Comment by Jim Campbell
November 20, 2019
The federal and state governments would like us to believe that since they passed legislation to designate crimes based on race color or creed that it has a positive effect in minimizing said crimes.
If fact the opposite effect is often true when prosecuting so-called hate crime.
Judges are requiring prosecutors to prove that the crimes of their defendants were, in fact, hate crimes.
Why the need for a crime that is already a crime to have a special designation?
The thinking was behind the liberals who passed said legislation, was that judges might hand down harsher sentences for hate crimes.
Hate crime legislation is just one more example of leftist “Feel Good,” legislation that has failed.
Hate crimes are an oxymoron in that they represent the break down of morals on the individual as well as large groups.
Try as they will, politicians can’t legislate morality into the lives of those who live in the States of America.
The reader might want to consider this in line with the anti-gun legislation passed by leftist do-gooders when there have never been studies conducted that the availability of guns causes violence.
The opposite has happened.
Hate Crime Laws
Since 1968, when Congress passed, and President Lyndon Johnson signed into law, the first federal hate crimes statute, the Department of Justice has been enforcing federal hate crimes laws.
As yes, the good old days when members of Congress attempted to give us the appearance of civility, unlike the cesspool Capitol Hill has turned into today.
The 1968 statute made it a crime to use, or threaten to use, force to willfully interfere with any person because of race, color, religion, or national origin and because the person is participating in a federally protected activity, such as public education, employment, jury service, travel, or the enjoyment of public accommodations, or helping another person to do so.
In 1968, Congress also made it a crime to use, or threaten to use, force to interfere with housing rights because of the victim’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; in 1988, protections on the basis of familial status and disability were added.
In 1996, Congress passed the Church Arson Prevention Act, 18 U.S.C. § 247.
Under this Act, it is a crime to deface, damage, or destroy religious real property, or interfere with a person’s religious practice, in situations affecting interstate commerce.
The Act also bars defacing, damaging, or destroying religious property because of the race, color, or ethnicity of persons associated with the property.
In 2009, Congress passed, and President Obama signed, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr.
Hate Crimes Prevention Act, expanding the federal definition of hate crimes, enhancing the legal toolkit available to prosecutors, and increasing the ability of federal law enforcement to support our state and local partners.
This law removed then existing jurisdictional obstacles to prosecutions of a certain race- and religion-motivated violence and added new federal protections against crimes based on gender, disability, gender identity, or sexual orientation.
Before the Civil Rights Division prosecutes a hate crime, the Attorney General or someone the Attorney General designates must certify, in writing, that (1) the state does not have jurisdiction; (2) the state has requested that the federal government assume jurisdiction; (3) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to state charges did not demonstratively vindicate the federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence; or (4) a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.
|The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, 18 U.S.C. § 249||The Shepard Byrd Act makes it a federal crime to willfully cause bodily injury, or attempt to do so using a dangerous weapon, because of the victim’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin. |
The Act also extends federal hate crime prohibitions to crimes committed because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person, only where the crime affected interstate or foreign commerce or occurred within federal special maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
The Shepard-Byrd Act is the first statute allowing federal criminal prosecution of hate crimes motivated by the victim’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
|Criminal Interference with Right to Fair Housing, 42 U.S.C. § 3631||This statute makes it a crime to use or threaten to use force to interfere with housing rights because of the victim’s race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin.|
|Damage to Religious Property, Church Arson Prevention Act, 18 U.S.C. § 247||This statute prohibits the intentional defacement, damage, or destruction of religious real property because of the religious nature of the property, where the crime affects interstate or foreign commerce, or because of the race, color, or ethnic characteristics of the people associated with the property. |
The statute also criminalizes the intentional obstruction by force, or threat of force of any person in the enjoyment of that person’s free exercise of religious beliefs.
|Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights, 18 U.S.C. § 245|| |
This statute makes it a crime to use, or threaten to use force to willfully interfere with any person because of race, color, religion, or national origin and because the person is participating in a federally protected activity, such as public education, employment, jury service, travel, or the enjoyment of public accommodations, or helping another person to do so.
|Conspiracy Against Rights, 18 U.S.C. § 241||This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory, or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the Constitution or the laws of the U.S.|
Viewers who believe in the complete sincerity of those who made these laws enjoyed face time among their constituents for doing something “Good.”
Some have become more jaded as they watch politicians over the years particularly the most recent ones with all the acrimony between Nancy Pelosi’s Cabal and the Administration of President Donald J.Trump.