that COULD be a hate crime. “He robbed me because he hated me because he is poor and i am have money” Everything COULD be considered a hate crime. Crime is crime no matter why it’s commited. This is just another example of the many ways the minority groups in the country expect special treatment.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

People, this law is to protect those that the courts have failed to protect in the past. Its for the killers of Matthew Sheppard who killed this poor young man for one reason and one reason only, because he was gay. Too many judges look at killing a gay man as no big deal, they take a ” he was asking for it stance” and they give a light as the law allows sentence to the people commiting the crime. Again, case in point: Ex judge Roy Moore in Alabama who continued to search his law books for the least amount of punishment for those who attacked gays because his skewed, demented warped view of the law mixed with his over the top fanatical religious views got in the way of sentencing guide lines. Remember the Ten Commandments fisaco he caused when he thought he was above the law. Its a fact, read the court documents, it’s there in print; many times he stated in court how he hated to give anyone any time for gay bashing, that it was bibical to attack a person that was an abomination in the eyes of the bible. He failed to recongnize the intended separation of church and state. It’s your Moore’s on the bench that caused this law, go after him for your wasted tax dollars. It’s a damn sad fact we must have this law. FYI: I am white and straight, if that matters.

By Mike

March 24, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

Sarah,

Sadly you have missed the point tottally. I agree there is a problem in the courts but yet ANOTHER law is not the answer. Especially not one as broad as this. We need to crack down on poor judges. Every crime is a hate crime.

By Tommy

March 24, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

Sarah- great comments…Mike- you obviously don’t understand what a hate crime is. Your response is a waste of time.

By Mike

March 24, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Tommy,

YOU are a waste of time.. Your telling me a steight white male killing a streight white male should be penalized less then a white man killing a black man???

By al

March 24, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this

One example of an irresponsible judge is not justification. Violent crimes are driven by hate, it is that simple. Attemping to legislate which motives are more(or less) damaging to society will not deter this type of crime. The irrational individuals that commit these crimes are not the type to weigh the difference between a standard homicide sentence and an extra bad, super evil, hate crime homicide sentence.
The crime itself is the evil, not the motive. When we begin to say which motives are worse than others, we will find ourselves in the position of determining which motives are more acceptable.

By hero

March 24, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this

the worst problem is black on black crime. what the KKK didso many years ago can not be changed so why talk about it now. Blacks are killing Blacks. I think if you are black and kill another black you should be put away forever. After a while all blacks would be dead or in jail. then the world would be a better place.

By Law-less

March 24, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

Our legal system is not able to handle a court case as it stands right now. I agree that a very stiff penalty should be given to those who are guilty of a hate crime. Unfortunately our court system can’t convict a person we all know is guilty because the courts can’t follow their own rules and the guilty are walking free. Can you say “Moussaoui”?

By msteven

March 24, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this

Hero..apparently your breath MUST Stink Powerful bad from having your head stuck so far up your Rectum..”the world will be a better place..” without Blacks..Ok. Soap Scum, lets start with exterminating your worthless butt first! Without Bigots like you, the world will truely be a better place..come after me, you feeling froggy Jump!

By msteven

March 24, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

This is for HERO..Its scum like you hero that Keep the KKK alive..also..When was the last time you washed that filthy Sheet that you wear at night? Looks very dingy dirty and brown now after riding all night long..ya damn KKK butthole.

By Todd S.

March 24, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

Hate crimes laws do not apply across the board to perps whose victims are of another race, sexual orientation, etc. Rather, evidence has to be present that indicates the victim suffered damages simply because of their race, sexual orientation, etc.

Hate crimes aren’t just crimes against the injured victim. They are crimes against the entire population of people like the victim. Hate crimes are meant to send a message to those like the victim, thus can be thought of as acts of terrorism. Because of that difference from crimes committed without prejudice against an entire class of people, I believe they should be punished more severely.

By hero

March 24, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

msteven sorry but I’m not the one you need to be worried about. you need to worry about your crackhead “brothers” in the street. They are the ones killing blacks. Just watch the news tonight and my point will be proven. Open your eyes dumba-s.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this

A law such as this may just make some teen-ager with a baseball bat, a few beers and some time on his hands to think twice before they go ‘shopping’ for a customized assault. The idiots may, God…afford me some wishful thinking here, may actually think they may get prosecuted under this law. Sorry Mike, its not easy to remove an activist judge, its next to impossible, its easier to make a new law. Moore is more popular now than ever in Alabama, he will be running for Govonor next term. His popularity is what caused the need for such laws. Make the law the law, make the sentencing guide lines the law when it is clear this crime was commited on the predication of sex, gender or race. If you are lawful, you shouldn’t worry about it. All peope are not straight white males enveloped in your cocoon of security.

By al

March 24, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

msteven - don’t get caught up in a bigot’s fluff, it reflects poorly on you. It would be better to look at the substance of what hero says. Black on black crime is a problem, white on black, black on white, white on white, ad nauseum. All crime is a problem, and legislating which is worse won’t solve any problems.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

Was Hero born after Roe v Wade made abortion legal? Did his mother not realize he could have been a procedure and not a burden to society. I am sure she has had many second thoughts.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this

Mike, the only ignorance I’ve seen is on your part, and people like you.

A robbery is not motivated by hatred. A mugging is not motivated by hatred. Three men beating a man to death for no reason other than that he is gay or black or white IS motivated by hatred.

If anything, the average violent crimes are driven by greed and indifference.

The problem with voters in this country today is that they lack the reasoning ability to discern shades of gray or differing motives.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Hey Denial..(First your name dont fit because one can clearly see, YOU, are not the one in Denial its these other bellie crawlers(Bigots) that Blog. I treat everyone the same, black or white, with respect.and I demand it in return. But I have Zero tolerence for Bigots of any Race. If you are Black and I detect you are racist against Whites, I distance myself from you(family included)If you are White and a Racist, I steer clear of you and watch my back. But I refuse to dislike All Whites because of a few that hate Blacks. All Whites do NOT hate Blacks just as All Blacks do NOT Hate whites..just a few on both sides that need to be exterminated like Bugs..Hey Orkin Man We have a Huge Bug on the Blogger goes by the Name of Hero.(and others)Exterminate him/she/it before I Crush it like the nasty Pest that it is.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

AL The Hero clearly stated if Blacks killed off Blacks the world would be a better Place..that Is an Insult to me as I am a Black Man..do not sugarcoat it..it is what it says.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this

Also Al

If it reflects poorly On me..so be it. But I would NEVer eVER NEVER say the world would be a better place without Whites. that is totally Retarded. What makes the world Unique is the different RAces. If we were all one color..how boring it would be. The Rainbow is beautiful ONly because it is made up of DIFFERENT COLORS, it wouldnt be a Rainbow if it was only ONE color.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

Hero

And Just who do you think Created Crack? dip shyt! who do you think manufactures crack? butthole? I dont do Crack Never have Never will..I guess that makes me a Sellout? and Not Black Enough? Your brain is constipated..I suggest You try Ex-Lax and crawl back into the toliet you crawled out of.

By Tommy

March 24, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Mike- you still don’t get it….why are you here??

By Law-less

March 24, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Hero flys the Confederate flag, and is proud of it. He names himself “hero” on this blog; really now what does that tell you about him? Think, do Real heros walk around calling themselves that? No way! He is a small minded boy and is trying to convince the world he is a Man. We are not buying it.

Hero, go sit down in the time-out corner and think for a few minutes.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this

I would also like to point out that all of the “crimes are crimes” arguments are moot, in light of the fact that we already “rank” crimes by intent, motivation and circumstance. If murder was murder, there wouldn’t be degrees.

Juries are already required to consider the intent of criminals in these kind of trials. Hate crimes legislation merely adds an additional degree to the equation.

By Hero

March 24, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this

THe way I see it blacks should be greatful that the white man brought them over on the boat. At least you arent swinging from trees any more. Why arent blacks killing the biggots instead of each other. Blacks dont even like other blacks so why should I?

By msteven

March 24, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this

Lawless…LOL..you made me smile..You are correct..since when does a Real Hero, calls himself a Hero? All the Heroes I know are Modest(oh oh, I forgot Hero dosent know the meaning of that word either! Rats! Hey hero..have you used that Ex-Lax yet? You are quite backed up BOY.(How does it feel to be called Boy, after all bigots like you are familer with using it on Blacks..heh heh

By msteven

March 24, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this

Hey Hero I will give you something to Swing on..but out of respect for some decent blogs..i will Let you Figure Out what it is.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

Hero I will bet my entire check(and today is payday) that your an odd looking little creature scared of your own shadow. I bet you look just like those two creepy looking outcast white boys that committed the Columbine murders..I noticed “They” killed Mostly Whites..and You are talking about Blacks killing Blacks..what do you call what they did to whites? oh my badd..Rats! I forgot You arent intelligent enought to think on such a differcult question..hmm maybe YOU ought to put down the Crack Pipe. oh MY BADD..You guys (some) are into Meth..silly me, silly me..You are making my day.

By hero

March 24, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

msteven sorry you homo ni—er but I dont swing that way but I know your wife does

By al

March 24, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this

msteven - Banter is the only reason hero posted those comments, and you are quick to oblige. I read what hero wrote, and it is intended to insult. Instead of arguing with mindless comments that are intended to incite an argument, why not discuss the basis of those comments? Hero is an idiot, we all agree on that. No reasonable person agrees with him. I’m just trying to let you know that I agree with you, but I don’t think he should be given the satisfaction of confirming that his a**hole comments have an affect on the sane among us.

Nothing you say can change the hate in some people. This is a fact. Focus on battles you can win. Teach kids that hate is wrong, show other people that taking the high ground is better than sinking to the level of those who attack you.

By Hero

March 24, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this

msteven once again you are being stupid I am talking about what is going on in the world today not years ago monkey boy. I guess I should thank blacks because the KKK isn’t needed any more. Black on Black crime is wonderful

By al

March 24, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this

John, You said we “rank” crimes by intent, motivation, and circumstance. I did not know we ranked based on motivation. I thought the degrees of crimes were based on intent and circumstance. I know motivation is used to strengthen a case, but could you tell me how it is currently being used in the sentencing of crimes, or the determination of degree of crime? I really do not know.

You have an interesting point, but I think intent and circumstance are the meat of the issue, and not the motivation. I could be wrong.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this

Hey Hero..mooot mooot mooot..(I think thats what a monkey says..) How about this suggestion..BLOW ME! mooot moot moot..Swinging out of the room now! You have thouroghly made My day! lastly..I may be a Monkey in you eyes..but its sure a lot of white girls getting with monkeys and having babies..explain that Constipated Brain.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this

I should have been clearer - determining motivation is used in the investigatory phase of a crime. As such, it is already considered and hate crime legislation would not be introducing new wrinkles.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this

And your talking about my wife..I bet your wife/girlfriend is getting a Little Chocolate Mr Goodbar on the side..heh heh..I bet she dosent agree with your comments..As a matter of fact I know some white girls that would Knock Your Monkey butt out for saying that..by the way..there are White Monkeys as well..heh heh..Watch Discovery sometime Ape Boy. Instead of the Simpsons.:-) also..I love it when you talk dirty to me..Say My Name! Say My Name! When no else around You! heH HEH heh..Love me Some Beyonce! dont be mad hero:-(

By DJ

March 24, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this

How are we suppose to decipher between race and nonrace related crimes when the african american community cries “race” everytime a crime is committed? start using the race card when appropriate and maybe someday your concerns will be taken more seriously.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this

Hey Hero..I bet you resemble Tarzen(THE APE MAN) although pure fiction..I have never seen any black men swinging from trees..and yes foolish little boy..Apes come in ALL colors..my God are DUMB! DUHHHHHHHH! Its so sad when your ignorant of the world behind you..Everyone KNOWS Apes are Just as Diverse as Humans in skin tone DUHHHHHHHH..ask Any Grade Schooler. Visit Your Local Zoo..and LEARNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!

By al

March 24, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this

I think that Lady Justice should remain blind, no matter how sincere or altruistic our justifications for wanting to take off the blindfold.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this

Besides Al

I am having the time of my life with this Missing Link called Hero. Just as the poor little confused Thing dosent realize apes come in all tones/colors shapes like humans..I bet he dosent Understand that there are WHITE AFRICANS Just as there are Black Africans..same concept with White Americans and Black Americans..duhhhhhhhhhh..I am having tooo much fun ..ah ha..ahh ha ha ha ha hee haw! Hero you tickle me you know that..you know Want me, But I dont do White Apes..or Black for that matter..too much hair Stinks!

By TonyC

March 24, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this

Hate crimes legislation would basically create “thought police”. People would be punished based on their way of thinking. Any crime is a hate crime…you don’t rob someone because you love them and you don’t rape someone because you love them. All crimes stem from some type of hate. What if someone assaulted another person because they hated communists, or lets take it one step further. What if you hate the color blue, so you kill someone wearing a blue shirt. Where does it end?

By The72John

March 24, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

Hate crimes legislation would basically create “thought police”. People would be punished based on their way of thinking. Any crime is a hate crime…you don’t rob someone because you love them and you don’t rape someone because you love them. All crimes stem from some type of hate. What if someone assaulted another person because they hated communists, or lets take it one step further. What if you hate the color blue, so you kill someone wearing a blue shirt. Where does it end?

Apparently it begins with specious arguments that have already been debunked.

By al

March 24, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this

I don’t think the Senate’s newly passed legislation will have any impact on apes, unless I missed something, or unless someone is attacking apes because of their “race, religion, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation.”

I don’t anticipate a decline in the number of attacks on blacks, whites, homosexual gorrillas, or anything else because of this legislation.

By Jennifer

March 24, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this

A crime is a crime. It’s that easy. It shouldn’t matter what the motivation is when the crime is committed. Do people scream hate crime when poor people are robbed and/or murdered? No.

I think the term hate crime only fuels the fire.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

I think that Lady Justice should remain blind, no matter how sincere or altruistic our justifications for wanting to take off the blindfold.

How does the introduction of hate crimes legislation have a negative impact on the impartiality of the legal system?

By jb

March 24, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this

The only group that can commit a “hate crime” is white males. By calling them “hate crimes” and increasing the punishment for commiting them, you are only reinforcing the old stereotypes. What you are saying is that minorities need extra protection from white males because they are somehow inferior. Laws like these only serve to reinforce to minorities that unless they are given special consideration they will never be able to compete or be considered equal. While laws of these nature appear good on the surface the real effects of them only help to further the idea of minorites as second-class citizens.

By jb

March 24, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this

The only group that can commit a “hate crime” is white males. By calling them “hate crimes” and increasing the punishment for commiting them, you are only reinforcing the old stereotypes. What you are saying is that minorities need extra protection from white males because they are somehow inferior. Laws like these only serve to reinforce to minorities that unless they are given special consideration they will never be able to compete or be considered equal. While laws of these nature appear good on the surface the real effects of them only help to further the idea of minorites as second-class citizens.

By Lmay

March 24, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

RE: The72John’s comment: “I challenge you to find a case where a white heterosexual was tied to a fence and pistol-whipped to death, or tied to the rear fender of a truck and dragged through the countryside.”

Four black men decided to murder the next white person they saw. That unlucky soul was a college student from Boston, whom the men stabbed to death.Asbury Park Press, March 7, 1991.

Indiana. A black man was arrested for killing seven white people with a shotgun. He explained that he murdered his victims due to his “deep-rooted hatred” of white people.Miami Herald, Feb. 2, 1991

Miami, Florida. The leader of a black supremacist sect (i.e., the “Yaweh ben Yaweh cult”) was convicted of the murders of several white people. He ordered his followers to kill any and all “white devils.” They killed at least seven white people, bringing back body parts to their leader.Miami Herald, Jan. 30, 1991

North Carolina. Seven black men kidnapped a white woman, raped her, put her in a tub of bleach, shot her five times, and dumped her body. The murderers said they did this for racial reasons.Destiny, Feb 1994.

As you can see there are crimes of hate against white people as well as other races. However the question was should these crimes be more severe in punishment.

MY opinion is YES….

By al

March 24, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Impartiality is trumped when we begin to sentence based on the race, religion, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation of the individual who has been convicted.

The legislation claims it is worse to commit a crime if you do it based on these protected classes, so if a judge determines that was your motivation, you lose your class protection. This is partiality in the favor of the victim.

It seems justified, but I believe it is still wrong. It is a deep ethical and moral question, and I don’t know that many people think of the implications.

By Jim

March 24, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this

No a crime is a crime. Also that would mean harsher punishment for whites, because to blacks everyone is raciest.

By The72John

March 24, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this

Lmay,

Thanks - I was actually being tongue-in-cheek, obviously I knew there would be examples out there, but you’ve done an excellent job of highlighting the falacy in THIS statement:

The only group that can commit a “hate crime” is white males

Why does everyone argue from false assumptions? Who says that only white males can commit hate crimes? Any crime that is motivated by prejudice is a hate crime, whether it be against whites or blacks or gays or straights or..etc.

By Damu

March 24, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

Msteven, I hope for your sake you’re about 9 years of age or younger, becuase that is what the level of your spelling, grammar, punctuation & sentence structure “skills” (??) indicate. Oh, I apologize! You probably don’t have a clue as to what I’m talking about. Why don’t you have your mama’s latest “baby daddy” and/or welfare social worker explain it to you, Smart Guy???

By Phillip

March 24, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this

I do not think the government should be allowed to determine the punishment for the crime by what they feel is the worth of the victem. The crime should determine the punishment and not any other factors.

By NotAHater

March 24, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

Saying that a crime is a crime is just plan dumb. Why, then, do we punish people more for killing a police officer? Killing a pregnant woman? Molesting a child? Engaging in acts of terrorism?

If a crime is a crime, then a terrorist act should be treated just like any other crime … no more or no less. A “hate crime” is just like a terrorist act. It is intended to intimidate a whole group of people. That is the standard. It seems like since we have enhanced penalties for other crimes, why not hate crimes?

By Baffled

March 24, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

I do not think the government should be allowed to determine the punishment for the crime by what they feel is the worth of the victem. The crime should determine the punishment and not any other factors.

Huh? What does the worth of the victim have to do with this topic?

By John

March 24, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this

Yes, criminals should get stiffer sentences for hate crimes, because it is their motivation that determines their actions.

A man that goes out of his way to satisfy his bigotry by harming someone different from himself, is a bigger criminal than someone that suddenly finds himself in situation where he loses control.

Someone that commits first degree murder receives a much stiffer sentence than someone that is convicted of manslaughter but they both have killed someone. Hate Crime sentencing is really no different.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Hero and others posting hate messages. I assume your gray matter is in your clothes hamper waiting for the laundry and not in your head. Did you realize by clicking on your name you get your e-mail address, ok no big deal you think. Well, for $19.99 at any retail store one can buy software that will give the home address, name and phone number of the person the email address is asigned to. Hero do you really want that to happen? Your email address, being a yahoo account which is mdjenk32@yahoo.com is one of the easiest to locate an address for, yahoo is not secure. You might want to calm down your tone if you don’t want the consequences of such actions as your fowl mouth.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

DAMU

How about this..BLOWWWWWWWWWWWWWW ME! Did I spell that correctly enough for you? Now you and the APE MAN Hero can go mate in the woods. Thats is what I think about your post. I said, What I said. I stand by what I said, and if you dont like it..tie a anchor around your neck, find the nearest body of water about 30ft deep and drown your sorry worthless racist dumb azz( I spelled it so it would go through, If I had put an “s” it would have been deleted out. I could care-less about what your monkey azz think of me. Again, BLOW ME! you know you want to..:-) Have a great weekend ya damn cow!

By msteven

March 24, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this

DAMU Check to see if I spelled this correctly..BLOW ME! and if any of you are thinking about looking me up..I will be waiting with a double barrel shot gun to kiss you with..have a great weekend BiGots!

By al

March 24, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

The worth of the victim does come into play in the judicial system, but it is usually in the civil courts. There are systems that determine the monetary damages based on many factors of the victims life, kind of like actuarial tables.

If a crime against an individual of a protected class is intended to terrorize an entire group of people, then it is terroristic, and should be prosecuted as such. The legislatition is not about intent, however, it is about motivation. There is a difference.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

Lmay, the people you mentioned in your post, the blacks who killed the whites just because they are white deserve the ultimate punishment, this is what this law is all about. The law is not meant for only one race to protect or prosecute, it’s for all races.

By al

March 24, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

Please Mitchell, calm down. You’re not contributing anything. Lou Rawls would be disgusted.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

I only apologize to the decent posts who are not bigots and racist. I do not apologize to those who have racist hate in your hearts. I regard you as less then a bug. As for you Damu, you are no where near my level of intelligence. Please do not flatter yourself. If you want perfect english, spelling and grammar..Then attend a English Class. I can speak, and write excellent whenever I choose to do so. But when I deal with soap scum, why should I use perfect grammar or spelling when your cow azzes wouldnt understand anyway. Go back to grazing in the grass. You are dismissed.

By Damu

March 24, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

Msteven, I HAPPEN to be black, which is precisely the problem I have with you & others like you. You & your type (i.e. ghetto mentality) set our race back 300 years. Instead of emulating that lame, pathetic thug lifestyle, why not try educating yourself? And by the way, I would rather kiss a rattlesnake than indulge in any sort of intimate activity with the likes of you. And, being African-American, I find “Hero” ‘s comments as offensive as you do, but at least I understand WHY they are offensive, Dillweed!

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

Calling something a “hate” crime is lacking in all sense, including the fact that it punishes thought. It is something that politicians come up with to pander to the masses. You can see it has worked for people like “Sarah” and others, who don’t have a clue. There are enough criminal statutes on the books to cover every “hate” crime. Drag someone behind a truck, go to prison. It doesn’t matter why you did it. It is like calling something “hate” speech because you don’t agree with it. If you put a label on it, you can avoid responding with any substance. The clueless masses always amaze.

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

Just when I pointed out “Sarah” as an example of the ignorant people who fall for the “hate” line, I looked forther down and she came up wit this gem — “Hero and others posting hate messages.” That is a great example of my second point. If you call something “hate” speech, it is an excuse to avoid any substantive response. She provides several examples of trailer garbage idiocy in her posts.

By msteven

March 24, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

DAMU

I dont care if you are darker then blue. I didnt address your black azz. so step off ya damn oreo cookie. Like I am going to back down because you are Black. So what? There are several Blacks that I detest. I dont discriminate. I dont speak for all black people this was my own personal post. He the hell you think you are? Its house negroes like you that are lower then spit on a side walk. As a matter of fact I would much rather deal with a white racist then your black two-faced behind. You are ever lower then a white bigot. Atleast I know where they are coming from, But your kind rank even lower then slime.

By Damu

March 24, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

“Attend A English class”? “Write excellent”? I rest my case!

By Baffled

March 24, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

If you call something “hate” speech, it is an excuse to avoid any substantive response. She provides several examples of trailer garbage idiocy in her posts.

I’m just curious to know if anyone else sees the irony in these two sentences.

By Sarah

March 24, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

Blonsky my dear who lives in his/her/its own universe, you’re not part of the huddled masses? Just what has worked for me? Articulate yourself; don’t just type to be stroking keys, make sense of the vowels and verbs. Elaborate. I have often pondered what life would have been like had I attented a public school and a state college; I suppose now I have you as a beacon of light to show me what would have been.

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

Baffled - I suggest you get a dictionary and look up with word “irony.” Then figure out that I can call things for what they are, and explain the reason, without whining about “hate speech.”

By msteven

March 24, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this

Anyway..its been Oh so much fun..dealing with Hero the White Ape and Damu the Moose Faced Chimp..hate to see what your offspring will look like..well..tally Ho! Hope you missing links have a great weekend..I surely will! Hey Damu..the need some house negroes to clean up the born..I sent in your name..The massa is waiting dont be late or you will get another Flogging! Oh by the Way..Uncle Toms Cabin is now OPEN..make sure you sign up..mr or ms Oreo cookie! I am out! pay stops time to go Party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this

After scrolling down and seeing this gem from “Baffled” —

“Huh? What does the worth of the victim have to do with this topic?”

— I am no longer surprised he/she does not know the meaning and application of the word “irony.”

Are you really incapable of understanding the link between the identity of the victim and the punishment?

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this

Another gem from Sarah —

*”Blonsky my dear who lives in his/her/its own universe, you’re not part of the huddled masses? Just what has worked for me? Articulate yourself; don’t just type to be stroking keys, make sense of the vowels and verbs. Elaborate. I have often pondered what life would have been like had I attented a public school and a state college; I suppose now I have you as a beacon of light to show me what would have been.”“

Here is a clue. I provided rather clear points in two posts. Have someone explain them to you, instead of posting more trailer garbage responses. That gem about abortion really shows the level of your responses. What school taught you that comeback?

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this

Another gem from Sarah —

*”Blonsky my dear who lives in his/her/its own universe, you’re not part of the huddled masses? Just what has worked for me? Articulate yourself; don’t just type to be stroking keys, make sense of the vowels and verbs. Elaborate. I have often pondered what life would have been like had I attented a public school and a state college; I suppose now I have you as a beacon of light to show me what would have been.”“

Here is a clue. I provided rather clear points in two posts. Have someone explain them to you, instead of posting more trailer garbage responses. That gem about abortion really shows the level of your responses. What school taught you that comeback?

By Baffled

March 24, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this

Are you really incapable of understanding the link between the identity of the victim and the punishment?

Perhaps you should check a dictionary yourself, or perhaps a thesaurus. Apparently you believe that “identity” and “worth” are synonymous.

The victim is irellevant in this discussion. It is the intent of the perpetrator that determines if hate-crime legislation would come into play.

Imagine, if you are capable, that a man brutally murders another man because he believes that person is gay and has made a pass at him. Even if the person turns out NOT to be gay, that crime is still a hate crime. See?

By Damu

March 24, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this

MSTUPID: Oh, how typical of the ghetto mentality of which I speak. To trash like you, any black person who isn’t lazy & who betters themsleves is a sellout/Uncle Tom/Oreo cookie etc. YOU are a racist & worse than whites because you want to hold your own people back! You can’t possibly have any pride in yourself. And not to worry, I have no intention of looking for you. I stay WAY out of the ghetto. Besides, you’re probably too busy drinking Ripple out of a paper bag & getting teenage girls pregnant. That is, the ones who are desperate enough to go near you.

By Baffled

March 24, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

I provided rather clear points in two posts

Perhaps you made clear points on another blog and are merely confused. All I have seen you post in this blog are unsupported generalizations and ad hominem attacks on others.

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this

Baffled - Thanks for the additional example of the pure ignorance of the people who fall for the “hate crime” line. Are you really so simple that you cannot grasp the fact that the “hate” portion is, in most cases, dependent on the identification/race/sexual preference/gender/whatever of the victim? Is that bit of common sense beyond your grasp. It is not as if this issue is not recognized by both sides of the debate.

Again, great example of the people who fall for it. Great job!

By Baffled

March 24, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this

Blondsky, you might have more credibility if you weren’t just insulting everyone who responds to you.

And obviously, my example is too subtle for you. Yet again, the idea that “worth” and “identity” are not interchangeable, or even tangentially related, escapes you.

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this

Baffled - Again, imagine my surprise that you are unable to read and understand the points made and resort to whining about “attacks.”

By Baffled

March 24, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

Actually, I did respond to your points. You just ignore the parts you don’t understand.

By Blondsky

March 24, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this

Baffled, yet again you show you are such a simple-minded person that you can’t grasp one of the easiest, and most obvious, arguments against the “hate crime” nonsense even though I spelled it out for you. Again, absolute stupidity given my clear response. At least you picked the appropriate screen name.

As for “credibility,” it is not as if I am in doubt about who is more credible.

By Robert

March 24, 2006 05:03 PM | Link to this

If the purpose of the Hate Crime Law is intended for all races, can anyone cite a case that someone other than a white male was charged with a hate crime? Hint: there isn’t any.

By al

March 24, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

Baffled makes a good point. The victim is not the determining factor. It is the motivation of the criminal. Motivation is hard to determine. What motivates a person to commit a crime is not as clear as it may seem.

If someone kills another person, and the judge is convinced their motivation was to kill someone in a protected class, this sentencing would take effect

Intent does not equal motivation. The intent should determine the severity of the punishment. If jealousy motivates you to kill someone, and you do, that does not make the person less dead than if you are motivated by hate for a protected class.

By Craig

March 24, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this

After reading many of the blogs today I am amazed at the pure lack of rational thought displayed by many of people participating here. A murder is a murder, no matter who did it and why. Its still murder and the guilty perpetrator should be punished accordingly. Same as rape, robbery, assault & battery, etc. etc. Even though the thoughts of the criminal may have contributed to his doing the crime, he is punished on the ACTIONS he committed, not the thoughts behind the actions. If a white guy kills a black guy, he should be punished the same as if he killed anyone else. If a black guy kills a black guy, he should be punished the same as if he killed a white guy. While we all may be disgusted with our percieved “hate” behind the committed crime, you can’t have discrimination in sentencing just to make us all feel better. It is still the actions of the criminal that need to be punished.

By MsMuhammad

March 28, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this

Wow, imagine what would be the outcry if this law had been proposed when Black men and women were being hung from trees, castrated, beaten and burned on a daily basis as a matter of sport!!

By justin

March 30, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

yes crime is crime but we are talking about one type of crime besides are you saying that a person who unknowingly breaks a law
should be punished equally with someone who raped/murdered/or commits homocide?

in these cases crime is not crime murder is murder it all depends on the type of crime

why are people such idiots that they think such things?

By Fig

April 18, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

Dano, you seem to have missed the objective of the issue. The idea is not to point a negative finger based on some fabricated scenario. The truth is that a lot of our ideas as Americans are based on prejudicial acceptance, and this needs to hault. The point is that hate crimes are commited each and every day and they affect us all, weather directly or indirectly. What needs to happen, is a consistent deterent to oppose these kinds of behavior.