AG Holder Urges New Hate Crimes Law

[Richard]

And there it is - the answer to whatever ails us - adding new and improved political polygrip to the broken dentures of legal teeth.

Richard's $.02

AG Holder Urges New Hate Crimes Law
USA Today, 15 Jun 2009

Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday that recent killings show the need for a tougher U.S. hate crimes law to stop "violence masquerading as political activism."

"Over the last several weeks, we have witnessed brazen acts of violence, committed in places that many would have considered unthinkable," Holder told the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs.

He cited separate attacks over a two-week period that killed a young soldier, an abortion provider and a guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Federal agents and prosecutors are already involved in the local investigations of each attack.

The violence, he said, "reminds us of the potential threat posed by violent extremists and the tragedy that ensues when reasoned discourse is replaced by armed confrontation."

In order to stop that violence, he said, Congress should pass an updated version of hate crimes legislation, in order to more effectively prosecute those who commit violent attacks based on gender, disability, or sexual orientation.

Did any of the three attacks mentioned have anything to do with any of these three categories?

The growing number of hate crimes against Hispanics also shows the need for tougher laws, Holder said.

"We will not tolerate murder, or the threat of violence, masquerading as political activism," Holder said. "So let me be clear, the Justice Department will use every tool at its disposal to protect the rights ensured under our Constitution."

Earlier, a leading civil rights coalition says there has been an increase in white supremacist activity since the election of the first African-American president.

The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund reported Tuesday that the economic downturn and fear of immigrants also contributed to the increase.

The report comes a week after a white supremacist killed a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Museum.

The coalition reported the U.S. now averages a hate crime nearly every hour of every day. A special concern is the rising number of hate crimes committed against Hispanics and gays.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...hooModule_News

[Utah Bob]

Yup, that'll fix it for sure.

[The Reaper]

I'm sorry, does the crime of murder in the first degree not already qualify someone for the death penalty?

Do they need another few years added because of their attitude towards the victim, or do we just need to administer their just rewards in a more timely manner?

TR

[KClapp]

More newspeak.

[greenberetTFS]

I can't imagine 3 1/2 more years(or more) of this guy.......

GB TFS

[rubberneck]

If the law passes can I press charges against Holder for implying that I am a racist and a coward?

[Gypsy]

Originally Posted by rubberneck

If the law passes can I press charges against Holder for implying that I am a racist and a coward?

Ooooh, there's a class action suit in the making right there.

[Sigaba]

I'm beginning to wonder if the recession means that the editorial duties of newspapers such as USA Today are being handled by Microsoft Office 2007's spell check and grammar check.

AG Holder needs no help sticking his foot in his mouth but that's what he got in this article. The text of his speech, available here, shows him making a transition from the crimes he describes as manifestations

of the potential threat posed by violent extremists and the tragedy that ensues when reasoned discourse is replaced by armed confrontation.

A bit later, he makes the transition by saying

Likewise, the Justice Department will do all that it can to bring the perpetrators of bias-motivated crimes to justice. That includes working with Congress to strengthen existing federal hate crimes laws. The House of Representatives has already passed legislation that would accomplish this goal and the Department of Justice is working with the Senate as it begins consideration of a similar hate crimes statute.

I testified in support of stronger federal hate crimes legislation when I was Deputy Attorney General, almost ten years ago. My friends, that is far too long to wait. Too long to wait for the authority to prosecute offenses motivated by a person’s gender, disability or sexual orientation. Too long to wait for the tools necessary to staunch the rising tide of bias-motivated violence directed at the Latino community. Put simply, too long to wait for justice.

By my reading of AG Holder's speech, he did not conflate the two issues as the USA Today piece suggests.

Moreover, as the balance of the quotation indicates, AG Holder's speech raised the issue of the Department of Justice working with Congress to shape laws that have been under discussion for the past ten years. This approach is markedly different than what the editorial thrust of the USA Today piece implies.

I am increasingly concerned that, for a variety of reasons, we are getting misreported, sensationalized, facts from the MSM. Are we on the right side of the aisle (and the issues ) being baited so that we react to what we read rather than what was actually said and done?

[KClapp]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

I am increasingly concerned that, for a variety of reasons, we are getting misreported, sensationalized, facts from the MSM. Are we on the right side of the aisle (and the issues ) being baited so that we react to what we read rather than what was actually said and done?

The OPFOR is well aware of the importance of a good IO campaign.

[nmap]

Sometimes, a passage in a work of fiction communicates an idea more effectively than any other choice of words.

"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken.You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it.

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt.

Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)

[Richard]

By my reading of AG Holder's speech, he did not conflate the two issues as the USA Today piece suggests.

And there you have it - a free press in action.

Richard's $.02

[Razor]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Are we on the right side of the aisle (and the issues ) being baited so that we react to what we read rather than what was actually said and done?

I don't believe so. Reading the article, I maintain vehement disagreement with the AG's position that "bias-motivated" crime deserves any more attention than a similar crime motivated instead by greed, anger, laziness, jealousy, boredom or any other factor. Were the Holocaust Museum murderer a young, white Jew that killed out of an intense hatred of museum patrons in general, would that lessen the resulting tragedy of the death and injury of the guards? If someone beats an elderly Asian woman to the point of hospitalization, does it matter if the assailant did so to take her wallet and steal her identity, or because the attacker hates "chinks"? If our justice system metes out punishment with an eye towards deterrence, what exactly are anti-hate crime laws really attempting to deter? A law against battery is enacted to attempt to discourage physical attacks by punishing those that do so. Thus, is the desired effect of a hate crime law to prevent hate? Are we really so self-important that we believe we can simply legislate away racial prejudice? I fail to see any difference between a sociopathic Latino murdering another, randomly selected Latino, and the same guy murdering a randomly selected caucasian; the end result is a dead human being, and is race-immaterial.

I feel we all have prejudices of one kind or another. I freely admit that given a choice, I prefer to associate with my SF brothers. So long as I'm not purposefully rude to others, what is the societal harm? If a person has a visceral distaste for, say, amputees, but never allows this bias to be overtly manifested, will a stronger anti-hate crime law change this person's view? I contend that it won't, and thus an emphasis on "bias-motivated" criminal law is both redundant and ineffective.

[KClapp]

Originally Posted by nmap

Sometimes, a passage in a work of fiction communicates an idea more effectively than any other choice of words.

"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken.You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it.

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt.

Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)

Ms. Rand's work may prove to be more prophetic than many would care to admit.