4Justice's Blog

Sorry, I don't believe in hate crime legislation at all. Folks don't harm another person because they like them. They do it because the are angry at the other person, because they hate the other person (for whatever reason), or because they just don't care (for the heck of it or just because that person is in the way). Each should receive equal punishment. Murder or assault is no less a crime just because the person was not of a particular race, faith, sexual orientation, etc.
The use of "hate crime" is just a form of socially acceptable bigotry IMO.

pol1.
I can understand your point and would agree had it not for the run away Judicial system we have adopted as of late.

No one likes more and more legislation being enacted but in this particular case we must put an end to swing door actions by laid back encumbered Judges.
Too many thugs repeat their hate crimes without fear and with impunity.

The Human Rights Campaign won the first stage as the Bill passed this afternoon in the Senate
However it has a tough road ahead to survive final negotiations with a very strong pressure from the radical right people who insist their way or nothing.

Pres. Bush has threatened to veto it as he does with most bills that have no interest value in his or Corporations favor.

We must ensure the freedom and protection of all Americans to enjoy the entitled freedom without fear of Mob rule and gang violence.

Hope you may reconsider this particular action for the safely of all peoples existence.
Thanks for your input and its good to hear other opinions.

I agree with this bill. If Bush vetos, I hope it is overturned.

There should be no categories of difference.
Because you hate some other person, animal or being does not give you the right to take physical action to harm them because you do not agree with their gender, speech, looks, race, color, height, weight or social habits etc.etc.

Judges and even Jury members are prone to being partisan and many times make corrupt and unfair decisions for their own gratification.

To stop the ongoing gang violence, we need more stringent laws where judges cannot be fooled by slick and slimy attorneys and must abide by the penalties to fit the crime.
That's what their job is all about, not to make their own laws to suit their own ego.

Think of the Mafia and how they got away with so much crime and do today, especially the violent non publicized ethnic varieties forming groups mostly illegal aliens.
No, not the MS13 gangs but the Russian, Eastern European and Asian Thugs.

People harming themselves with chemical abuse get harsher prison time than those that do physical harm or rape and murder to others.

We need to confine these criminals together on some far away Island.
They would then be able to let their violent emotions loose upon themselves.

If you don't agree to have laws strengthened to suit the crime then wait until you are violated without cause and you'll be thinking different.

This blog was to show how 3 evil monsters predominately and maliciously killed another human being for monetary gain and showed no remorse for their actions in the murder.

There is a difference between random acts of violence and violence directed at a specific individual or group of individuals because they are different.

The purple panda would be the hate crime, especially if Alfred has documented hate of all purple pandas by means of associations (Ku Klux Klan who hate purple pandas for example) or perhaps hosts a a Kill All Purple Pandas web site. It doesn't make the life that was taken any less significant. Betty could be the random act of violence. Carl could be the next serial killer who took pleasure in watching animals die at first, but had someone paid attention to this, perhaps your child would still be alive. Donna could also be the next serial killer. They would all deserve life in prison without eligibility of parole.

Why do we label people killers and serial killers? Does a label of a serial killer make the person who was killed by the regular killer any less significant? No. People who tend to commit hate crimes tend to be habitual in their actions. Why do we label people child sexual predators versus just a child predator who kills? Doesn't the sexual predator who doesn't necessarily kill the body kill the soul?

“The purple panda would be the hate crime, especially if Alfred has documented hate of all purple pandas by means of associations (Ku Klux Klan who hate purple pandas for example) or perhaps hosts a a Kill All Purple Pandas web site.” Guilty by association or innocent until proven guilty?

My question remains unanswered.

Which is the worst of the crimes? Was it Alfred’s, Betty’s, Carl’s or Donna’s?
Could it be that all are murderers?

Is theft, theft?
Am I more concerned with the dollar thief or the 100 dollar thief?
If I only have one dollar it would be the dollar thief because the 100 thief will pass me by. If I have 100 dollars I am concerned with both. Do you think the 100 dollar thief would take just 1?

Which is the worse case:
A member of the Dog party kills a member of the Dog party , or;
a member of the Dog party kills a member of the Cat party.
I guess it depends on if I am a Dog party member or a Cat party member because I really dislike someone that would kill one of their own. But that is backward to hate crimes legislation as I should really be worried about someone who would kill those that are different because we know Dogs and Cats cannot get along. And then, well, there are exceptions.

Count me confused as to why we need to difference the punishment for the same crime.
Hate crimes legislation deals with presumptions or worse…emotions.
What happened to the whole equality thing?

Yes, it is thick headedness on my part.

i dont understand your laws so making any comment is not mine to make but lets just remember the waste of a life needs to be valued in consequence --meaning YOU DO THIS YOU GET THIS simple really and if everyone knows the law then maybe balance is restored