dagblog - Comments for "Courage, Republican-Leaning Districts, and the Matthew Shepard Act " http://dagblog.com/social-justice/courage-republican-leaning-districts-and-matthew-shepard-act-643 Comments for "Courage, Republican-Leaning Districts, and the Matthew Shepard Act " en "If the hatred you spew is http://dagblog.com/comment/5380#comment-5380 <a id="comment-5380"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/social-justice/courage-republican-leaning-districts-and-matthew-shepard-act-643">Courage, Republican-Leaning Districts, and the Matthew Shepard Act </a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>"If the hatred you spew is based on what you believe in good faith your religion teaches, you get a pass."  That is just creepy as far as I'm concerned.</p> <p>I love a blog that has lawyers commenting - I get to learn something and be reminded again of the imperfections of law and the tension between ethics, morals and law in a democracy.  While I grant the difficulty in the courts mind-reading criminals, I want the hate crime laws and I want them to cover crimes against gays and transgendered people.  It would be great if we lived in a society that didn't need these kinds of laws; we need our government to protect it's individual members from the injustices of the few.  Sometimes our laws go ahead of us, sometimes they lag behind what we should do.  I am willing to grant a little government mind reading until we catch up.  </p></div></div></div> Tue, 05 May 2009 00:12:54 +0000 Bluesplashy comment 5380 at http://dagblog.com Three things, Orlando: If http://dagblog.com/comment/5378#comment-5378 <a id="comment-5378"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/social-justice/courage-republican-leaning-districts-and-matthew-shepard-act-643">Courage, Republican-Leaning Districts, and the Matthew Shepard Act </a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Three things, Orlando:</p> <p>If you're a Blue Dog, you've got to fly your conservative colors every now and then. Given how easily this bill was going to pass in the House, Donnelly could vote no at little cost from fellow Democrats and at no risk to its passage.</p> <p>The law already takes mental state into account in many ways, such as degree of premeditation. As long as there's an underlying crime that's been proved, I have no problem with increasing penalties if bigotry is the motive.</p> <p>Finally, and a bit OT, I do have some qualms with laws, such as Canada's, that attempt to criminalize "hate speech." Hate speech should be pointed out and condemned whenever it occurs. I just don't think we should be jailing people for words -- unless they specifically advocate a criminal act.</p> <p>About five years ago, Canada added sexual orientation to the list of things you can be prosecuted for inciting hatred over, along with race, color, religion or ethnic origin. Notice anything that's missing? How about gender itself? How about age? No, you can publicly treat little old ladies with all the contempt you can muster, and the law can't touch you. Blog about what bad drivers the Chasidim are -- especially the gay ones -- and you're looking at five-to-10. (I haven't actually looked up what the maximum penalties are.)</p> <p>The worst thing about Canada's hate-speech law is that it has a built-in religious exemption. If the hatred you spew is based on what you believe in good faith your religion teaches, you get a pass. Incredible!</p></div></div></div> Mon, 04 May 2009 23:15:29 +0000 acanuck comment 5378 at http://dagblog.com While motive for committing a http://dagblog.com/comment/5355#comment-5355 <a id="comment-5355"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/5348#comment-5348">There are already penalties</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">While motive for committing a crime may be secondary to the crime itself, it's not exactly secondary to the charges brought. Otherwise, we'd have charges of robbery, burglary, murder, larceny, etc. No degrees, no aggravation, no grand anything. We do have those qualifiers, which tells me that somebody, or a whole bunch of somebodies, gave some careful consideration to what penalties to apply based on what the motivation was. How is the motive of hate based on identifying factors any different?</div></div></div> Mon, 04 May 2009 02:23:43 +0000 Orlando comment 5355 at http://dagblog.com There are already penalties http://dagblog.com/comment/5348#comment-5348 <a id="comment-5348"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/5341#comment-5341">Great post, O. The penalties</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>There are already penalties in place for someone who commits a violent act.  To take into account a person's opinions or motivation for committing a crime is secondary to the crime itself.  Furthermore, it is tantamount the government approving or disapproving of a person's personal opinions - ie establishing the notion of a "thought crime."  It is not illegal to be a bigoted arsehole, it is illegal to kill someone.  While we all agree being a bigoted arsehole is wrong and idiotic, the government is not in the business of regulating stupid people's opinions.  However, should a bigoted moron decide to become violent, then the government fully in it's bounds to hold them accountable.  </p> <p>Hate crimes legislation puts the government in the business of regulating citizens' thoughts.  I agree people who commit violent acts for bigoted reasons are even more heinous than the criminal motivated by money, but I'd rather the government keep their claws off the citizenry's brains.</p> <p> <object height="350" width="425" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"> <param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d0U18cxoxiI" /><embed height="350" width="425" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d0U18cxoxiI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object> </p></div></div></div> Mon, 04 May 2009 00:57:57 +0000 Larry Jankens comment 5348 at http://dagblog.com Yay for Orlando!  Yay for http://dagblog.com/comment/5346#comment-5346 <a id="comment-5346"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/5342#comment-5342">Yay for the Google!</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Yay for Orlando!  Yay for Dagblog! </p></div></div></div> Sun, 03 May 2009 23:07:36 +0000 Bluesplashy comment 5346 at http://dagblog.com And Larry's got #1 for "jesus http://dagblog.com/comment/5345#comment-5345 <a id="comment-5345"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/5342#comment-5342">Yay for the Google!</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>And Larry's got #1 for "jesus license plates." It's a dagblog news sweep.</p></div></div></div> Sun, 03 May 2009 22:07:37 +0000 Michael Wolraich comment 5345 at http://dagblog.com Yay for the Google! http://dagblog.com/comment/5342#comment-5342 <a id="comment-5342"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/5341#comment-5341">Great post, O. The penalties</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Yay for the Google!</p></div></div></div> Sun, 03 May 2009 21:39:28 +0000 Orlando comment 5342 at http://dagblog.com Great post, O. The penalties http://dagblog.com/comment/5341#comment-5341 <a id="comment-5341"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/social-justice/courage-republican-leaning-districts-and-matthew-shepard-act-643">Courage, Republican-Leaning Districts, and the Matthew Shepard Act </a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Great post, O. The penalties for hate crimes are higher, so hate crime laws are not merely symbolic. Furthermore, <a href="http://www.hrc.org/laws_and_elections/5660.htm">the act</a> "<i>provides the DOJ with the ability to aid state and local jurisdictions either by lending assistance or, where local authorities are unwilling or unable to act, by taking the lead in investigations and prosecutions of bias-motivated, violent crimes resulting in death or serious bodily injury.</i>" This is particularly relevant to Indiana, which is one of only <a href="http://www.theheraldbulletin.com/local/local_story_110215725.html">five states</a> without hate crime laws on the books.</p> <p>In addition to classifying crimes movitated by the victim's gender, disability or sexual orientation as hate crimes, the Matthew Shepard Act also eliminates "<i>a serious limitation on federal involvment under existing law which requires that a victim of a bias-motivated crime was attacked because he/she was engaged in a specified federally-protected activity such as voting, serving on a jury or attending school.</i>"</p> <p>In short, Donnelly's <i>rationale</i> is a <i>rationalization</i> or in legal terms, a <i>load of crap</i>.</p> <p>PS Your post is #1 in google news searches on "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&amp;ned=us&amp;hl=en&amp;q=matthew+shepard+act">Matthew Shepard Act</a>."</p></div></div></div> Sun, 03 May 2009 21:30:26 +0000 Michael Wolraich comment 5341 at http://dagblog.com