
Louvon Harris (L) stands with Betty Byrd Boatner (2nd R), both sisters of James Byrd, Jr., as Boatner embraces Judy Shepard, mother of Matthew Shepard during a White House ceremony following the enactment of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Shepard was murdered in Wyoming in 1988 because he was gay. Byrd, an African American man, was dragged behind a pickup truck to his death in Texas the same year.
Saul Loeb-AFP/Getty Images
Matthew Shepard’s death was a tragedy. But I think it’s a shameful political hoax to make him the poster boy for the Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
President Obama signed this into law Wednesday:
This year, with enlarged majorities in Congress, Democrats attached the hate crimes law to a $681 billion defense spending bill this month over GOP objections. House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said the approach put “radical social policy” on the “back of our soldiers.”
The legislation extends provisions first passed in 1968 that make it a federal crime to target individuals because of their race, religion or national origin. Under the law, judges can impose harsher penalties on crimes that are motivated by such animus, and the Justice Department can help local police departments investigate alleged hate crimes.
I truly do not understand the redundancy of hate crime laws- especially at the federal level. Why punish the thoughts behind crimes rather than just the action of the crime itself?
But, it’s one of those things that make liberals feel good about themselves; that they are fighting the good fight. President Obama’s remarks:
Now, speaking of that, there is one more long-awaited change contained within this legislation that I’ll be talking about a little more later today. After more than a decade of opposition and delay, we’ve passed inclusive hate crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray, or who they are. (Applause.)
I promised Judy Shepard, when she saw me in the Oval Office, that this day would come, and I’m glad that she and her husband Dennis could join us for this event. I’m also honored to have the family of the late Senator Ted Kennedy, who fought so hard for this legislation. And Vicki and Patrick, Kara, everybody who’s here, I just want you all to know how proud we are of the work that Ted did to help this day — make this day possible. So — and thank you for joining us here today. (Applause.)
So, with that, I’m going to sign this piece of legislation. Thank you all for doing a great job. All right.
I guess the Nobel Peace Laureate has now officially accomplished something this year. Still amounts to a big nothing for me, though. I mean….criminalizing what’s already been criminalized? C’mon….get real.
Incidentally, also attached to the bill was a revival of military trials for Guantanamo detainees, expanding their legal rights, but not to the extent that the ACLU would have liked.
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
When are we gonna’ pass a “Love Crime” bill. Naw, your honor, I didn’t kill them cause I hated them. I killed them cause I loved ’em.
Do the math. Hate Crime = Thought Crime.
Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian
Wonder why obama didn’t have thier parents up there with him.
I also agree that the crime should be punished – the thought behind a crime is primarily irrelevant. I guess now that an added dimension to a trial can be added, a lawyer can get someone off, because he might be able to create reasonable doubt that a crime was indeed a hate crime. What if one has to be charged with one or the other? Is it a crime or a hate crime, and if charged with a hate crime, what if one proves it wasn’t hate…maybe just indifference?Is this going to be one more way to let a bad guy out on the streets.
Why is no one raising the issue of equal protection under the law in regard to “Hate Crime” legislation?
If someone commits a “hate crime” aren’t they being considered more guilty under the law than a person who isn’t committing a crime of “hate”?
If someone is a victim of a “hate crime” aren’t they being given greater protection under the law than a person who is the victim of a garden variety crime?
A convincing argument can be made that all crimes have an element of hate.
It appears to me that this type of legislation should be considered unconstitutional on its’ face. Does anyone know if any challenges to these laws have reached the Supremes?
**Davey*
Nice 1984 reference just finished reading it for like the 5th time. As socialisim expands it’s sense of right and wrong to the masses we will see more focus on thoughts and intents rather than the accual act. So now if a man of one race attacks another man of a diffrent race it can automaticaly be bubbed a hate crime. DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER