Hate Crime Bill passes House

[Kelemvor]

I guess it really is something we have to leave to the jury and judges (even though there are some really crap judges out there). I would agree that the legislators are ill equipped to handle this. The thing they are trying to tackle is bigger than hate crimes. It is an attempt to legislate upon the perceived villainy of a crime, which is very slippery.

Remember, though, differentiating between crimes of the same end is not that radical. I could shoot a guy and steal his car and be a murderer (which I would never ever do), but I would be a murderer still if I catch a man in bed with my wife and beat him to death (which might happen if I were ever put in the situation). In my opinion, I would deserve to die for the first situation, but the second is different, I do not think such an action makes one a menace to society.

Thoughts?

[Semiauto]

Philandering, like sodomy, is a lifestyle choice.

[Kelemvor]

Philandering, like sodomy, is a lifestyle choice.

Not quite the same, but there is no doubt in my mind that I'd kill someone for sodomizing my wife.

[Guest SUNTZU]

I am all for gay marriage and do not feel threatened in the slightest by it... so no, the way I read that Act I am not for it, nor do I applaud it.

Its just strange that most Gay Rights groups advocate the Democrats when that bill was passed into law by Bill Clinton. You'd think they'd be up in arms that this wasn't repealed than applauding the Hate Crime bill that makes them more equal than everyone else. Now that that's said, I'll wait at the door to be arrested.

[analog_kidd]

I guess it really is something we have to leave to the jury and judges (even though there are some really crap judges out there). I would agree that the legislators are ill equipped to handle this. The thing they are trying to tackle is bigger than hate crimes. It is an attempt to legislate upon the perceived villainy of a crime, which is very slippery.

Remember, though, differentiating between crimes of the same end is not that radical. I could shoot a guy and steal his car and be a murderer (which I would never ever do), but I would be a murderer still if I catch a man in bed with my wife and beat him to death (which might happen if I were ever put in the situation). In my opinion, I would deserve to die for the first situation, but the second is different, I do not think such an action makes one a menace to society.

Thoughts?

I think in the eyes of the law these two examples are already different. The first would be first degree murder, the other is second degree murder, or a crime of passion. The offender would be prosecuted differently for each.

[Guest mikedwood]

I don't like the fact they attached it in with a military spending bill. I hate it when they attach something to one bill that has nothing to do with the intent of the rest of the bill.

That kind of stuff happens on both sides, it shows the charater of our elected officials.

I don't like the thought crime aspect or putting one group over another. I've always been under the impression we were all Americans and as such were equal. Some are more equal than others currently and that is Orwellian.

I'm not for an amendment to the "Bill of Rights" to define marriage. That doesn't sit well with me at all.

[towerclimber37]

Not quite the same, but there is no doubt in my mind that I'd kill someone for sodomizing my wife.

Unless he dragged her there against her will, you'd be murdering a man that didn't deserve it.

In this respect, all I can say is that it takes 2 to do that sort of stuff and your wife would be just as guilty...and moreso than the stranger if you want to use moral relativism..simply because she KNOWS the probability of what would happen were she to be caught,when the stranger does not.

That sort of thinking is no way to get justice for all, which is a part of the credo of our justice system.