Obama signs gay hate crime bill

Oct. 28: Ms. Information: Rachel Maddow reports on some stories that didnt make the front page, including President Obama signing the Hate Crimes Act into law to include protection for gay people.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• president
• obama
• hate
• crime
• bill
• gay
• military
• act
• law
• protection

[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.

[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?

[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.

[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?

[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]

" 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.