I was saddened and shocked to hear about this story as I drove to and from Atlanta yesterday for work. I wanted to post on this so we all had a way to reflect on this tragedy.
Police investigate shooting as a hate crime – Advocate.com
A teenager armed with a hatchet and handgun opened fire inside a New Bedford, Mass., gay bar early Thursday, wounding at least three people in what police are investigating as a hate crime.
A bartender at Puzzles Lounge told the Associated Press that the young man, dressed all in black, ordered a drink and asked if Puzzles was a gay bar. He finished his drink shortly after midnight, ordered another, then started attacking people, the bartender said. Three were hospitalized Thursday.
18-year-old suspect Jacob D. Robida
So a couple of observations here. I’m certainly not condoning what happened, nor looking to blame the victims. But I”m having a hard time understanding why an 18-year old wasn’t carded by the bartender and either shown out or denied a drink. Now perhaps this “drink” was an iced tea….but using the term “drink” in a bar usually means alcohol. I just think this is an interesting detail that I’d like to learn more about.
**UPDATE: According to the Washington Blade story, the 18-year old neo-Nazi suspect “walked in around midnight and drank a rum on the rocks.”**
More importantly, this incident comes about a week after PatriotPartner and I were reflecting on our time already in Charlotte and how welcoming people around here have been to a gay couple that doesn’t go out of their way to hide it. No, we don’t wear skirts to Home Depot, but c’mon… people KNOW. PatriotPartner and I both agreed that when you hear of gay bashing stories, a majority (though not all) actually seem to come out of Liberal Blue State America. Granted, the urban centers automatically assume an increase in crime due to population density.
But Massachusetts?!?! I thought we were all supposed to go around like nymphs in the fairie meadows in Massachusetts celebrating our gayness. Frankly, I feel more comfortable in Charlotte being who I am then I ever did in Washington, DC or Northern Virginia.
Finally, what are your thoughts on this being a “hate crime.” Isn’t it simply a violent crime, period? I have mixed feelings about the importance and relevance of separate “hate crime” laws….. and wanted to open that up for discussion as well.
Anyway, I’m sorry to start the weekend off on a downer but felt this tragedy was important to cover today.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Gee, I thought hate crimes legislation were supposed to be a panacea against this sort of thing. Because heaven knows that last thing a thug wants on his criminal record is a hate crime.
Bruce, thanks for posting this.
My thoughts, in no particular order:
– I share your ambivalence about “hate crime” laws. But that’s a legal issue separate from the incident itself.
– Interesting observation about reported gay-bashing indidents. Of course, one caveat might be that you’re only hearing about the REPORTED incidents, not the unreported ones.
– The details of this event are indeed curious. If an eighteen-year-old had simply walked in and ordered a drink without being carded, I’d just assume it was negligence on the part of the bartender – perhaps the customer was good-looking and the bartender was reluctant to send him away. But this guy asked if it was a gay bar … wouldn’t that set off some alarm bells? I mean, I really don’t know. Do gay men go into a bar, walk up to the bartender, and say, “Is this a gay bar?” I’d think it would be the sort of thing you’d already know, or if you were new in town, either ask around or figure out for yourself. So that part seems a little weird to me. But we’ll have to wait to find out more details.
– As it happens, I was just sitting down to write a post on homophobia when I read this. I’ll have more thoughts on this later.
Bruce, three things: #1 the drink is reported in the press to have been alcoholic (rum on the rocks); #2 New Bedford isn’t anything like the princess in pink fairyland idea you have of Massachusetts –it’s a tough, rough, gang ridden, below blue collar area where the last claim to fame (aside from a gay bar called Puzzles) was the group rape of the woman on a pool table Mar 6th ’83.
#3 As far as hate crimes goes, it sounds like this perp had enuff hate to fill a town already filled with hateful people –but when gays play out the hate crime card it usually leads to the victim card. I’d rather avoid that great liberal tradition of playing out the victim card and call for playing the justice card –rally the community, underscore toleration in a town not known for tolerance, and stress the angle of justice, not victimhood and pity party time.
Agreed. The important thing here is that some idiot walked into a bar with a hatchet and a gun and proceeded to put three people into the hospital. It doesn’t matter what race, religion, nationality, or sexual orientation those people were; the guy needs to be caught and punished.
Hate crimes legislation, in my opinion, is all about validating being victimized.
My problem with hate crimes laws is that they offend the very notion of “Equal Justice Under Law.” They say essentially, “Some Groups Are More Equal Than Others Under The Law.”
Uncanny yet again, Bruce. Last night, i returned froma movie, intending to go to bed, but then saw on AOL news, the stuff about Chad Allen and End of the Spear, and started to post, then I saw NGLTF’s angry release and thought of commenting, so I will likely update your post later.
Personally, I favor increasing the penalty for excessive violence in an assault, but am opposed to Hate Crimes legislation. (More on that anon.)
No need to panic about the demon rum, everyone… let alone bold it and adorn it with asterisks. The AP has been reporting since last night that he showed a fake ID.
BrokebackBob does have a point though. Isn’t the whole 21-drinking-age thing stupid; an artifact of 70’s hysterical puritanical nanny-statism run amuk? Why shouldn’t an 18-year-old be allowed to drink? Why should there be drinking ages at all? Most of Europe does fine without them.
Now, now GayCowPoke, take a moment and simmer down, will ‘ya pardner?
I didn’t see anyone hooping and hollering about the drink being served in exclusion to the horror of the crime. I think each commentator underscored the heinous nature of the crime. I don’t think anyone reduced their concern to “underage drinkers being served”. I don’t think anyone would dispute that the crime sounds like it could be classified as a “hate crime” either. So, just simmer down and quit the praire dog shuffle.
What is being discussed is whether we should have a special class of crimes called “hate crimes”. It’s an old issue and one that lends a special class of victimhood to gays, ethnics, and others. Murder is murder; violent felony assaults are criminal. Investigate, book em, try em, send to prison.
Your post makes it sound like no one here understands hate crimes or thinks this act is a felony(ies).
While it might be comforting for you to wallow with the victim card held high and proud, I think others would suggest positive constructive steps to promote community support for the victims of the crime rather than exporting the vicitimhood of this act to the gay community, writ large.
A liberal gay site –I think 365– argues that this kind of act is a result of the piddle of anti-gay rhetoric from conservative right wingers. How absurd.
Now, before you saddle up and ride that horse to town, some of us are only saying we don’t need no stinking Hate Crimes status. Bust and dust the perp, rally New Bedford’s conscience and demonstrate against crimes arising from intolerance and hatred… but keep the victim card for the other Left causes.
VdaK, I think we should all withhold comment on anything that Europe’s civilized and enlightened states do until raj baby gets here. I think to do so in the absence of such intellectual brillance, singular insights, and fashionable opinion is to… well… simply endanger the free world’s tettering providence and luck.
Please refrain from commenting on all things European until raj gives permission. Or does that only apply to Germany?
Not to mention, Michigan-Matt, but doesn’t Brokeback Bob’s stereotype about life outside the gay ghetto (“there’s no shortage of places where being gay (or even suspected of it) means constantly looking over your shoulder, constantly wondering where the next taunt, the next wad of spit, the next blow might come from.”) seem melodramatic, outdated, and insulated? Maybe he should get out once in a while, or at least note that the year is 2006, not 1956.
Please refrain from commenting on all things European until raj gives permission. Or does that only apply to Germany?
My bad. I keep forgetting that raj’s unsubstantiated prejudices are far more relevent in any argument than that which us dumb hicks quaintly refer to as ‘reality.’
Um, GCB, if this man were a kook (well he is a kook) walking into a straight bar and doing the exact same thing, with the exact same level of violence, should the penalty be any less?
Thanks GP, the next time I hear complaints about liberals bashing red states, I’ll be sure to remind you that you do the same exact thing in reverse.
Dan, I put on my GayCowpokeBob sock puppet and I’d like to anwer that not-entirely rhetorical question:
“But what about us gays! He attacked us! We’re not safe, we’re not protected. We need special protection. Americans DONT love us even tho they think we do “den in taupe plaid” really really well. THEY DONT LOVE US YET!”
“It’s a right wing conspiracy to attack us. It’s the religious GOP nuts pursuing and stalking us into our lairs of libidity. They attacked us!”
“And, no, I don’t care if they attack heteros; serves the str8 people right for denying us full civil rights.”
Whoops, sock puppet Bob says he needs to add another line:
“George Bush is responsible for this.”
VdaK, I think the melodrama is more important than what he was projecting outside the “gay ghetto of love”… if we don’t feel it to excess, can it even be gay?
#9 V the K — February 3, 2006 @ 12:15 pm – February 3, 2006
Why shouldn’t an 18-year-old be allowed to drink? Why should there be drinking ages at all? Most of Europe does fine without them.
I am not sure how true this is. I’m considerably older than the “age of consent” (I’m referring to the purchase of alcoholic beverages, not sex) but I have read that in Germany they actually do have a minimum age to purchase “adult beverages.” A short google search turned up the following http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/LegalDrinkingAge.html
Until a few years ago in the US, the “age of consent” was 18. A few years ago, the age was raised to 21, in the belief that it might reduce drunken driving by youths. I don’t know how well that has worked out. The age was 21 until the early 1970s, then it was lowered to 18, and a few years ago it was raised to 21 again. It appears to be that the increase was primarily at the behest of the auto insurance companies. That’s fine with me, but I don’t know whether they really had any statistics on the subject.
Going up a bit in the comment
Isn’t the whole 21-drinking-age thing stupid; an artifact of 70’s hysterical puritanical nanny-statism run amuk?
This comment is a bit strange. The legal age for purchasing adult beverage was reduced in the 1970s (or late 1960s) to 18, and was increased (if memory serves) in the 1980s to 21.
I suppose that, if the government required cars to have “breathalizers” that would prevent a car from starting if the driver’s breath indicated a blood alcohol level was above a selected level, you might have a point. But the government doesn’t. I don’t particularly care whether a drunk driver plows his car into a tree. But if the drunk driver plows his car into another car, maiming or killing those in the other car, I do care. And apparently there is evidence that younger drivers are more likely to drive while intoxicated. And that was the stated reason for the increase of the drinking age.
OT – for Bruce and Dan –
GCB’s open re-emergence has certainly added more heat here, but as you can see, no more light…
Purely for my own curiosity: did his ban end? Did you say he could come back to your space?
Oh, and Bob, I knew you could not stay away.
#19 raj baby, shooting off that yap without a safety again, eh? This time on the drinking age, no less. You should have restricted your remarks to pedestrian comments about the Euro-centrist enlightenment in allowing kids to drink in their home and the intrinsic value of getting young males drunk in your home. It’d be better than being wrong again.
No, the auto insurance companies weren’t responsible for increasing the drinking age in most states to 21 (from 18 and 19 in some), it was the parents of dead kids and sensitive legislators as well as a threat from the US Dept of Transportation via Congressional action that if the age wasn’t raised, the individual state’s share of the federal gas tax would be decreased.
Stick to what you know. Uninformed opinions masquerading as knowledge have little value to others –Ambrose Pierce
And if this wasn’t a hate crime, would you like to propose some other motivation for someone walking into a bar with a hatchet and a gun and beginning to beat people? Does this happen often in straight bars?
Um….you’ve led a very sheltered life, haven’t you, Bob?
Just query “shooting” and “bar” and stories like this pop up immediately.
Now look at that. Six people shot, one killed. Did it make the national news? Did you have national groups screaming about how it was all the fault of someone else? Hell no. Why?
Because these people weren’t minorities who need incidents like this to exploit as a means of reinforcing their victimhood.
THAT’S what you don’t get, Bob. The national gay organizations that burst blood vessels over this are not interested in the crime; they are interested in how it can be exploited and twisted to their ends.
Case in point:
“The hatred and loathing fueling this morning’s vicious attack on gay men in New Bedford is not innate, it is learned. And who is teaching it? Leaders of the so-called Christian right, that’s who. Individuals like James Dobson of Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins, the Rev. Pat Robertson and their ilk are obsessed with homosexuality. They use their vast resources, media networks and affiliated pulpits to blame lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people for all the ills of society. They disguise their hatred as ‘deeply held religious beliefs.’ We have witnessed seven years of vicious anti-LGBT organizing in Massachusetts — and endured the hate-filled rantings of Brian Camenker of the Article 8 Alliance and Parents Rights Coalition and Ed Pawlick of MassNews. The blood spilled last night is on their hands.”
Of course, what Matt Foreman refuses to admit is that he and his fellow NGLTF whores last year gave millions of dollars to a man who said his religious beliefs justified what NGLTF usually calls hate speech and treating gays like second-class citizens.
Meanwhile, I’d bet you money that this kid never even heard of the people they mentioned. If anything, being a neo-Nazi, he would have stayed the hell away from them, especially given that Brian Camenker is Jewish. But again, whorebitches like Matt Foreman can’t let an opportunity go by to bash religion, so they blame all Christians, even those who aren’t, for causing this.
Americans don’t buy it. And as long as the hatemongering left controls the gay rights movement, they never will.
Well said NDXXX. You should think about doing this in your own right and getting a blog or something… just an idea.
I knew it wouldn’t be long before the GayLeft grabbed the incident to make some dough through attention, outrage, and snake oil.
All that was left off (no pun) that GayLeft pandering statement is: “Now, in our hour of crisis and attack, will America not give us our full civil rights? Silence everything and everyone “religious” in our country. Overturn the Court who is poised to overturn Roe v Wade. Give us back the Congress. Put a lesbian in the White House. Let us into the priesthood, allow us to post hot pictures of guys in the elementary classrooms we control, and start paying our partners-of-the-hour full health care benefits! Do it now in our hour of crisis and attack or the streets will run red with gay blood.”
You know… I think that homophobia as well as racism *is* inate and *doesn’t* need to be learned. That doesn’t make those things right, of course, but this idea that human beings need to be *taught* to fear the “other” is simply bogus. They have to be taught NOT to fear those different from themselves.
Xenophobia is a instinctive survival reflex that mirrors the opposite impulse, which would be our fascination with people and things we don’t know. Both things work for survival in different situations… a strange person approaching the camp fire might be a scout for raiders or for traders. Fear of the “other” increases safety while reaching out to that person increases profit.
It’s easy to see this in children. Some of them are so fearlessly adventurous that they are a danger to themselves and others, while other children will put a death-grip on Mom if approached by a face they don’t know. This fear isn’t taught and *usually* kids grow out of it. Surprisingly, children from a “protective” environment will often be more adventurous and those who are often left with strangers (day care, etc) are less so.
#23 North Dallas Thirty — February 3, 2006 @ 1:55 pm – February 3, 2006
The national gay organizations that burst blood vessels over this are not interested in the crime; they are interested in how it can be exploited and twisted to their ends.
This isn’t new. About the only reason that you heard of Matthew Shepherd’s murder was because some national gay activists wanted to make use of the murder in support of an amendment to the federal bias crimes bill that was pending at the time that would have added “sexual orientation” to the existing law.
Why have you heard that the New Bedford MA incident has been reported by national news services, but not the Columbus OH incident? I frankly don’t know. If you want to ask Reuter’s why they reported one but not the other, why don’t you email them and ask them. I doubt that I wouldn’t find any information about it since your article was from August 2005 Maybe Reuters did report the Columbus OH incident: some of these news services have regional feeds that sometimes make it to the national level, but they don’t keep them on line forever.
On the other hand, it is probably unlikely that you would have heard of the incident, if you were outside of the Boston-Providence area, were it not for the gay press (print and on-line). About a decade ago, a gay man was stabbed to death in a southern Boston suburb. It was a bias crime. And I doubt very seriously that you would have heard of the incident.
Returning to the comparison with the Shepherd case, let me ask you this. What about the Columbus shooting would suggest that some national organization would want to use it for political purposes?
Regarding
…especially given that Brian Camenker is Jewish…
I’m not sure what this is supposed to mean. One would be led to believe that you have never heard of KommeradenPolizei–Kapos–in the Nazi extermination camps. BTW, Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem have long been opposing gay people there.
raj said:
I don’t particularly care whether a drunk driver plows his car into a tree.
You Sir, are a horrible liberal! That is destruction of natural habitat! And how do you think that poor tree felt!
Just Kidding:-)
On a more serious note. When ever I read or hear about his type of thing my blood boils. In ’93 my friend Rob Johnson was bashed to death in his apartment in San Diego. I had met him a year earlier while visiting my family in SD (I was going to Fresno State at the time). We met at “The Flame” a lesbian bar that hosted “Boys Night Out” on Tuesdays, and hit it off quite well. He was in line right in front of me and instead of stamping his wrist, he pulled down trow and had them stamp his right cheek. I was hooked right then. His positive attitude was infectious, and he was just a normal guy. No hang-ups. Normal. And just happened to be gay. We hung out for the next few days, I even spent the night at his bungalow overlooking Pacific Beach, which was strange for me being a “Hit and Run-Out-the-Door” guy back then. And then I went back to school. We hooked up a few times that year, when ever I was in town. But there was no possibility of a relationship, even after I moved back to SD in the summer of 92. I had not broken down all my barriers yet, keeping my guy and straight life separate for example, and was not ready for a relationship. And he was a bit of a player; he liked to have his fun. We didn’t socialize much after I moved back. Things move on. But I still loved him, and I think he knew it. I kinda melted when I saw him, even when he was with another guy. In late Feb of 93, I guess I hadn’t gone out for a week or so (not unusual for me) and was at “Flicks”, one of my regular hang-outs. I overheard friends talking about the wonderful but sad funeral they had gone to that day. When we were leaving the bar I asked the question that needed to be asked, although I had a gut feeling I might not like the answer. “Who’s funeral did you all go to”? One of my friends said “Our friend Rob in PB”.
I said “Johnson?!?”
I think the look on my face said everything. Someone said in a shocked tone “Oh my God, you knew him, you didn’t know?”. I remember the looks on their faces, as I’m sure they reflected the look on mine. Since the relationship was in the past, and I was not exactly the most social type of person, how could they know I knew him? And no one called since no one had my number. Anyway, they told me that he was robbed and shot dead in his apartment. We went out to Denny’s-ish restaurant, and I was OK. Then the next morning the full weight of the new reality set down on my being. Rob was gone. I’ll never see him again. Never again see his smile. Hear his laughter. That was so hard. A week or two after, I started hearing different versions of what had happened to Rob, so I went to visit Robs best friend and maybe ask about the details of Robs death. I couldn’t. As soon as Bill opened the door I knew I never could ask him because the pain was so clear on his face. So I simply told him how sorry I was “and call me if you need to talk”. How stupid. I was the one that needed to talk. So I went to my car, grabbed my lyric notebook, and walked down the beach to the shoreline, and with the waves cresting before me, wrote the best, gut wrenching, most honest lyric I will probably ever write.
I did eventually find out what most likely happened. Rob was known for “skimming” the beaches late at night and picking up strangers to have fun with. Well I guess he picked the wrong guy. They went to Robs apartment and the guy, who was never caught TTBOMK, beat Rob to a pulp and left him in the tub to die. I also found out that Robs parents didn’t know he was gay, and didn’t find out until his funeral. That was gave me the courage to finally tell my parents the truth. I couldn’t imagine having them go through the same thing. Rob’s death helped me cross a final barrier in my life. I wish to God I would have had the courage to tell him how I felt about him. He was, and still is, a major influence in shedding my negative feelings about being gay, and I miss him to this day.
PS. I’ll post the lyrics later today.
PPS. Sorry for the long post.
So, a violent hate crime in generally liberal Massachusetts implies to you that liberalism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be? The attacker in question is apparently a neo-Nazi; I’d be awfully curious to see what his opinions are in the arena of U.S. politics. I betcha he’s not a Kerry/Kennedy fan.
You mock hate-crime legislation because it’s not a fool-proof method of stopping all hate crimes, as if anyone, liberal or otherwise, ever said it was. What it does do is establish that violence directed towards people perceived to be gay or lesbian is a crime; it reaffirms that gay people are equal under the law. Whether or not it is effective as a deterrent, it provides legal remedy for people who perpetrate violence against gay people.
Now, let’s look at the states which do not have hate crime legislation for sexual orientation: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. Do you see a trend here?
You keep trying to accuse liberals of not being as liberal as they say they are, as if the existing pro-gay legislation that’s out there can be credited to the Republican party. You can truthfully argue that many Democrats are ineffective on gay-rights issues, but you can’t truthfully counter that Republicans are better. Demonstrably they are much more hostile to our community.
On the other hand, it is probably unlikely that you would have heard of the incident, if you were outside of the Boston-Providence area, were it not for the gay press (print and on-line).
Does the name CNN ring a bell?
Now, if you can explain how I so readily was able to find that, but next to nothing on the Columbus shooting……
One would be led to believe that you have never heard of KommeradenPolizei–Kapos–in the Nazi extermination camps. BTW, Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem have long been opposing gay people there.
In general, Raj, 18-year-old neo-Nazi anti-Semites do not take orders from or listen to Jews or groups of Jews. Now, you are welcome to argue that he went through the logic that he could listen to these groups because there had been a small cadre of Jewish informers in the Nazi concentration camps, but I daresay he wouldn’t have the faintest idea who or what you’re talking about.
What (hate crimes law) does do is establish that violence directed towards people perceived to be gay or lesbian is a crime;
No, assault and other crimes of violence against all people were already illegal.
It reaffirms that gay people are equal under the law.
No, hate crime laws do the exact opposite. They establish inequality under the law by making it more illegal to commit crimes against some groups of people than others.
It’s beyond melodramatic, outdated and insulated — it’s utter crap.
And again, Raj shows how ignorant he is of the way the United States government operates. There is no US age of consent; age of consent is determined by each individual state, not the federal government.
Yes. Those are all states in which I would vastly prefer to live, rather than the liberal hell-hole states of New York, Massachussetts, New Jersey, or God forbid, the Peoples’ Republic of California.
Balderdash. They are much more hostile to a leftist agenda, and that is precisely what makes them far better places to live.
The attacker in question is apparently a neo-Nazi; I’d be awfully curious to see what his opinions are in the arena of U.S. politics. I betcha he’s not a Kerry/Kennedy fan.
Why not? John Kerry says gays are second-class citizens who can be discriminated against because of a characteristic with which they’re born, because his religion says so. I didn’t hear a single one of you say THAT was vicious antigay slander — probably because your mouths were so firmly locked on his ass and praising him for being “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”.
And there is a simple phrase that describes Ted Kennedy’s attitudes towards anything…..do as I say, not as I do. Remember the Alito hearings, where Fat Man shrieked about Alito’s supposed connections to oppressive groups, only to have it revealed that he himself CURRENTLY belonged to a club that thought it was all right for him to treat Mary Jo Kopechne like an object because of her gender?
What it does do is establish that violence directed towards people perceived to be gay or lesbian is a crime; it reaffirms that gay people are equal under the law. Whether or not it is effective as a deterrent, it provides legal remedy for people who perpetrate violence against gay people.
So in other words, if hate crime statutes didn’t exist, you couldn’t be prosecuted for violence against another person if they were gay, and they couldn’t sue you.
Now, let’s look at the states which do not have hate crime legislation for sexual orientation: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. Do you see a trend here?
Yes. Where are Kansas, Texas, Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Louisiana, Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee? After all, isn’t the argument you’re trying to push, Andy, that, these states wouldn’t have them, since they all broke Republican in 2004, and Republicans all hate gays and want them stripped of rights and exterminated?
And again you try your mealy-mouthed crap about Democrats being “ineffective”. Funny, most of the time when people support state constitutional amendments to strip gays of rights, you call them “hostile” to gay rights — except Democrats, who are just “ineffective”.
#30 V the K — February 3, 2006 @ 3:39 pm – February 3, 2006
This:
>>What (hate crimes law) does do is establish that violence directed towards people perceived to be gay or lesbian is a crime;
No, assault and other crimes of violence against all people were already illegal.
is correct, but this:
>>>It reaffirms that gay people are equal under the law.
No, hate crime laws do the exact opposite. They establish inequality under the law by making it more illegal to commit crimes against some groups of people than others.
is incomplete. Bias crimes laws enhance penalties when a perpetrator commits a crime against someone of a group because the victim is a member of that group. The groups are identified by the respective bias law. The penalties are not enhanced merely because the perpetrator commits a crime against a member of the group.
BTW, my reference to “kapo” was a reference to Brian Camenker, not to the attacker in the New Bedford gay bar, as should have been obvious. Kapos were not themselves not necessarily Nazis, they were just working for them.
So anyway, back to the point I wa going to make before getting sidetracked:
Question:
Why should the guy who robs and kills my little brother ’cause he wanted the money,
Get LESS Punishment
than the guy who murders my boyfriend ’cause he’s gay.
Either way they’re both murdered and dead.
Just Asking.
I’d be awfully curious to see what his opinions are in the arena of U.S. politics. I betcha he’s not a Kerry/Kennedy fan.
I wouldn’t be quick to assume. After all Fred Phelps is a registered and at varying times active democrat and he didn’t vote for Bush (not sure that he voted for Kerry either).
I would be willing to bet this guy probably doesn’t care much about politics, and probably doesn’t have a clue who the Vice President is.
What “trend” are you trying to illuminate with the states, Andy? That they have small populations and tend conservative? North and South Dakota (like Minnesota) tend toward Democrat, actually. North Dakota had a very strong Communist movement once upon a time. Those farmers like their subsidies you know. The social conservatism is as much a Scandinavian reluctance to view certain things as proper for any sort of public discourse as anything else. We tend to be uncomfortable with any sort of public display and recieve the words “I love you” as either a glib lie or a declaration of marriage. We know we aren’t beautiful and if anyone says we are, we know he’s just trying to get some. We don’t want to have to think about what other people do and really *really* don’t want to think about what gay people or lesbians do. We’ve got centuries of practice enforcing a psychological privacy to bring us through winter after winter with a dozen people in a one room shelter without it turning into a Hollywood horror movie of systematic masacre, and hate for that to be violated. (Do you think the violence of the vikings was a fluke?) Yet… more than 20 years ago the Mayor of Fargo was declaring Gay Pride days.
And everyone enjoyed complaining about that… nothing is quite so entertaining as something to complain about.
I’m not surprised that the Dakotas do not have hate crime legistlation (Minnesota, with the twin cities, is a bit less rural.) It’s entirely in the character of the people in those places. What it *doesn’t* even begin to suggest is the actual attitude of people toward minority victims, or the attitude of law enforcement toward minority victims.
#35 sonicfrog — February 3, 2006 @ 4:00 pm – February 3, 2006
One of the things that you apparently wish to overlook is that not all bias crimes end in death. If you take a look at FBI bias crimes statistics (they periodically publish a report) most bias crimes are for far lesser offenses. So your examples, while rather extreme, are hardly representative.
I think it’s kind of strange that these posts are more about fighting over hate crimes laws or complaining about the bar’s serving policy than anything else.
I just feel so bad for these poor men, who were put into serious and critical condition solely because they wanted to go to a gay bar, I can’t focus on all the other nitpicks.
It’s true that crimes happen anywhere, but there has been such a steady drumbeat of anti-gay invective from the press, from politicians, from the pulpit. In other cities like New York crimes against gays are going up. There seem to be a lot of people now who view gays as so subhuman they deserve nothing but pain or death, and that attitude trickles down to men like this guy in Massachusetts.
Andy said:
“Now, let’s look at the states which do not have hate crime legislation for sexual orientation: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. Do you see a trend here?”
Yes. I do. They’re all listed in alphabetical order.
The more relevant point would be the rate of “gay based hate crimes” per capita per state. Are the rates higher in the states listed than those not? If so, then you could extrapolate that these states are indeed more homophobic. If not, then what is your point in bringing up this list, besides yet another attempt to reinforce the tired “Bush Hates Gays” meme.
PS. I almost typed “HoBophobic”:-)
All — GayCowboyBob is still banned and I took care of his illegal comments on this site. 🙂
#39 sonicfrog — February 3, 2006 @ 4:37 pm – February 3, 2006
The more relevant point would be the rate of “gay based hate crimes” per capita per state.
You’re never going to be able to get such a rate, because nobody knows how many gay people there are in any state.
If you are interested, you can get the FBI bias crimes reports via http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#hate Be forewarned, the reports are PDF files. If you want to download any of them, I would suggest saving the “target” to your desktop and then opening the file in the Acrobat Reader, instead of downloading to your browser.
One of the things that you have to realize when reading the reports is that the FBI collects the statistics from state and local law enforcement agencies, and the state and local law enforcement are not required to collect the information (federalism, you know). I suspect, but cannot prove, that state and local law enforcement agencies in jurisdictions that do not have bias crimes states are less likely to make the extra effort to determine whether a crime is a bias crime.
I also suspect, but cannot prove, that there is an under-reporting of bias crimes committed based on sexual orientation in the 2003 report (page 12) there 1430 bias crimes were reported, the vast majority against male homosexuals (881). Surprisingly, there were 15 reported against heterosexuals. But the 1430 number was four more than the total number of bias crimes based on religion–most of which were committed against Jews and Muslims.
raj said:
If you are interested, you can get the FBI bias crimes reports via http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#hate Be forewarned, the reports are PDF files.
Those files didn’t seem to have the info to answer my querey, but there is tons of info there and I don’t have the time to see if the data is organized in such a way as to determine an answer to my question (what did I just write?). I did see, at another site, that El Paso (tx), SF (ca), and Columbus (oh) were 3,2,1 for cities with highest reported gay H crimes in 2001.
Just a note as to the question of why he wasn’t carded – the video interview with the bartender indicates that the kid gave him a false ID that claimed he was 23. Happens every day. http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/02/gay.shooting/index.html
Gentlemen, please……………
Hate crime laws – these work like other laws that protect groups who tend to get targeted for violence, such as the police and maybe officers of the court. They exist because violence aimed at policemen is aimed not only at the individual victim, a common crime of violence, but at the entire police department or at police as a community. These laws are in effect anti-terrorism laws. No one says that special laws protecting the police make them somehow less than equal under the law. But we have hate crime laws because people balk at calling gay-bashers terrorists, the same way they think that cop-killers have human rights and shouldn’t just be killed as slowly and horribly and publicly as possible. Idiots.
BTW I heard that the kid was carded but had fake ID.
As for the question about why one death matters more than another – of course on one level they mater all equally, but on another level, we got a lot more wound up about the 9/11 deaths than about the 3,000 other equally dead people who died in armed robberies or whatever that month.
Imagine…
Imagine there are no hate crimes. Imagine there is no discrimination. Imagine a world where people are productive and feel strong and independant, and no one feels victimized.
Now… which party would benefit and which would lose power?
Things that make you go “hmm…”
#38 Carl, “There seem to be a lot of people now who view gays as so subhuman they deserve nothing but pain or death, and that attitude trickles down to men like this guy in Massachusetts.”
This does not “trickle down.” Please let this idiot criminal take credit for his own actions. He was not enabled by any general anti-homosexual attitude from on high. The mindset that breeds neo-Nazis or even just school yard bullies, is a mindset that needs this “subhuman” definition and will find some reason, any reason at all, to find someone to play that role.
The attitude toward gays is more accepting than it’s ever been… ever. I hate to use the word “koolaid” but the idea that disapproval, even strong disapproval, of homosexuality equates to a desire for pain and death is that sort of delusion. I can see the rhetorical need… things are so much better that the threat has to be exaggerated. And so hyperbole makes civilized disapproval into violent intent and people just… swallow it.
No, not “someone of a group,” but someone of an officially recognized pet victim group. And therein lies the source of the inequality these despicable laws create.
I agree, Synova. What really motivated thi s guy was his own sense of worthlessness. He was just looking for a target. But this is where general bigotry in a community comes in – it suggests the target. In some places and times it was the next black man you saw – all you had to do was claim you had caught him looking at a white woman or whatever. Here it is a different standard target, but the mechanism is the same.
Attitudes are better in most places than they have ever been, that is true. In other places they suck, and fat-headed generalizations about what places are likely to be more tolerant and civilized are not going to be reliable. I remember a stray comment in a log yard somewhere in Arkansas about 15 years ago, when we as visitors asked where some guy my boss knew was – the answer was he had moved to the next town with his boyfriend and that was a that. Then there are animal shelters like New Bedford, where some Portuguese men steadily raped and Italian- American woman back in 1983 for quite some time, and the reaction of their women was that she just shouldn’t have been there in the first place. so now something simlar happens again. surpise, surprise, surprise Then there are places like the Dakotas, that don’t have hate crime laws because they simply don’t need them – they are full of Scandinavians, who are about as bigoted and violent as Bassett hounds.
I have never had a problem with classifying a crime as a hate-crime for the sake of documenting it for statistics and for trying to find ways to reduce those crimes. But when the left started trying and sometimes succeeding in attaching extra penalties for the same crime, that’s when it broke down into thought crime, and that’s downright scary.
And how are they classifying him as a neo-Nazi? He’s hateful and therefore automatically a neo-Nazi or did they actually find a connection between this guy, a Jew, and an organization like that? It seems the left takes every story like this and propogandizes it to reinforce the sense of victimhood that they must rely on to convince voters that big socialized government is the only answer to their problems.
The statistical reality is that hate-crimes, while very visible (probably thanx to a liberal MSM) are an incredibly tiny fraction of all crime. The statistical reality is that violent crimes are less per capita than ever, again very visible with a larger modern media. The reality is you’re less likely to be a victim of a crime in those “scary” red states with few gun control laws than in the blue states, regardless of what minority group you’re a part of.
But the Democrat party has to keep people feeling panicky about crime, about the environment, about big corporations, about racism and homophobia, even while all of these things have been steadily improving thanx largely to (what’s left of) a free society. It has to convince people they can’t succeed without help from government.
As John Stossel would say, give me a break!
Jim wrote:
“As for the question about why one death matters more than another – of course on one level they mater all equally, but on another level, we got a lot more wound up about the 9/11 deaths than about the 3,000 other equally dead people who died in armed robberies or whatever that month.
Uhm, I think there’s a wee bit of difference between random street murders, and terrorists flying jumbo jets into buildings and watching it all unfold before our eyes on TV. Maybe I’m wrong but…
Carl said:
“In other cities like New York crimes against gays are going up. ”
According to whom??? And, if true, is that because gays are less afraid of filing reports and / or police take these reports more seriously than in the past???
#3 & 4
That’s pretty much the reason Bush gave to oppose hate cirmes legislation in Texas. The libs won’t tell you that, though (if they even know), because facts don’t mean a damn. All you get is:
“Bush vetoed hate crimes legislation in Texas harumph, harumph, harumph! Why he obviously hates gays, blacks etc.”
Then they trotted out the family of James Byrd Junior to politicize it and ASSume Bush hates everybody.
#9
What did Bareback Bob say?
woops! should’ve read
According to whom??? And, if true, is it because gays are less afraid of filing reports and / or police take these reports more seriously than in the past???
#21
I was going to say that I that it was MADD that had the drinking age increased. Don’t they want it to be like 25 or something?
Further, I’m surprised that Raj had to look up information about the drinking age in Europe.
-The attitude toward gays is more accepting than it’s ever been… ever.-
Attitudes have improved, but if people were this accepting, we wouldn’t have so many politicians trying to ban partnerships, adoption rights, gay/straight alliances, we wouldn’t have the President comparing gay marriage to unethical politicians in the SOTU, we wouldn’t have so many people who see anti-gay fervor as a political or fundraising bonanza.
A lot of people think improved attitudes toward gays = an evil gay agenda to take over America. That mere thought inflames and enrages those who are so willing to take action against us. The more they hear the press and politicians and religous figures talk about how much power we have and how disgusting we are, the more angry and violent they may become.
#55
As far as I can tell, we don’t have gay/straight alliances. We have liberal agenda propaganda machines.
Further, Bush never compared gay marriage to unethical politicians and you can save posting the quote because I know what he said.
#47 rightwingprof — February 3, 2006 @ 6:28 pm – February 3, 2006
No, not “someone of a group,” but someone of an officially recognized pet victim group.
I really don’t care how you want to phrase it. I gave a succinct description (which you failed to copy completely) of bias crimes.
And therein lies the source of the inequality these despicable laws create.
As I’ve said elsewhere, when you and likeminded people get existing laws repealed, I’ll sit up and listen. I’ve seen few if anyone doing anything other than bitching and moaning about them. As I’ve mentioned, these laws do not usually get particularly controversial until it is proposed to add “sexual orientation as a category–and then usually by conservative christians, a category usually covered by such laws.
Two commenters mentioned the 1983 rape case in a New Bedford bar. The bar’s name was Big Dan’s tavern, and it indeed occured on 6 March 1983.
I don’t recall whether the rapists were actually Portuguese, as one commenter mentioned. They might have been, but New Bedford is heavily Portuguese-American, so they may very well have been American citizens–either naturalized or descended from Portuguese immigrants.
The incident provided the basis for the 1988 movie “The Accused.” From the Internet Movie Database: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094608/
VdaK, don’t you think it is enough we let 18 year olds marry, vote, and go off to war, now you want them to drink, the horror.
In all honesty, this country would do much better if we taught responsible drinking at an early age. From what I remember of a Soc class some 20 years ago, I understand Jewish families that allow children to have wine at dinner have fewer incidences of alcoholism in the family.
This country has it all backwards.
TGC, why are gay/straight alliances liberal propaganda machines? These are clubs in school where gay and straight teens can talk to each other in a safe place. How is safety liberal?
-According to whom???-
http://www.nyblade.com/2005/12-30/news/localnews/ny.cfm
From the post:
Finally, what are your thoughts on this being a “hate crime.”
I believe that you are conflating two issues. The fact that Robida asked the bartender whether he was in a gay bar, and shortly thereafter, suggests (but doesn’t prove) that it was motivated by anti-gay bias, and hence, that it was a “hate crime.”
The second issue is whether, if bias can be proven, perpetrators should be punished more harshly because of the bias, and authorized by statute.
As to the second issue, I was posting on a now-defunct message board web site, which was populated largely by conservatives, on the bias-crimes issue. One of the posters (a conservative) suggested that evidence of bias could be considered during the sentencing phase. Except for capital murder cases, sentencing is pretty much handled by the judge, not a jury, and I asked the poster whether he wanted a single person, the judge, to determine whether the crime was motivated by bias and make his sentencing based on that determination. I don’t practice criminal law, but I believe that sentencing recommendations are largely based on sentencing reports provided by investigators, which they base on evidence that has not been cross-examined.
The discretion reminds me of decisions of several federal district courts that the federal sentencing guidelines are unconstitutional. The federal sentencing guidelines gave federal judges considerable discretion in sentencing based on evidence of aggravating or mitigating factors that are found by the judge. The district court cases were decided to recently for appeals to be taken to the US SupCt, but they are based on the 2004 SupCt decision in Blakely vs. Washington http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/display.html?terms=sentencing&url=/supct/html/02-1632.ZS.html Blakely involved a case tried in Washington state court, involving state sentencing guidelines, and so it did not directly involve the federal guidelines, but the issues in the federal courts were substantially similar: sentencing based on findings of fact that were not presented to a jury.
If there is a separate statutory “bias crime,” the prosecutor would be required to present evidence of bias to the jury and the jury would have to be required to find bias beyond a reasonable doubt in order for the sentence to be enhanced. If bias is considered during the sentencing phase, the jury wouldn’t get to see the evidence.
You misrepresented hate crimes legislation — and since you pose as some sort of pinkie-up intellectual, I must assume you did so deliberately.
I couldn’t care less what makes you sit up and listen — particularly since repealing the laws and the nature of the laws are two different issues.
#49 Dale, I see arguments for both sides of the hate crime bills issue. But I don’t see the problem that you and others have with the additionally penalty because of one’s thoughts. We already have a crime, murder, which carries a much more stringent penalty than manslaughter, because of one’s thoughts. To me, the point of hate crimes legislation is to say that you could think whatever or hate whomever you want. No crime for that. But if you act on it, and thus severely trample on someone esle’s rights, then you will be penalized extra for doing so. If that deters some crimes, I would be for it.
I am more concerned when there are hate crime laws and sexual orientation is not part of one of the protected categories. That sends a much worse message.
To me, the point of hate crimes legislation is to say that you could think whatever or hate whomever you want. No crime for that. But if you act on it, and thus severely trample on someone esle’s rights, then you will be penalized extra for doing so.
Um….wouldn’t that be the same for EVERY crime? Or, by when you say “extra”, you mean you should get penalized more for beating up a black kid than a white kid?
This then is the problem. Hate crimes statutes dole out penalty based on the characteristics of the victim. Thus, by definition, the penalty is different for beating up a black kid than it is a white kid. If it isn’t, then the statute is redundant and unnecessary, and amounts to nothing more than pandering.
I’ve completely lost track of the thread of discussion in the comments… I wanted to point out a similarity between the drinking age and hate crime laws. The rationale for making the drinking age 21 is nearly always presented as a way to keep people *under 18* from getting alcohol. Most people agree that a person who can vote and go to war ought to be able to buy a beer, but, they say, it’s not the 18 year old they are worried about, it’s the 16 year olds the 18 year old buys for. The obvious unfairness of the law preventing voters and soldiers from ordering a beer (lately some localities have passed laws so that a military ID legally buys a brew, no matter the age printed on it) is considered less important than the *true* purpose of the law, which is keeping alcohol from 16 year olds.
It’s true that certain victims, in practice, have been less equal than others. Hate crimes try to correct this problem by over correcting it.
I’d prefer that our laws meant what they meant… that the law itself reflected what must be as it must be. It just seems to me that laws that *compensate* enforce the mindset that laws aren’t expected to be enforced as written.
Jim — February 3, 2006 @ 5:28 pm – February 3, 2006
As for the question about why one death matters more than another – of course on one level they mater all equally…
Assuming arguendo that all deaths at the hands of another should matter equally, they are not all punished equally. There are degrees of moral culpability when one person kills another. There are usually several degrees of manslaughter and several degrees of murder. In all cases, a victim is dead, but the extent of punishment (this varies from state to state) depends on the degree of intent in the perpetrator that committed the act that led to the death. And the person who did the killing might be excused completely if he can show that the killing was in self-defense.
It seems to me that whether the perpetrator committed the act out of bias against a member of a group because he is a member of the group is merely another factor in determining the extent of intent in committing the act.
Statistically speaking, murders and the like tend to be either w/w, b/b, a/a between and among people with some sort of association. We as a people despite our acceptances of other by and large stick to our own. So when you go out of your way to kill someone that you would not ordinarily come into contact with – say a homophobe in a gay bar, then yeah you need to be strung up by your nads just a little bit tighter than the guy who killed his associate for a business deal gone bad or his wife for sleeping with the tennis pro.
I mean really!
I agree with an earlier poster who wrote if you are gay, you have probably already checked around to know that this is a gay bar. You just don’t ask the barkeep unless you need confirmation before doing evil.
The creep’s been captured in Arkansas…unfortunately at the cost of a policeman’s life, and that of a female traveling-companion in a subsequent shotout with Ark. State Police.
In Arkansas, killing a policeman’s a capital crime and will get you “the squirt”. At least this means that the traditionally-liberal Mass. courts will not have him “rehabilitated” and released in 7-years for “good behavior”.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183831,00.html
They’re now reporting he’s in critical condition….
It would be cheaper if he dies, but would that provide “Justice” for the Arkansas policeman’s family, or for the patrons attacked in New Bedford??
I think Bruce should correct his original post…you make quite a deal of his being 18 yrs old, but all news reports indicate he showed the bartender a fake ID showing that he was 23.
As far as a hate crime? Well, I pretty much suspect this guy is a real whacko, based on what they found in his bedroom at home: By the way…what kind of mother does he have?? Anyway, it seems to me hate crime also fits because this guy intentionally and methodically chose gays to attack. For as nuts as he is, he had some kind of logic to go to a gay bar to attack gays, not just some random people he first came across on the street. Add hate to crime to the lists. It’s heinous that a poice office and a woman had to die to catch him and this sick bastard is still alive.
49: “But the Democrat party has to keep people feeling panicky about crime, about the environment, about big corporations, about racism and homophobia, even while all of these things have been steadily improving thanx largely to (what’s left of) a free society. It has to convince people they can’t succeed without help from government.”
You mean much like the current Republican led government has gone for over 4 years and can’t catch the guy responsible for 9/11 because it’s better for their agenda to keep Americans in fear of terrorists threat so they can stay in office, using the false accusations that Democrats don’t care and are incapable of keeping the US safe? Last I checked Mr. Bush was reading “my little Goat” (upside down thank you very much) when he was told of the worst act of terror on US soil.
He caught two with his head.
http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20060205/D8FINFF81.html?PG=home&SEC=news
So how many times are we going to read about the fake ID in this thread?
I’d like to know how many conservatives on this board really hate being gay….because I suspect there are several of them. A lot of time is spent here defending the actions of homophobes (GWB for one – I don’t care how politically crafted his speeches are – his actions since he became an elected official in TX indicate he is a homophobe).
In addition, I noticed in the first *6* posts on this thread that a number of regular posters have not one drop of concern about the people who were viciously attacked by this guy, but run with the whole hate crimes topic.
As I read the original post again, I’m left scratching my head as to exactly how being welcomed with open arms in Charlotte, NC has anything to do with a lunatic attacking people in New Bedford, MA? It’s a completely false analogy to turn this into some kind conservative vs. liberal issue. I’m sure with a little research, I could easily find stories of pyschopaths in every state in the union who’ve harmed people and each story would have no regard to political affiliation or whether it occured in a red state/blue state…
CNN is now reporting that the attacker, Jacob Robida, has died of his wounds after a shootout with police (prior to which he killed an officer and a woman who was in the car with Robida) No story yet; just listed as breaking news. So, it’s over…no political affiliations, no long drawn out trials, no question about hate crimes, appeals, prison, mental hospital. For whatever twisted reasons, this guy decided to cause violence and he died in a violent way because of his actions. seems he got what he wanted/deserved.
To follow up on the Robida incidents in in MA and Arkansas, there are several fairly detailed articles on the Boston Globe’s web site this morning–particularly of the events in Arkansas. They are available through http://www.boston.com/news/globe
#75 Kevin — February 5, 2006 @ 11:08 am – February 5, 2006
Reuters is reporting the same. From the Reuter’s feed on the NYTimes web site, it apperas that Robida died at 3:38 AM Central Time.
The 10:46AM (Eastern time) Reuters feed is at http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-crime-massachusetts-gay.html
I’d like to know how many conservatives on this board really hate being gay….because I suspect there are several of them.
Because obviously, if a person thinks issues like lower taxes, fighting terrorism, preserving market capitalism, school choice, judicial restraint, and so forth are more important than being able to get a piece of paper from a government bureaucracy “legitimizing” a personal relationship, the only possible explanation is that they are self-hating.
/sarc
It’s also kind of amusing the way some of the local drama queens are getting the vapors because a thread about a “hate crime”… somehow broke down into a discussion about “hate crimes.” Gee, never saw that comin’
On one of my personal favorite blogs, the majority of comments on a similar thread about this crime concern the merits of different brands of laptops. Lousy haters!
78: Well, you know, that’s the funny thing about living in a free country…everyone’s entitled to want what they want. Just stop attacking people because they put some more importance on things than you do. men/women can get that little piece of paper without having to worry about whether they’re entitled to it…seems to me it should be the same for everone. equal protection under the law.
Just stop attacking people because they put some more importance on things than you do.
Says the guy who accuses people who put more importance on different things than he does of being “self-hating.” Says the guy who claims that GP and GPW support people who “would be perfectly happy to see us exterminated.”
#64
Um….wouldn’t that be the same for EVERY crime? Or, by when you say “extra”, you mean you should get penalized more for beating up a black kid than a white kid?
This then is the problem. Hate crimes statutes dole out penalty based on the characteristics of the victim. Thus, by definition, the penalty is different for beating up a black kid than it is a white kid. If it isn’t, then the statute is redundant and unnecessary, and amounts to nothing more than pandering.
NDT, that wasn’t quite my point. First, a black kid or a white kid could be a victim of a hate crime, based on race, or whatever. Also, take the situations where a victim is injured as a result of intentional violence, and a victim is injured as a result of negligence. Even if the injuries are the same, the perpetrator who caused intentional violence would receive a higher penalty than the perpetrator who crime was negligence. Just as a victim who is dead as a result of manslaughter, and a victim who is dead as a result of murder. As far as the victim is concerned it’s the same result. But the murderer gets a much higher additional penalty (based on that person’s thoughts that he/she acted on). I don’t see how this is much different, or different at all, for that matter, than adding additional penalties for a hate crime.
Sonicfrog had a good point in #34. Why should the penalty be different if the crime was based on hate, or based on wanting money? Perhaps the penalties should be the same, because in both cases, there was aforethought to commit a crime.
Pat, good clarification. Seems to me most white people don’t get the essence of a hate crime. White people can just easily be the target of hate crime but it is generally not in the nature of black people to go out randomly kill white people b/c of the color of their skin. A number of hooded and sometimes not so hooded white people have gone out of their way to do so to kill black, gay, jewish, mexican, etc. Maybe the problem white male conservatives have with hate crime is they are disproportionately affected by the law. Maybe they need to be taking a look at the man in the mirror to see what they can do to change him.
You make the case of intent, and for all practical purposes, one could classify a hate murder as first degree. Where I have a problem is as follows: hate is taught, if you hate something so much you are probably going to avoid whatever it is you hate. You are not going to go seek it out. So while all those school shooters may have planned to shoot up the school, they typically do not go out of their way to find a school with a large gay, latino, female, black etc. population. (n.b.: didn’t include white males b/c lets face, w/ the exception of the beltway sniper, black people don’t go on random shootings.)
Where prosecutors have gone wrong on hate crime prosecution, two teens: one black and one white, lifelong friends. White kills black or black kills white. In most cases, this should not be a hate crime. A few yrs back there was a situation in either Palo Alto or East Palo Alto, that simply amouted to two friends getting into an argument and events going horribly wrong. But b/c they were not of the same race, the prosecutor wanted to utilize the hate crime provision. Wrong, because it just cheapens the true hate crime and gets conservatives’ panties in a bunch.
Thus, hate crime should not be and generally is not based on the characteristics of the victim, but generally the intent of the perp. Having bad thoughts is no big deal but acting on those thoughts – well it is time to tie your nads up.
Its just human nature for most people to stick to whom they are most comfortable. If you go out of your comfort zone to burn a cross, beat up a gay, scribble anti-semitic remarks, vandalize a mosque you have acted on a deep-seated hate, yeah then you should be penalized just a little harder.
$0.11
When Bruce gets his face axed at a gay bar – I’ll remember to ask if the ax murderer had an id or not.
Gotta keep your priorities straight.
White people can just easily be the target of hate crime but it is generally not in the nature of black people to go out randomly kill white people b/c of the color of their skin.
Been listening to much rap music lately? Or does the fact that songs like “Cop-Killer” sell millions of albums and are considered part of black mainstream culture prove too inconvenient?
You like to use a fringe group that practices racism. I can show you mainstream blacks who encourage people to go out and shoot whites, just like I just did.
When Bruce gets his face axed at a gay bar – I’ll remember to ask if the ax murderer had an id or not.
Gotta keep your priorities straight.
I’m not sure you’ll have time, what with all the celebrating you’ll be doing.