...Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 HR 1913

[Brick]

IMO there should only be one class of "protected persons" under U.S. law and that class is U. S. citizens and legal foreign residents.

Find the complete text through
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c111query.html
Select 111th Congress and search by bill number for HR 1913
Says in part.

Sec. 249. Hate crime acts

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person--

`(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and

`(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if--

`(i) death results from the offense; or

`(ii) the offense includes kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person--

`(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and

`(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if--

`(I) death results from the offense; or

`(II) the offense includes kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

I also question how a perception of hatred can be proven. Where are the thought police? And I am still trying to decide why "the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device," appears to be the means of committing a hate crime, but stabbing, dismembering, vehicular homocide or garroting (just to name a few) is not? Also are there no other crimes that can be committed against one's person other than kidnap, rape & murder?

[Halftrack]

I also question how a perception of hatred can be proven. Where are the thought police?

IMO, those ambiguities are built into those documents for a reason. It gives enforcement authorities a much broader brush with which to paint criminal activity.

Look at Napolitano's recent DHS report, which she now has to defend for its page 2 footnote regarding activity or conduct that comprises right wing extremism. Entire Christian church movements now fall into that category for their view on abortion.

Civil rights apparently will soon exist only for komrades who will toe the party line.

[Guns4Fun]

These hate crimes make no sense to me---a crime is a crime no matter the thought or perception behind it.

Why should a hate crime of murder / assault carry any more weight than just a plain ol murder or assault?

I'm pretty sure that if someone were assaulting or killing someone else that they pretty much hated them---or they wouldn't have assaulted them or killed them in the first place.

It is all crime. These people that come up with these new rules are silly.

[Siobhra]

It should be a crime is a crime but it is not. Hate crimes are more rage enhanced. When some one is attacking someone else to rob them or teach them a lesion they normally just do what they perceive to be 'enough'. What ever that is. However when they go after someone for being black, gay, etc the beating is the purpose of the attack. Enough tends to move to the extreme.
And the current perception is that the police and the courts just don't care. And a lot don't care if the victim is someone they don't like.
Hate Crime Laws send the message that the system does care. But that is what we gun owners have been saying for years. If you send the message that the system does care ALL crime will go down. And if you send the message that YOU care about what others do to you they will look for softer targets.

[Siobhra]

I wonder if we could use the debate for Hate Crimes Laws to make our case? When the Libs cry for more gun laws point out that if enhanced hate crime laws work to stop hate crimes do we really need more gun laws when all we need to do is enhance the sentence for all crimes. Do that for all laws and there will be no need for gun-control.

[Morel42]

I really do hate Hate Crime laws.. All crimes are hate crimes..

Violent criminals should do hard time.. To make room, let out the nonviolent stoner dude who got caught with 10 ounces of weed.. and give him 2,000 hours of community service..

He gets to smoke. We get clean parks.. It's a win win situation.

[thatJeffguy]

Of course, incidents like the Wichita Massacre, or the killings of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom will never quality as "hate crimes", nor will the hundreds of thousands of black-on-white rapes committed each year, but any action undertaken by a white against a black is automatically a hate crime and must be proven otherwise.

Just another step...

[Brick]

I wonder if we could use the debate for Hate Crimes Laws to make our case? When the Libs cry for more gun laws point out that if enhanced hate crime laws work to stop hate crimes do we really need more gun laws when all we need to do is enhance the sentence for all crimes. Do that for all laws and there will be no need for gun-control.

But, here in PA there are already sentencing guidelines and laws in place that provide increased penalties for displaying or just possessing a gun during the commission of certain felony crimes. But go read the Pennsylvania Sentencing Commission report and you'll see they are apparently rarely used.

I'm more inclined to believe that for murder or murder that occurs during the commission of another felony crime or kidnapping, that the death penalty is justified and that the execution of the sentence take place publicly and swiftly following sentencing.

[BSH]

Wouldn't this establish a violation of equal protection, by creating victims who are classified superior to other victims?

[tail pipe todd]

IMO there should only be one class of "protected persons" under U.S. law and that class is U. S. citizens and legal foreign residents.

Find the complete text through
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c111query.html
Select 111th Congress and search by bill number for HR 1913
Says in part.



I also question how a perception of hatred can be proven. Where are the thought police? And I am still trying to decide why "the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device," appears to be the means of committing a hate crime, but stabbing, dismembering, vehicular homocide or garroting (just to name a few) is not? Also are there no other crimes that can be committed against one's person other than kidnap, rape & murder?

There are a boatload of cases, including pa, where on 9/11/2001 some "patriots" attacked, killed, attempted burn down business of Sikh's. Sikh's are non muslims from India, but these guys in there narrow views saw the head dress and thought they were killing, burning, or attacking muslims. Funny thing about hate crimes is that no one understands them until they are the victim. Imagine someone attacking you solely because you are white or male. Does that attacker need to be locked away longer than the criminal that just attacks for profit?