Skip to comments.
Schwarzenegger signs hate crimes law [protecting gays, transgendered]
PlanetOut Network via Yahoo! News ^
| 9/24/04
Posted on 09/24/2004 6:29:46 PM PDT by Cracker72
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-137 next last
To: Bush2000
Hate Crime = Thought Crime.
Plus, as a straight white male, if someone beats or kills me, they are charged with assault or murder. If I were gay, and someone beats or murders me, then they get charged with assault+ or murder+.
"All animals are equal, but SOME animals are more equal than others."
81
posted on
09/24/2004 11:25:18 PM PDT
by
spodefly
(A bunny-slippered operative in the Vast Right-Wing Pajama Party.)
Comment #82 Removed by Moderator
Comment #83 Removed by Moderator
Posts 82 and 83 removed at posters request. Thanks.
84
posted on
09/24/2004 11:55:33 PM PDT
by
spodefly
(A bunny-slippered operative in the Vast Right-Wing Pajama Party.)
To: Bush2000
No, d-----bag, but it is UNECESSARY as it creates another PROTECTIVE CLASS of people. MURDER IS MURDER. There is NO FRIGGIN REASON why we need addditional punishments just because the murderer had something against trannies and "friends of Dorothy."
Please go back to your log cabin and leave us real Republicans alone.
85
posted on
09/24/2004 11:57:09 PM PDT
by
Clemenza
(I LOVE Halliburton, SUVs and Assault Weapons. Any Questions?)
To: freestyle
WRONG! To my knowledge, it has always been illegal to murder a person, WHATEVER their sexual orientation. Tell me when it has been legal to kill gays?
I gather you've had too much liberal college propaganda drilled into your brain that it was legal to kill gays somewhere. You and your RINO pal Ahhnold have been misinformed.
86
posted on
09/24/2004 11:59:58 PM PDT
by
Clemenza
(I LOVE Halliburton, SUVs and Assault Weapons. Any Questions?)
To: spodefly
87
posted on
09/25/2004 12:00:17 AM PDT
by
Clemenza
(I LOVE Halliburton, SUVs and Assault Weapons. Any Questions?)
To: Clemenza
That is embarrasing. My post was about how people (like you apparently) are unable to detect the sarcasim in that post.
(Hint: we both agree that this new law is NOT needed.)
But hey! Thanks for the name callin'!
To: freestyle
What can I say, I rode the small bus to school. :-(
89
posted on
09/25/2004 1:09:37 AM PDT
by
Clemenza
(I LOVE Halliburton, SUVs and Assault Weapons. Any Questions?)
To: Clemenza
No harm, no foul.
To: Cracker72
91
posted on
09/25/2004 1:16:12 AM PDT
by
ApesForEvolution
(You will NEVER convince me that Muhammadanism isn't a veil for MASS MURDERS. Save your time...)
To: Bush2000
Wow, I always gave you more credit than this...
92
posted on
09/25/2004 1:17:57 AM PDT
by
ApesForEvolution
(You will NEVER convince me that Muhammadanism isn't a veil for MASS MURDERS. Save your time...)
To: Clemenza
Hop aboard the clue train. Jurists and juries already examine the motivation and intent of the criminal in assigning penalties. Wilfull commission of crimes is therefore considered more serious than inadvertent commission of the same crime. This law merely increases penalties for any criminal that evidences motivation to target someone based on sexual preference or gender. We're all interested in seeing criminals pay for their crimes here. No one here is deprived of any right by this law when criminals get punished in a harsher manner.
As for "hate speech" being punishable on its own -- in the absence of a crime -- that's just plain fear-mongering. Hate crimes laws have been on the books for awhile, and nobody has been prosecuted for "hate speech". This may surprise you, but we have a First Amendment which guards even those who engage in "hate speech". A prosecution based solely on speech content is doomed to failure.
93
posted on
09/25/2004 2:04:42 PM PDT
by
Bush2000
To: Clemenza
Hop aboard the clue train. Jurists and juries already examine the motivation and intent of the criminal in assigning penalties. Wilfull commission of crimes is therefore considered more serious than inadvertent commission of the same crime. This law merely increases penalties for any criminal that evidences motivation to target someone based on sexual preference or gender. We're all interested in seeing criminals pay for their crimes here. No one here is deprived of any right by this law when criminals get punished in a harsher manner.
As for "hate speech" being punishable on its own -- in the absence of a crime -- that's just plain fear-mongering. Hate crimes laws have been on the books for awhile, and nobody has been prosecuted for "hate speech". This may surprise you, but we have a First Amendment which guards even those who engage in "hate speech". A prosecution based solely on speech content is doomed to failure.
94
posted on
09/25/2004 2:05:09 PM PDT
by
Bush2000
To: ApesForEvolution
I used to think differently about this issue. But having seen one of my gay friends bleeding and bruised in the aftermath of being followed from a restaurant by a bunch of teens and assaulted in the parking lot, he admitted that that incident wasn't the first time that it had happened to him. Some people apparently think it's a lot of fun to beat up on him, simply because his mannerisms are different from ours. They slammed his head on the pavement and kicked him. And for what reason?!? Because he's gay?!? WTF?!? I want these criminals to go away for a long time -- but I don't have any problem seeing them go away longer for having targeted my friend. He didn't (and doesn't) deserve that kind of crap. Most of you have justified this kind of behavior, feeling safe in the knowledge that you're not as likely to be attacked as some of these people. But that's the point. They're targets. And this law sends a signal that continuing to target them means more jail time. I'm all for that.
95
posted on
09/25/2004 2:12:25 PM PDT
by
Bush2000
To: Bush2000; All
My Congresswoman put it better than I, when she responded to an email I sent:
..."I do not support 'hate crimes' legislation. I believe our law enforcement and judicial system should be focused upon holding individuals accountable for what they do, not what they think. Moreover, such initiatives are grounded upon the false notion that crimes motivated by hate are somehow more serious than crimes of envy, lust, greed, or any other evil compulsion that may motivate an attacker..."
I'm very pleased with Jo Ann Davis, my Congresswoman.
96
posted on
09/25/2004 2:13:43 PM PDT
by
beezdotcom
(I'm usually either right or wrong...)
To: Bush2000
We need to find other means to rid our society of public deviancy by helping the individuals, with their root problems...which starts with God and family in America. I'm for the IMMEDIATE PROSECUTION OF THE ACLU UNDER EXISTING RICO STATUTES TODAY! That's our best plan for America today, followed by registering and accounting for every single Muhammadan in America today, particularly males over the age of thirteen. But the borders and ports must be 100% secured first. There's my platform...lol Still love ya buddy, I know what you mean, got friends too...we just have to help people out of the gutter spiritually or we're done as a Free and Safe and Happy and Prosperous Light on the planet...they want to kill the last light of nations in the world...America.. (it's so obvious, isn't it?)
97
posted on
09/25/2004 2:53:28 PM PDT
by
ApesForEvolution
(You will NEVER convince me that Muhammadanism isn't a veil for MASS MURDERS. Save your time...)
To: Bush2000
Rich people are targets for muggers. Should we lengthen sentences for them?
To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
On his mind? Getting support for amending the Constitution so he can run for President. Conservatives should be very wary of the Gropernator. He has the potential to be the GOP Clinton.
To: Bush2000
I suggest your friend get a CCW so he can protect himself. I will even offer training & target practice for him if he is in the LA area.
100
posted on
09/25/2004 3:03:51 PM PDT
by
Feiny
(Here's to swimmin with bow legged women!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-137 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson