So the new Hate Crime provision (expanding the existing law) has been signed. Well…it was attached to a must-sign Defense bill so that it would have to be approved after it has not been approved when submitted on its own. Yeah…that’s how the government should work…
Now, I have no issue with people being punished for committing crimes against gays, lesbians (isn’t that the same thing?), bisexual, etc. But why is that crime any different than committing these crimes against me? Or a straight, white adult male.
Yes, I’ve read all of the arguments for the provision. And for the law in general (which I disagree with.) I understand them. But nowhere in any of them do I see something explaining to me why a crime against someone…anyone…shouldn’t be treated and punished equally.
You drag me out behind the bar and beat me up – should be a penalty for that. You rape me – should be a penalty for that. You burn my house down – should be a penalty for that. So why differentiate the victim? The victim is the victim. The perpetrator of the crime should be punished. Same penalty for the crime no matter who it was against. It shouldn’t matter what color, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc. (crimes against children should have harsher penalties however.)
Yes, I get that if you take a gay man outside and beat him BECAUSE he is gay it is bad. Of course it is. But if someone drags me out and beats me up or kills me, it’s not because he (or she) loves me, that’s for sure. So why is that different? Why is that not a hate crime? Yes, gender is “protected” too. But then every rape is a federally prosecuted hate crime? No, I don’t think they are. If a bunch of black, hispanic, asian or martian men take aside a white kid and beat or kill him – are they charged with a hate crime? All of these acts would be done with malice. With hate. Because one thing is for damn sure, they weren’t done out of love.
You can argue all of the delicate sensibilities and PC crap you want. If a crime is committed, there should be a penalty. Adding on a HATE crime label is dumb. They are all hate crimes. If you commit violence against another living thing – it’s not because you have some great affinity for it/them.
Treating one bucket of victims differently from another is wrong. Period. The definition of discrimination is:
treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.
So another bill was signed into law (expanding the language of a current law really) doing just this exact thing. So yes, this bothers me. A lot.
5:34 am on October 29th, 2009
Decided to wade into the murky waters of legislation and the political influences I see. You are entirely correct in your outrage at the differentiation of who may be a victim for a particular crime. It makes me scratch my head too. My apologies for a long response.
The layering of different degrees of punishment for crimes committed against different victims is not new thought. Take the rape laws for example -automatically one assumes that the crime is going to be done by a man against a woman and inevitably, that is the overwhelming majority of the cases – but look what happens when it is the reverse – the same exact facts and circumstances exact a different punishment.
Often times in politically-charged legislation that is enacted as a knee-jerk reaction to a heinous crime, existing laws will be tweaked to add a special circumstance penalty that can add additional punishment if the facts and circumstances of the act can be proven.
I know – lawyerspeake – but that is the reality of how the criminal justice system works and I am not defending it, but will say that the intent, I believe was to protect the victims of these crimes and give prosecutors the right to seek additional punishment when they are specifically targeted for being a certain race, sexual orientation or gender. In the most heinous crimes, this does make sense – but I also believe that by protecting a class above others can backfire. The only real instance that I think this protected class status works is when a crime against a child occurs and federal legislation is stronger than many state laws specifically in this regard.
Malice is a flowery word that is really a term of art when describing the most evil crime – murder (e.g. malice aforethought is the mens rea which must accompany the actus reus of death.
What these protected class or special class designations do is give the prosecutors another arrow in their quiver to use where the crime committed warrants – or – if they do not get a conviction in state court, they could claim that the victim’s civil rights were violated and attempt to have the case tried under the federal laws that protect this class. A very slippery slope indeed.
Justice is supposed to be blind, but in many instances, it depends on whether the judge rendering the punishment is medically or only declared legally blind.