Posted on 06/06/2020 8:45:34 AM PDT by karpov
As Congress prepares to wade into a contentious debate over legislation to address police brutality and systemic racial bias, a long-simmering dispute in the Senate over a far less controversial bill that would for the first time explicitly make lynching a federal crime has burst into public view.
The bill, called the Emmett Till Antilynching Act [...], passed the House this year by a vote of 410 to 4, and has the backing of 99 senators, who have urged support for belated federal recognition of a crime that once terrorized black Americans.
But the private objections of one Republican, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, have succeeded for months in preventing it from becoming law. [...]
The issue erupted on the Senate floor on Thursday afternoon, when Mr. Paul sought to narrow the bill’s definition of lynching and push the revised measure through without a formal vote [...].
Mr. Paul argued that the lynching bill was sloppily written and could lead to yet another injustice — excessive sentencing for minor infractions — unless it was revised.
...
At issue is what, exactly, counts as lynching under federal law. The bill would add a new section called “lynching” to the civil rights statute to deal with group violence meant to intimidate people of color or other protected groups. The offense would be classified as a conspiracy by two or more people to cause bodily harm in connection with a hate crime, with penalties up to life in prison if convicted. Mr. Paul proposed to raise the bar beyond the standard in federal hate crimes statutes, to “serious bodily injury,” so that only crimes involving conspiracy to cause “substantial risk of death and extreme physical pain” could be charged as lynching, according to aides.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Kamala Harris "seething" and outraged? She always is. That's her shtick.
Is there an epidemic of lynchings I didn’t hear about?
Somebody ought to remind Kamala about how popular lynching was among Democrats back in the day. And how they stopped Civil Rights from being passed in 1957.
LYNCHING??? When was the last lynching?
if this law passes as-is, there will be. Or more accurately there will be an epidemic of people charged with lynching.
Hasn’t been a lynching for 60+ years....but now failing to be woke is considered a lynching!!!!
Stupid bill.
When is the last time anyone was lynched?
We have laws against murders in every state already. Why do we need federal laws against lynching on top of that?
A lynching occurs whenever someone fails to display adequate respect for a precious snowflake.
the Senate can mobilize for this crap but not for what was the most egregious coup attempt ever in the US.
Yet another example of the left wanting to bastardize the language.
There are already anti lynching laws on the books.
There are already hate crime laws on the books.
Remember the RIOTS when Channon Gail Christian, aged 21, and Hugh Christopher Newsom, Jr., aged 23, were from Knoxville, Tennessee The grand jury had indicted four of the suspects on counts of capital murder, robbery, kidnapping, rape, and theft, while Eric Boyd was indicted in 2018 on federal charges of carjacking, but also indicted for theft, rape, and murder. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom BETTER HAVE A PUKE BOWL HANDY, POS STILL ALIVE, MOST GRUESOME TORTURE MURDER, PERPS BLACK. https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2017/08/24/archives-horror-christian-newsom-killings-focus-what-happened-chipman-street/597805001/
This should be called the PLEASE FORGIVE WHITEY, WE SORRY bill.
Lynchings are usually done in elevators these days. That is why you don’t hear about them.
;-)
An anti lynching law at this is a political stunt which due to the image of what the law supposedly represents, daring opponents to not go along,
The fact that in every state the law is unnecessary as either murder (by any means), unlawful abduction or injury is covered in every state by various state laws. On that Rand is right.
However, the Libs are only interested in supplying the optics for their own agenda, to which they will enjoy saying “see the GOP opposes laws against lynching”. Rand should not give them that opportunity for in a legal sense, needed or not, the bill will do little harm (unless the wording has been rigged to expand the meaning of “lynching” into all sorts of different stuff - om that point I admit ignorance).
Damn, and we were planning a lunching party on Monument Avenue in Richmond this evening. Buzz kill.
The Randstander strikes again.
Senator Paul is a real asset. Sometimes he can annoy the dickens out of me but his service has certainly had it’s pluses.
Even if it is a Rand Paul hissy fit, he is probably right about the bill. Congre$$ has proved time and again they are incapable of well thought out bills. Such as in their last attempt to provide unemployment benefits during the COVID-19 shut-down and ended up paying some folks more money than they could make working.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.