More about the hate crimes bill - No more equality! Video

Hate crimes bill = division places more value on certain groups than others, when the constitution states we are all to be treated equally.

HR1913
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1913

Its already illegal to murder, assault, kidnap, etc anyone in all 50 states, so whats the only difference?

MONEY!

Do you think its possible that federal funds to be given for hate crimes might influence politicians, DA and law enforcement?

YES we have seen this in our history.

So instead of justice for all, we might just end up creating a bigger problem and infringing the rights of other citizens?

Things that make you say hmmmm...

Here are some words to consider...

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Declaration of Independence

Save & Share:

bldgy: Yes, it will "ensure' that the truly guilty who don't have connections or who don't have funds for an expensive lawyer are sent to jail by taking out several innocents as collateral damage... Why not start bombing places where heterosexuals tend to hang out? You'll surely take out some bigots along with all those who are innocent... There really isn't much difference...

bldgy: Yes. By definition a self defense is a reaction. They are not the aggressor. There is no stipulation to protect those who are defending themselves, and under the text of the law, they can be charged with a hate crime if they can be pegged as a bigot. Even Erik Holder did not argue against this.

Airportchris2: All hate crime is applied equally, show me one part that singles out a specific race, etc. Notice that this bill doesn't say specifically for homosexuals, it says for gender identity, sexual orientation aka straight, gay, bisexual, etc. and disability. Well, I think all hate crime bills include the key groups targeted, but certain ones emphasize one group, such as this one, is meant to emphasize the crimes against a person due to actual or perceived gender, sexuality, and disability.

Airportchris2: I think our court system and such is capable of determining guilty from innocent, but no one will ever know, if we keep arguing about these petty bills. I don't think homosexuals would bomb heterosexuals, homosexuals don't share such prejudices against heterosexuals as heterosexuals do against homosexuals.

Airportchris2: Well, usually the person who is attacking someone is committing the crime, so if the person fights back, as self defense, they are doing exactly that, defending themselves. That hate crime bills are put forth to protect and aid the victim to fair justice, and not the person committing the crime.

bldgy: Dude, answer the question: Do you know what "case law" is? For those of us who do, you are really making yourself look clueless... You said: "Well, I think all hate crime bills include the key groups targeted" Interesting, because earlier you said they were ignored in previous bills. Care to point out the section that emphasized gender, sexuality, and disability above all others?

bldgy: "I think our court system and such is capable of determining guilty from innocent, but no one will ever know, if we keep arguing about these petty bills." What? So now my opposition to a bad bill is preventing courts from determining guilty from innocent? You don't actually know how our justice system works, do you..

Airportchris2: The Matthew Shepard Act is mainly for gender, sexuality, and disability, as it was created after Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. were killed, Matthew due to him being perceived as being gay, and James Byrd, Jr. was an African-American man who was tied to a truck by two known white supremacists, dragged from it, and decapitated in Jasper, Texas in 1998, hence the race part of the bill.

Airportchris2: Case law is the reported decisions of selected appellate and other courts (called courts of first impression) which make new interpretations of the law and, therefore, can be cited as precedents in a process known as stare decisis. From wikipedia, a source I use from time to time, feel free to make me look for another source to compare the accuracy of this information.

bldgy: The race part you didn't know existed until I told, you mean? And it's interesting, you are trying to claim both that this law is meant to be applied equally AND that this law is geared to protect homosexuals above all else... Make up your mind

Airportchris2: I don't think this is a bad bill, you due because you assume it's unequal, well, I see it differently, I think people are just mad, because it now increases the protection of groups that have needed it for a long time, from intolerant people. I see how the justice/court system works everyday, & yes, their are some innocent people charged as guilty, and their are also guilty people let off as innocent, and they commit more crimes, & people suing for millions from burns from hot coffee and win.

bldgy: OK, so you had to pull it from wikipedia... Now, do you understand what that says in regards to how laws are applied/enforced?

Airportchris2: Actually, I knew about the race part, I have been in support this act since I first heard about it, a few years ago, but I didn't emphasize the race part. It is applied to all hate crimes against someone's perceived or actual sexuality, gender identity, or disability, but yes, it's mainly for the LGBT community, as most hate crimes in this area are towards homosexuals, etc.

bldgy: Hm.. So I base my opinion on the text of the law, and the history of how all previous hate crime laws have been applied/enforced. You base your opinion of what YOU THINK the people who oppose the bill are thinking... And you assert that I'm the one jumping the gun and making assumptions. "I see how the justice/court system works everyday" Based on what you are claiming, I have trouble believing that... Tell me, why do you think most prosecutors try to charge people with crimes?

Airportchris2: Well, it's always this way, people think it's made unequal, etc. Probably money, but I don't dwell on this as much you prolly do, I hear something, have a moment of thought, and let it go.

bldgy: You don't "dwell" on unequality, but claim you are a gay rights activist? Interesting... And "people think it's unequal" and I suppose that they are all wrong... Unless of course they are homosexual. And then it will be unequal according to you, right?

bldgy: Now you say: "Actually, I knew about the race part, I have been in support this act since I first heard about it, a few years ago, but I didn't emphasize the race part." But earlier you stated clearly that race had nothing to do with it. It's kind of hard to back out of that now.

bldgy: Prosecutors and judges have stated explicitly that minorities cannot be charged with committing hate crimes against majorities. Out east about one year ago, a group of blacks severely beat two whites, man and woman, on a bus. The prosecutor stated they could not be charged with a hate crime, because the attackers were black and the victims were white. Is this applying the law equally?

Airportchris2: I don't see anything that is unequal about this hate crimes bill, only you do.

Airportchris2: What I meant to say is it was as emphasized as the sexuality/gender/disability part. Look, I don't see anything wrong with this bill, you can debate it till the cows come home, but you're not going to change my mind. Also, the stuff about this bill affecting free speech, is BS, about church stuff, this hate crimes, not hate speech, completely different, people can already prosecute for hate speech, even before this bill was passed.

Airportchris2: I'd like to see these statements, in some official report.

bldgy: Of course you don't. You aren't interested in looking at it without bias...

bldgy: I'm sure you would. Just like you'd like me to post each individual section of this bill that shows all of your assumptions are wrong, but at some point you need to start doing you own research. There are plenty of instances. I'm not going to waste time looking them up, but I'll point you in the right direction at least. Look up: Sarah Kreager That is one instance of many. The Jenna 6 is also an excellent example. Do some research.

WeCanAllGetAllong: Hundreds of feelia's,will make perverts legal. And thats just sick! But they will add thought crimes too,soon enough! Until we push back, and soon we are approaching those days. Oh how they burned in the camps,if only they would have waited in the stairwells and alley ways with thier axes pokers and daggers. That may be what it comes down too.Cause they sure aint listening. They could just start listening now,but it doesnt look that way. So buckle up'

Piscivorus: This hate crime bill doesn't criminalize anything that isn't already a crime. It just makes existing crimes more severe when they are assumed to have been committed out of prejudice. But it's already too easy for police and prosecutors to make assumptions without knowing all the facts. This bill just makes it easier for police and prosecutors to play the race card, to increase the rate of wrongful convictions, and to ruin people's lives out of prejudice. The law itself becomes prejudicial.

Author: SafeArmsReview; Uploaded: Oct 29, 2009; Duration: 9:51; Views: 987

Tags: hate  crimes  law  christian  preachers  will  be  persecuted  in  america  gospel  jesus  christ  salvation  yokeup  patriot  citizen  constitution  bill  of  rights  republic  crimeshare crimes against pop crimes against humanity crimestoppers most wanted crimes and misdemeanors crimes of passion crimestoppers.co.uk crimestoppers crimestoppers wales crimestoppers scotland