FBI Hate Crime Statistics, 2000

Fiedor Report On the News #252 ^ | 11-25-01 | Doug Fiedor

[staytrue]

A person should be prosecuted based on his actions, not upon his thoughts.

I guess this would mean that there is no difference between 1st degree murder and 2nd degree murder.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I think that crime that is done for no reasonable reason other than the desire to commit crime is worse than a crime done for a reasonable motive."

"I think shooting people at random, for no reason than the enjoyment of mayhem is worse than shooting to rob, exact revenge, road rage ,or other reason."

"The extension to hate crimes simply means that "hate crime" laws mean greater punishment for those who commit crimes for no explainable reason other than dislike of someone's race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, or national origin."

"As far as reading intent, this is done all the time in murder cases. 1st degree murder is intentional, while other murder is not. They are both murder, but one type gets a tougher sentence. The same goes for malicious destruction. The same applies in civil suits where punitive damages are handed out for intentional wrong doing as opposed to accidental wrong doing. Hate crime laws are an extention of these ideas."

All these "thoughts" do is prove that you have been successfully brainwashed by the left. "Hate crimes" are right out of the book "1984". No matter what the "reason" behind it, a given crime is equally bad, no matter WHAT the motivation behind it. What you are actually talking about is UNEQUAL protection under the law. Next you will be (and your colleagues on the left are already trying to put the process in place of) criminalizing people simply for THINKING about harming someone ("thought" crime), or talking about same ("speech" crime). I'm sorry, but this is BS.

Why not take your "liberal-think" over to Democrats Unlimited, where they "think" like you do?

[staytrue]

The practical reality is that justice is not applied equally. If I shoot a homelees street person, one cop might investigate for a few days before closing the case. If I shoot Bill Cosby's son or Chandra Levy, a whole army of investigators descend for months and they never give up.

If I shoot a cop or the president, it's hanging time, but if I shoot a homeless person, I might get 2 years if I have a good lawyer. This is because, killing a cop is deemed more injurious to society than killing a street bum.

Further, I will say that random killings, like a sniper on a rooftop, is far more tramatizing and detrimental for society than a person who shoots his wife because he was rightly or wrongly jealous about someone. You will find that juries agree with me.

Hate crime laws simply are saying that killing someone because you don't like their race or whatever is worse than killing someone because you want to rob them and the victim resists. I agree with this because racial crimes are more injurious to society than non racial crimes because the breed division, disunity, and anger in the society. I am against hate crime laws because they breed even more division and disunity. Nevertheless, you should see that those on the other side have a valid case.

[Smokin' Joe]

No. That's why I count on my ol' .45

[Ditto]

I guess it is probably because if one out of every six whites decided to shoot a black, and every single black decided to shoot a white, then one out of every 6 whites in the country would be dead, while 100% of the blacks would be dead.

And since there are still lots of blacks I guess that sort blows the idea that all whites are racists crap out of the water.

Can there be such a thing as a black on black or white on white hate crime? Like some gang members who will shoot other gang members on sight? Aren't they profiling and killing because of hate?

[savedbygrace]

Statistics lie.

Besides, the largest grouping is "intimidation," which isn't a crime, unless, apparently, it's a Hate Crime. this defies logic, IMO.

If it's a crime for a white person to intimidate a black person, then it HAS to be a crime for a white person to intimidate a white person. Otherwise, it violates the equal protection clause.

[unamused]

I guess this would mean that there is no difference between 1st degree murder and 2nd degree murder

Not if you're the victim...

[Wonder Warthog]

"Nevertheless, you should see that those on the other side have a valid case."

Nope, I don't see any such thing. All I see is leftist propaganda at odds with our Constitution and laws. Don't you find it just a bit "odd" that the only people advocating "hate crimes" just happen to be leftists, and the only people that will end up on the pointed end of the stick are those on the right?? See, as a case in point, the treatment of Timothy McVeigh and the much larger number of eco-terrorists who routinely bomb\burn\and destroy. Why doesn't the FBI pursue these LEFTWING terrorists with fervor equal to that which they invest in pursuing the "Aryan Nation" and "Christian Identity" (all five guys of them!).

[Angry Activist]

Once again more P.C. B.S! The only reason that tese statistics seem so high is that the average White who is intimidated in the streets of the cities DOES NOT report it, and even if they do, it is hardly ever concidered a "hate" crime. If I blew the whistle every time I was threatened, called a racial slur, or had a black man put his hands on me in a menacing manner every time I walked the city streets of Minneapolis Minnesota, law enforcement would have very little time to concentrate on the REAL crimes going on in the city. Now let me simply add to this the fact that it is proven that in many of these case studies, hispanics are also thrown in under the category of White, and thus unbalancing the actual numbers of crimes (or supposed crimes) comitted by Whites.

This P.C. business has to end. Am I the only one who sees that Hate Crime Laws seem slanted to encompass the White Americans? One need look no further than the incidents of the Cincinatti Riots not so very long ago.....how many of the blacks who chose White victims to smash with bricks, fists, feet, and any other means they could think of, were actually brought up on Hate Crime Charges? Had the situation been reversed....you can rest assured that the entire White populaton would have been condemned as evil biggots and racists, and would have been sent straight to prison!!

So much for the supposed equality everyone keeps harping on. EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL.....SPECIAL PRIVILAGES FOR NONE!!!

[staytrue]

I can't find where warthog mentioned the unabomber. But fyi, if you read the unabomber published manifesto, you will find that his views are original and probably 70% right wing. He hates govt. in general and technology in particular. He is not an eco terrorist.

[staytrue]

Why not take your "liberal-think" over to Democrats Unlimited, where they "think" like you do?

I figure you might like having me around to argue with or is it that I make too much sense.

[kristinn]

staytrue is a member in good standing of the D.C. Chapter. He's a good guy and I'm proud to have him in our chapter. You are out of line trying to run him off FR.