Obama signs gay hate crime bill

[clownfish51]

Gay-hate is' punishable by federal law'....really?

You goddamned faggots, why can't you tell the difference between a vagina and your asshole?

Now, bring the 'Federal Affidavits' ,lets see how your claim works out.

[DeptOfLawEnforcement]

Homophobia is a Preventable Crime. Make no mistake, Gay-Hate is dealt with swiftly and severely, an offense now punishable by Federal law.

Ensuring the safety and sexual rights of the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual and Transgendered community is both highly commendable and worthy of praise.

If you suspect Homophobic terrorism or Gay-Bullying online or off, report it to Police immediately.

Prosecutions for individuals accused of Anti-Gay Hate-Speech will be pursued to the maximum extent allowable by law

[rainbow345910]

i am so happy that were finaly being treated equal

[StoogeWatcher]

And where were these same liberals when Jeffrey Curley and Jesse Dirkhising were killed? Oh wait, since they were murdered by NAMBLA, Democrats don't consider Jeffrey and Jesse hate crime victims.

[putzmeier1999]

This is what u call a president..

[poolerboy0077]

And here's a excerpt from Wisconsin v. Mitchell (of which you've still yet to peruse):

Moreover, the Wisconsin statute singles out for enhancement bias-inspired conduct because this conduct is thought [508 U.S. 476, 488] to inflict greater individual and societal harm. For example, according to the State and its amici, bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest.

[displaced36]

they should protect heteros from the hate crimes that will take place during the homo uprising movement or as some might call it the world wide "coming out of the closet... swinging" movement in the near future. just kidding.

[FlagThisProfile]

Goddamn it I hate Oboma.

[antisocialflowerpot1]

wow get a life Zeta...

[Zeta441]

now we cant hate gay people! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS

[DRealfriknKeenan]

I hope that this bill also covers when a gay or black person kills a straight or white person. or are we discriminating?

[antisocialflowerpot1]

yea but 99% of the time its straight white men killing black or gay people

[DRealfriknKeenan]

That's funny because 99% of percentages are made up on the spot.

[poolerboy0077]

It would, since the term added here is "sexual orientation" meaning a person of *any* orientation. Same applies to the other status categories such as "race" or "sex."

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 lol! I wish. that would make every crime a hate crime and thus make the bill pointless.

[poolerboy0077]

How would that bill make "every" crime a hate crime? Crimes span different motives: greed, negligence, recklessness, insanity, under-the-influence, revenge, sexual impulse, etc. Bear in mind that not all criminals specifically target their victims, like in the case of a holdup in a liquor store. Here the vicitims at the counter could have been anybody and thus instill no hightened fear into a community (which is a rationale behind the penalty enhancement).

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 fine. I meant "every crime against another person," ya' nitpick.

[poolerboy0077]

But it isn't. If I beat you up because you didn't hand over your lunch money did I necessarily beat you out of hate for who you are or rather what you failed to do? The reason there's an enhanced penalty for bias motive crimes is that these type of crimes by design are felt not only by the victim but also entire communities who get the message that they are in danger merely by virtue of their existence.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 so then, How do I decide your motives? couldn't it be a coincidence that you beat up a white conservative with no consideration for race or political views? is hurting a person (for any reason beside self-defense or defense of others) petty and evil? why would we try to decide why someone hurt someone else after we know he did it out of evil intentions (and so forth)?

[poolerboy0077]

"couldn't it be a coincidence that you beat up a white conservative with no consideration for race or political views"

Sure. The motive would have to be established based on the circumstances and elements of the crime.

"is hurting a person...petty and evil?"

Of course not and that's why we have laws against assaults in general. Keep in mind that aggrevating circumstances to enhance penalties have always been taken into account, traditionally during sentencing.

[poolerboy0077]

"why would we try to decide why someone hurt someone else after we know he did it out of evil intentions (and so forth)?"

I'm sorry, could you rephrase this question?

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 sorry:

say we know a white dude killed a black dude. and it wasn't in self defense or defense of others (or at least there wasn't evidence that he was). why should we decide if he killed the black guy for money or because he hates black people? and why should he be punished more for hurting black people than for any other reason?

[poolerboy0077]

Bias crimes are worse than crimes with ordinary motives because their impact is felt far beyond the actual victims of the crimes themselves. Bias crimes are acts of terrorism directed at certain victimized groups. By design, they are felt by entire communities, who get a message that they are in danger merely by virtue of their existence.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 you know, persecution often has the effect of strengthening the thing you want to end. homohaters and white supremacists are just going to see this as an attack on there beliefs and use it as emotional leverage.

[poolerboy0077]

That could be applied to any harsh penalty punishing bad behavior w/ bad intentions. Hate crime laws have several effects though: They send a message to victimized groups that the government is unequivocally taking their side rather than looking the other way, send the same message to the perpetrators, send the same message to law enforcement responsible for investigating & prosecuting bias crimes, and help mold the public conscience to oppose the very biases that lead to bias crimes.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 shouldn't we be sending the message that all people are equal? making crimes against another race worse than "regular" crimes would send the message that we are separate groups (african-americans, gay-americans, and regular americans) rather than just "Americans."

sure, you can call it a hate crime, but treating it like it's worse than other crimes is a mistake.

[poolerboy0077]

Do you see all crimes as one-dimensional and uniform? Are you against the legal distinction between murders and manslaughters? Let alone degrees of murder? After all, the same could be said of these. The fact is that some crimes do, in fact, carry more aggrevating circumstances than others. Not only that, but even if we were to take away hate crime laws this would continue. Why? *Because courts of law have been doing it since time immemorial*, traditionally during sentencing however.

[poolerboy0077]

All people *are* equal under the law. This idea, of which is found in the Fourteenth Amendment, is not in the least bit diminished simply because some criminals will receive a higher penalty for their aggrevating circumstances. So long as the statute is neutral (meaning not favoring a particular race, sex, sexual orientation, etc.) and the state having a legitimate interest in more punative sentencing it is not unconstitutional in that regard.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 I see murder as punishable by law and hating someone as freedom of thought. should the government hold us accountable for our thoughts and feelings as well as our actions?

[poolerboy0077]

" I see murder as punishable by law and hating someone as freedom of thought"

You're not answer the question. The question was: do you see an inequality in having two separate types of crime for a homicide where "malice aforethought" is the distinction that gets you murder and manslaughter?

[poolerboy0077]

People have to right to be racist/homophobic, but the state also has the right to take a position on that subject & express its point of view too. Just like many states have laws officially requiring doctors to take various steps which discourage women from having abortions--on the legal rationale that states have the right to take a moral position on abortion, even if they don't have the Constitutional power to outlaw it--so do states have the right to take a moral position on bias.

[poolerboy0077]

You have to understand that there is no constitutional impingement on freedom of speech and expression by having hate crime laws. This issue has already been addressed by a unanimous (highly conservative) Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Mitchell.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 that's not an answer to my question. true, the government can discourage hate. true, it has a right to its opinion. but it doesn't have a right to punish someone for their feelings. a white person killing a white person is just as bad as a white person killing a black person (if both killings were on purpose).

(to answer your question I said "murder" not man slaughter. it's not really murder if you don't mean to do it).

[poolerboy0077]

"but it doesn't have a right to punish someone for their feelings"

And they aren't. You should really read the opinion in Wisconsin v Mitchell because your concerns are all addressed there. Here's a quote from it:

In so holding, however, we emphasized that "the Constitution does not erect a per se barrier to the admission of evidence concerning one's beliefs and associations at sentencing simply because those beliefs and associations are protected by the First Amendment.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 so there is no added punishment for hate crimes? then why pass the bill. if the people get the same amount of punishment for killing someone of a different race or sexuality, then why distinguish it?

[poolerboy0077]

"to answer your question I said "murder" not man slaughter. it's not really murder if you don't mean to do it"

Are you aware there is such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? The action was do intentionally, but that isn't the question here now, is it.

[poolerboy0077]

* Note that we also have 1st and 2nd degree murders. Are these unequal treatments under the law?

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 yes I know that in some cases murder is technically called manslaughter and manslaughter is up there in varying degrees of murder and what not. I was just trying to make the distinction that killing someone on purpose is bad, killing them on accident is not. I know it gets complicated with such things as killing someone while drunk or insane and so forth, but that is beside the point. we aren't arguing about that, we're debating "hate crimes."

[poolerboy0077]

" but that is beside the point. "

No, it isn't. That's *precisely* the point. The point here is that motive is taken into account. You are aware that 1st and 2nd degree murders are both done "on purpose" as you say, don't you? So why the distinction? And why not the outrage in inequality as you argue for hate crime laws? After all, the same outrage you employ for hate crime laws can be applicable here.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 so if I kill you because I want your car, it is not as bad as if I killed you because I hate you? the difference between first and second degree murder is the intent to kill. I personally wouldn't have set a distinction, but the reason why we set the degrees is so that we can differentiate between criminals who want to kill and criminals who killed due to circumstances. killing you for your car and for your race are both first degree and should be punished equally.

[poolerboy0077]

Second Degree Express Intent to Kill is when defendant had the desire & intent to kill but the killing was not deliberate & premeditated. Nowhere in the definition do you get a homicide not done "on purpose." Thus like your beef with hatecrime laws you should also hate such a distinction out of consistency. Also the difference between murder and manslaughter is "malice aforethought." Why aren't you mad that we take this into account? People have a right to hold malicious feelings,no?

[poolerboy0077]

"so if I kill you because I want your car, it is not as bad as if I killed you because I hate you"

I have already answered this question in detail in previous posts. All I can do at this point is suggest you read Wisconsin v Mitchell because we're going around in circles with the same points.

[DRealfriknKeenan]

@poolerboy0077 you have not answered that question in previous posts. we're going around in circles BECAUSE you avoid answering this question directly. is it or is it not just as bad to intend to kill a person of the same race and sexuality as it is to intend to kill someone of a different race or sexuality? and if so, why would we punish one crime as if it WERE worse than the other?

[TruthHurtzAllDaTime]

I mean whites/jews are so afraid of loosing control and being revealed for what they really are and hey, you can't erase the emotional/physical effects of slavery, chattel slavery, jim crow, and modern day intellectual/spiritual slavery so why am I pissing on the new Klan's parade?

[DRealfriknKeenan]

so there are black people in america today who were enslaved by white people in america? I'm pretty sure that emotional/physical effects only apply to the individual who was wronged, not his descendants.

[TruthHurtzAllDaTime]

So while most on here laud this bill being passed. My opinion is James Bryd's name is only in it because that's how the jews were able to give the illusion it's inclusive when in fact it's an all too familiar tap dance. Being discriminated against in america for being a lesbian, gay, transgendered is seen and has been verbally expressed as being a "white thing" to hell with niggers (though now it's not socially acceptable to say that out loud but, I'm sure that's coming back soon.)

[TruthHurtzAllDaTime]

I say this because having done some research on murders in america (documentary) one thing stands out in the white community...they know how to keep their mouths shut about a chopped up body in the basement plus they never go to prison said family member/killer.

[TruthHurtzAllDaTime]

Besides these facts, people are missing the point that NO ONE VOTED OBAMA IN! This is the most obvious puppet president in my time but folks just seem to like to stay in their make-shift intellectual utopia's. Really I've never been so aware of how infantile and brain washed people even in their 50's plus truly are.The passing of this bill is going to cause problems. Give racist whites and jews a reason to again legally incarcerate and sacrifice blacks via prison, fines, etc.

[TruthHurtzAllDaTime]

Who in the white/jew community cared about James Byrd Jr.? I participated in rallies in WA state that were lead by the whites/jews in the LGBTQ community and always noticed that this black man's savage beating was minimized (a patronizing comment like, "Oh it's so horrible what happened to him.") while the deviant and purposeful flirtatious acts of Shepard which caused his murders to feel their manhood was threatened weren't talked about and he was made out to be a faultless victim.

[TruthHurtzAllDaTime]

What is this bill going to do really? As a black lesbian who's been out since she was 14 and has up until 5 years ago tried my hardest to participate in LGBTQ rights/Civil Rights, I've found that blacks are considered the enemy in but in many cases expendable and subject to being sacrificed always after exploitation by whites/jews who are constantly imposing a symbiotic relationship that drains those of us no matter what our sexual orientation is, of our history, respect, and voice.

[Back2BackJack]

We protect people based on special qualities and attributes which they possess or believe, not based on the fact that everyone is an individual and deserves equal protection under the law. We're more worried about the ideology of the person committing the crime, than the act itself. The guys who killed Matthew Shepard are villified more for hating gays than killing him. The killers of Matthew Shepard should be executed, not for their beliefs, but because of their actions.

[Kimerats]

Finally , there was enough hate from church and finally is the time for the government to step out.