Hate Crimes

[mkronmal]

With the help of 30 Republicans, House Democrats on Wednesday pushed through a measure that would add sexual orientation, gender and disability to protections covered by federal hate crime law. Under current law, the federal government assists local and state authorities prosecuting limited types of crimes based on the victim's race, religion or ethnic background.

"This legislation is long overdue," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (search). "All Americans have a fundamental right to feel safe in their communities."

Does anyone think that the Founding Fathers meant to exclude the Federal Government in the Equal Protection clause (14th Ammendment)? Crime is crime. The only thing that I see as a valid mitigator is criminal intent vs. unintended negligent effect (i.e. murder vs. drink driver killing someone).

P.S. Nancy: prosecution after the fact does not make someone feel safer. And, as a straight while male, am I not considered one of "All Americans"?

[SomeSailor]

If I'm reading that properly, it seems to make sense. I don't think that just because the federal government has jurisdiction, that they will necessarily excersize it in every instance.

For example; sexual orientation is as vague as it gets. We ALL have some sexual orientation and are of gender, but it's not until that is used as a motivating factor for the crime that they would get involved. If someone decided they'd go on a rampage beating up gay guys... I can see how federal law enforcement could be put in place. Particularily in cases where they have crossed juridictions at the state level.

I don't see how this would conflict with the 14th Amendment either. I think it might actually compliment it well. Too many states are trying to get around federal laws by enacting their own as it is now.

[mkronmal]

But, beating someone up is the crime. A specific crime that is applied to a class of persons is not Equal Protection. Note that any State hate crime is a violation of the 14th Amendment and why the Federal statute has been being pushed for some time.

[bradvo]

It got allot more publicity after Sept 11. remember cab drivers were getting there ass's kicked. Small store owners were getting roughed up etc.etc. anyone that looked like an Iraqi or similiar.
Brad

[SomeSailor]

I think as a Federal government, we should have special interests in crimes that are committed only criteria like race, gender, handicap, religion, etc.

If you don't... then you're leaving that responsibility up to the states and then it's open to interpretation and abuse. I disagree that a law like this gives anyone any special treatment... I think if anything it's the opposite. It guarantees that each of us will be treated equally, especially when it comes to living a life without fear of being different, or judged by the color of your skin.

[TollyWally]

Despite claims to the contrary the Constitution is not hard to understand. For what ever reason our schools have done a very poor job teaching about the supreme law of the land. Sadly, even amongst those who have sworn an oath to uphold the constitution, many do not "get it".

The link below is well worth looking at.

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst.html

For further clarification one might peruse the Federalist Papers.


Hate crimes create separate classes of citizenry and punishes thoughts as well as deeds. If you don't understand why this violates the Constitution perhaps a little studying is in order.

Just because Congress might craft laws favoring the fashionable whims of the moment does not make such legislation constitutionally valid. Remember we live not in a democracy but a republic.

TollyWally