That, or he's just stoned again
Posted on 01/16/2007 9:22:00 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
(CNSNews.com) - As the new Democratic majority continues its 100-hour legislative blitz in the U.S. House, one Democrat has quietly reintroduced controversial legislation that would give the federal government more authority over so-called "hate crimes."
On Jan. 5, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas introduced a bill that would create federal guidelines for the sentencing of violent criminals who were "motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim."
It expands the scope of current federal hate crime law, which extends federal oversight to crimes that prevent the victim from engaging in a federally protected right - such as voting - and that are motivated on the basis of race, color, religion or nationality.
The new bill expands the definition of a hate crime to include sexual orientation, gender and disability and allows for any violent crime to be considered a hate crime regardless of whether is affects a victim's ability to engage in a federally protected right.
According to the bill, Congress has the authority to oversee hate crimes because of its constitutional powers to supervise interstate commerce. "Such violence affects interstate commerce in many ways," the bill states, and "instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence."
Jackson-Lee has introduced similar legislation in the past. Since 1999, she has introduced the same bill every two years. None of the bills made it out of the House Committee on the Judiciary to see a vote on the House floor.
The bill passed the House in 2005 as an amendment to the Children's Safety Act, but the Senate did not pursue its full passage.
Opponents of the bill believe it threatens free speech by opening the door for legislation aimed at curbing offensive speech.
The National Prayer Network (NPN), a group that encourages Christians to pray for the country, calls the bill "the most dangerous legislation ever to come before Congress" and charges that "it leads directly to an end of free speech."
The bill specifically addresses violent crimes that result in bodily harm, but NPN Director Ted Pike said it "sets us on a slippery slope" toward limiting speech that is offensive to the protected groups.
Pike told Cybercast News Service the bill "is not as far-reaching in its formative state" as hate crimes legislation in Canada that has been used to limit criticism of homosexuality.
"But it does set up a bias-oriented federal justice system ... and it can inevitably be broadened to involve speech crimes as well as physical crimes," Pike argued.
"It will be up to judges ... to begin to interpret and adjudicate from the bench and inevitably they broaden out the definition of a hate crime," he added.
Opponents of the bill also insist that hate crimes are not a serious enough matter for Congress to address.
According to data collected from local law enforcement agencies by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, there were 7,163 incidents of hate crimes in 2005. More than half of the crimes were motivated by race. Fewer than one in five were motivated by religion or sexual orientation.
Jackson-Lee's office was unavailable for comment on Monday, a federal holiday.
Don't be hatin
You expected anything different from Lee.
Once we have "speech crime", thought-crime is not very far away.
That has to be one of the most abused clauses of the constitution.
"Motivated" refers to a thought. Laws can control actions only, not thoughts. Therefore any law that attempts to control thoughts is invalid.
Now we have a situation in which invalid laws have been enforced for years and countless people have been punished for what the prosecutor says are their thoughts.
The laws are still invalid, even if they were not challenged.
That, or he's just stoned again
Could this be used to charge Crystal Gail Mangum (the Duke Lacrosse dancer/stripper/ho) with a hate crime?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Person #1 has the crap beaten out of him because someone wanted to take his wallet and not face any resistance.
Person #2 has the crap beaten out of him because of his "actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability."
I fail to see how the second crime is worse than the first.
I have thought a bit about hate crimes and legislating them. I do remember of incident in East Texas of the 3 or 4 yahoos tying that black guy to the back of a truck and dragging him to death. Obviously something like that was racially motivated. My gut reaction is that certain people are going to go ape with this legislation and try to use it at every twist and turn when race probably had little or nothing to do with the crime. Would they ever think of using it in cases of black on white crime? Although most crime in the black community is on their own race, there is a sort of thinking out there that whites are easy targets who won't defend themselves. It's almost like the white person being mugged will say "Oh hi Mr. Mugger, you want my wallet, cash and jewelry? Why Soitanly (3 stooges) here it is--have a nice day"
The irony of this is that what the terrorists hate us for is that we are not a Islamic extremist nation that hates Christians and Jews. Yet the liberals sympathize with them and try to appease them!
I wonder if she would let Virginia have Lee-Jackson-King day back?
On Jan. 5, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas introduced a bill that would create federal guidelines for the sentencing of violent criminals who were "motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim."It expands the scope of current federal hate crime law, which extends federal oversight to crimes that prevent the victim from engaging in a federally protected right - such as voting - and that are motivated on the basis of race, color, religion or nationality.
The new bill expands the definition of a hate crime to include sexual orientation, gender and disability and allows for any violent crime to be considered a hate crime regardless of whether is affects a victim's ability to engage in a federally protected right.
Of course the DNC Brownshirts can still harass and intimidate Republicans and vandalize their properies under such legislation. POLITICAL BELIEFS ARE NOT PROTECTED UNDER THIS SCAM! Protect the Democrat-Socialist constiuencies and let Republicans fend for themselves.
Between this bill and trying to re-institute the "Fairness Doctrine", the Dems are doing what they do best: shut down and censor the opposition so that they can consolidate their power.
Most current thread is from 4/28 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1823843/posts?page=68.
Looks like this hits full house this Thursday.
Contact info on reps by entering your zip code: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
Most current thread is from 4/28 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1823843/posts?page=68.
Looks like this hits full house this Thursday.
Contact info on reps by entering your zip code: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
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.