Obama: Hate crimes, defense spending

I'm a left leaning independent on most issues, but hate crime legislation confuses me. And I don't think law enforcement likes it because it confuses them.

What difference does it make if someone is murdered/assaulted/injured during a robbery, a domestic dispute, drive by/gang related activity, or because of the color of their skin or sexual orientation.

They are all CRIMES, and should be investigated and prosecuted in a similar manner. I've never quite understood the need for additional laws in this instance.

I can see the difference in, let's say, punk kids spraying meaningless graffiti on someones garage, as opposed to teenage skin-heads spraying a swastika on a jewish fanily's garage. However, local law enforcement needs to be able to investigate whether it was just "punks" or whehter it was meant as a threat. Without the feds interference.

If Germany had hate-crime laws in the early 1900's, Hitler would have been imprisoned before he could have ever risen to power.

Bravo, on the one hand, covering the murder of an American, by other Americans, for having different inclinations !! Stinko, on the other part of the bill, that throws more money down the gullet of the American Military-Industrial Complex !! There's a " governement-run " program that I don't here too much moaning and screaming about, from the Republican-Libertarian gaggle of goons !! I wonder why ?? Could it be, that is where they have all of their lucre stashed !!?? I know they were out of Wall Street before the Weasels made their dramatic appearance !!
President Obama will sign the bill, because he will get a little, to give up a little. What he will get, would be the federal prosecution of those bullies, haters and snakes, that can't leave other people alone !! Instead, these snakes must beat their point of view into somebody, even if it means, killing them !! Just observe Bush&Cheney and their mind-set concerning Iraq !! Look at Iraq, today and ask yourself, how successful is that mentality, that Bush&Cheney championed, or was it, accomplished !!?
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Is there any type of crime that can be categorized as a "love crime"?

How about this, " Chris " ? I love your stupidity, Chris !! I hope I didn't commit a federal crime, by stating the obvious !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

I had the opportunity to see the autopsy photos of James Byrd Jr. It was a while back and thanks to his family who has authorized those in the law enforcement hate crime units to use it as a teaching tool. Hits you very hard. Hate crime laws tend to trend on controversial, but in my humble opinion this is appropriate. That's not to say that more laws or tougher laws necessarily equal better or safer, there are other ways to target the problems, but in clear cut vile cases it's like icing on the cake for the victim, the victim's family, and society who had to endure such pain and loss.

Posted by: Stephen J | October 28, 2009 7:31 AM
;
A HATE crime is an attack on a particular group of people in addition to the victim. You are using the victim as an example to send a message to others like the victim that this is what will happen to your kind if we find you. It takes some critical thinking to see the difference but there is. There is a thing called intent that must be considered in crimes.

Don Fitzgerald,

No.
The only crime you commit, repeatedly I might add, are crimes against logic and reason.

Please explain the difference between a regular crime, and a supposed "hate crime".

Please further explain why there should be different penalties.

Also, good job doing your typical name-calling. I guess when you cannot support your position with facts and logic, you need to resort to school yard taunts. AWESOME job!

Thanks, " Chris ", I needed that !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

"If Germany had hate-crime laws in the early 1900's, Hitler would have been imprisoned before he could have ever risen to power.

Posted by: syj"

Hate to tell you this, "syj", but Germany DID have "hate crimes" laws. They were instituted by Hitler, in order to get rid of his opponents.

Posted by: Chris | October 28, 2009 12:48 PM
;
Do you believe terrorism should carry a different penalty? How is that different than regular crime? The difference is the intent. INTENT.

Terrorism is an act of war, not a crime. Nice strawman you're trying to build there.

Criminal intent, or mens rea, is something that is completely different than trying to distinguish or differentiate the "hateful" intent of a criminal.

Why does James Byrd get a descriptive account of his horrible death, and yet Matthew Shepard, whose death was equally horrific and disturbing, get overlooked with a simple "killed because he was gay." He was not just killed... he was mutilated, tortured, humiliated, and left for dead in a field. This is an extremely important oversight on the part of the authors.

>"The provision is named in honor of Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming college student killed in 1998 because he was gay, and James Byrd Jr., a black man dragged to his death the same year year behind a pickup truck in Texas. "

Posted by: Chris | October 28, 2009 3:44 PM
;
Ok, you really thick. Let's see...do you not agree that scrawling FED across the thorax of a hanged census worker is done w/ the INTENT to send a message that government agents should steer clear of the neighborhood? The INTENT was to strike fear into a particular group.

Here's the video of Obama signing the hate crimes bill:
http://www.gotchamediablog.com/2009/10/obama-signs-matthew-shepard-hate-crime.html

“If Germany had hate-crime laws in the early 1900's, Hitler would have been imprisoned before he could have ever risen to power.”
.
Posted by: syj | October 28, 2009 8:36 AM
.
You’re a scream, syj. Hitler WAS imprisoned before he came to power. His imprisonment for starting a riot that resulted in several deaths gave him the time and opportunity to write “Mein Kampf.” That, in turn, led to his rise to power. It was a very different world over there at the time.
.
And, in any event, do you seriously believe the existence of hate-crime laws in Germany would have prevented what he did? After he became Chancellor of Germany, he was the law. The systematic rounding up and extermination of millions was not the product of a legal system guided by laws as we know them. It was the result of arbitrary power exercised by a few people with no legal constraints. Laws are totally ineffective unless someone is willing to obey them and enforce them.

* * * * *
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | October 28, 2009 9:11 AM
.
Don,
.
The only “goon” around here is you. Libertarians don’t believe in fighting wars that aren’t absolutely necessary to protecting the United States. Nor do they believe in occupying the rest of the world with our military forces. That is something that even the Democrats cannot claim. The fact that you insist on lumping Republicans and Libertarians together when it comes to issues involving the military and its proper role is just further evidence of your invincible ignorance.
.
And, furthermore, Don, tell me where people arrested for a violent crime get away just because the victim belongs to a particular social sub-group? They don’t. And that’s the way it should be. Violence against anyone should be - and already is- a crime. In which case (unlike you), I don’t see any particular need for federalization of crimes that have traditionally and routinely been handled by State law enforcement agencies.

Chris, try solicitation of an act of prostitution.

Anyway, the white collar defense bar is now taking up a theme song of "void for vagueness".

In anticipation of the indictments which will--or at least should-- be coming down on Wall St. chicanery.

They want a reinstatement of a hard "mens rea" requirment before some hedge fund con artist who claimed he was using a "secret proprietary risk formula" to analyze some securitized garbage and really didn't intend any harm as your money went down the drain, can get off because he lacked any specific intent to harm you.

[Which is true in the Pickwickian sense that he would have done the same to any sucker....]

So, bring it on. Let's examine the mental state of the murder and mayhem crowd.

If it's relevant in white collar crime, it should also be relevant in M & M.

" John W ", the wannabe pontificator !!
Do you mean, like the lynchings by the KKK !! Oh, that's right, the locals sure handled those crimes, didn't they !!? Get real and get some common sense. You can start by quitting the pose of a pontificator !! Like most empty cans, you belong on Fox Noise, not here at The "World Renown " Swamp !! This venue just can't handle your ignorance, it is just too great !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

* * * * *
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | October 29, 2009 11:56 PM
.
1. You have no place to speak about pontificating, you hypocrite. You can go on about stuff more often and, at times, just as long as I can (and with less reason, too). You are the one so gullible and easily duped by the rhetoric of your own party that you go on forever about the merits of some stupid political ploy. You are the only Swamp denizen who can look at the current health care bills and fail to discern that Congress and the President are trying to help, rather than hurt, the big corporate health insurance interests. Your loyalty is way too blind.
.
2. You obviously didn’t understand my question if you had to come back with the knee-jerk response about the KKK. I asked, “... tell me where people ARRESTED for a violent crime get away just because the victim belongs to a particular social sub-group?” The KKK gets away mostly because they don’t get arrested. The problem with combating the KKK isn’t the absence of laws; it’s the lack of enforcement. You aren’t going to tell me that there aren’t sufficient laws on the books to combat the KKK (because you can’t). Every state makes it a crime to murder, maim, assault, batter, rape, kidnap, imprison, seriously injure anyone, or to make terrorist threats. The laws of every state also make it a crime to attempt, conspire or aid and abet the same acts of violence. Adding another law isn’t going to change the lack of enforcement either. If the federal government wanted to spend its money more wisely, it would do so by assisting local efforts at enforcement.
.
3. I still don’t see any response to the criticism that your confusion between Libertarians and Republicans is the product of your invincible ignorance. You don’t even acknowledge that none of the politicians that you routinely castigate are Republicans, and that most of them actually hate the Libertarian Party platform.