Hate Crimes Bill Clears Committee

[KittySlayer]

Does the bill name “Legal open carry adult male gun owners with a LTCH” as a protected class? I understand they are a minority that are hated, especially if wearing a red hat.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Does the bill name “Legal open carry adult male gun owners with a LTCH” as a protected class? I understand they are a minority that are hated, especially if wearing a red hat.

That would be rich.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Smary virtue signalling which will only be used by prosecutors to attack racial minorities.

IF this passes, I demand there be a mechanism to record the race of the defendant who it is used against.

 

[Fargo]

Smary virtue signalling which will only be used by prosecutors to attack racial minorities.

IF this passes, I demand there be a mechanism to record the race of the defendant who it is used against.

Geez at least spell smarmy right. The Indiana Republican Party does really know it’s way around pandering.

 

[cbhausen]

I'll add my voice to the NO votes... I want this bill to FAIL.

 

[Mark 1911]

So let's postulate that the incident at the Pro-Life March in Washington DC involving Nathan Philips, the Black Israelites, high school students from Covington Catholic High School in KY, and a politicized media, happened here in Indiana, say Indianapolis.

As it turned out, it wasn't the boys who were guilty of bad behavior, but Nathan Philips, the Black Israelites, and the media who fabricated a false narrative to smear the high school students.

Had this happened in Indiana, would the high school students have recourse to legal action under the new hate crimes bill?

No. Probably not. Only certain groups would have access to it. And that is why this is so ridiculous.

 

[rhino]

I'd be on the phone to my senator's office right now, but he was the 1 in the 9-1 committee vote. Phil Boots is a good guy.

 

[AngryRooster]

Just saw on the news right now that an amendment was added by a republican. It stripped all the protected classes out and replaced them with "bias" for the judge to use his discretion on. They said the amendment passed. I didn't catch part of the story on 59 so I know any more details. I'm sure they will repeat it in a while.

 

[cobber]

https://www.jconline.com/story/news...ate-crimes-bill-but-he-says-hes-k/2927537002/

With RINOs like this, who needs Democrats. Tsk...

 

[KellyinAvon]

So is Indiana's Hate Crime Bill now too inclusive?

 

[rob63]

https://www.jconline.com/story/news...ate-crimes-bill-but-he-says-hes-k/2927537002/

With RINOs like this, who needs Democrats. Tsk...

The article spells it all out...

“The version of the bill approved today by the Senate does not get Indiana off the list of states without a bias crime law,” Holcomb said Tuesday.

The entire point of this is to get us off the list, not to do what is best, or what the people want, or anything else one might think is a reasonable reason for passing a law. I don't know who it is that keeps this list, but I presume they are rich and powerful.

“I will vote against it, absolutely,” Alting said. “I’m a person of my word, and I have told my constituents that, why would you not have the list with the names of the characteristics on it to protect these different people. … I gave my word that if it didn’t have sexual orientation in it and if it didn’t have gender ID in it, this senator would not support it.”

I have no idea who it is that keeps the list we have to get off of, but, it is obvious that whoever it is will not be satisfied with anything less than those specific words.

“The positive thing is that there’s a bill still alive – something that the House can look at,” Alting said. “The House can replay the tapes of the testimony. They can see the passion in what the people believe in. And possibly put that list back in the bill.

The reason why we must listen to these people, and use their specific words, is because they are passionate.

I don't get it either, but, I think the outcome is fore-ordained. We will do the bidding of the business leaders that want this, so that they won't abandon us, and they will reward us by expanding their businesses in California, New York, Washington, or wherever the heck they are from.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The entire point of this is to get us off the list, not to do what is best, or what the people want, or anything else one might think is a reasonable reason for passing a law. I don't know who it is that keeps this list, but I presume they are rich and powerful.

Over the years, I've had a number of managers that would often times prioritize resources solely based on the goal to either be first on some list or not be the last on some other list...usually regardless of whether it was the best thing to do for the business at the time. Those people were usually some of the least favorite I worked for.

 

[BigRed]

A good article in today's WSJ re: this "hate-crime" BS:

Are Hate-Crime Laws Helping?​

Such statutes seem to encourage dubious claims like JussieSmollett’s more than they promote justice.​

Ifyour mother says she loves you, check it out. That old journalistic saw hasbeen much neglected in recent years. It needs to be revived after the JussieSmollett case. Here’s another lesson: If Al Sharpton is not rushing to be seenstanding next to the latest hate-crimes accuser, you might be wise to withholdjudgment too.
Andwhy must celebrities strive always to be first to deplore incidents thatvirtually all Americans deplore? Is it because they live in dread that a wordor episode from their own past will resurface and wreck their careers?
Finally, can we consider the possibility thathate-crime laws were a bad idea after all? Such statutes don’t seem to determuch. Why would they? They criminalize acts that are already criminal. Yet theyseem to have spawned an epidemic of false charges.

Wikipedia’sentry on racial hoaxes is instructive. Remember the Boston man in 1989 whomurdered his pregnant wife and blamed a random black assailant? Such cases,playing on racial stereotypes, were once not rare. Tawana Brawley, who claimedshe was raped by four white men (and inadvertently gave birth to Rev.Sharpton’s national profile), also had a self-preservation motive: She wasseeking to avoid punishment from her stepfather for an unexplained absence fromhome.
Thenature of the racial hoax seems to have changed. Recent cases involved mainlyperpetrators who wanted to bring attention to themselves, pose as victims, andincite ideological hatred.
TheCollege Fix, a student-reported news site, lists 50 such incidents on campussince 2012. National Review contributor Andy Ngo tweeted out details of 31documented cases arising from anti-Donald Trump sentiment.
IfMr. Smollett assumed his story would go unquestioned because he was black andgay, he didn’t do his research carefully. And why involve confederates whendoing so needlessly created witnesses to his own wrongdoing? Whatever you thinkabout the media, police and other relevant authorities have been willing to getto the bottom of reported incidents. In 2016, an arson against a Mississippiblack church, including the spray-painted words “Vote Trump,” was traced to ablack parishioner. A Louisiana Muslim university student’s claim that she wasassaulted by Trump supporters was shown to be fabricated. The list goes on.
Theseepisodes and dozens more were dutifully reported by the press as racistoutrages, then dutifully reported as hoaxes when the truth emerged.
Looking back, hate-crimes legislation was supposed tomanifest society’s special sensitivity to acts stoking group antagonism. Itdoesn’t seem to be helping. Chicago police spent hundreds of man-hoursunraveling Mr. Smollett’s story, resources that weren’t spent on the city’sepidemic of unsolved murders. If Mr. Smollett sticks now with his current linethat he’s being railroaded by a biased Chicago justice system, he’ll onlycontribute to a stereotype that makes solving real crimes harder.

AQuinnipiac poll finds that 56% of black Virginia voters don’t believe theirgovernor should step down over a blackface episode in his past. Is this not asignal that average Americans resist a descent into racial craziness? Whyanyone would be offended by such incidents is easy to understand. The incidentsthemselves aren’t. Some of Virginia’s most respected liberal Democratic leadershave these episodes in their past. Does this suggest an anarchic youthful urgeto transcend oppressive barriers or to reinforce them? At least we’d like tohear from somebody more expert than a journalist trying to demonstrate his own antiracistbona fides.
Injecting an element of thoughtcrime into the treatment of acts that werealready serious felonies, such as assaults and vandalism, was always a dubiousconstitutional proposition. Many civil libertarians thought so when hate-crimelaws were being debated, though not all were able to maintain the courage oftheir convictions.
Arecent Pro Publica study found that Texas, which enacted a strong hate-crimeslaw in 2001, has had few successful prosecutions. Among the reasons: Provingmotive is harder than proving the act itself; often the act alone carries asevere penalty; prosecutors worry that seeking a hate-crime enhancement wouldonly complicate a straightforward case.
Thefuture may add another caveat: Hate-crime charges have become debased in thepublic mind because of false accusations.
Americansdo hateful things to each other, but they do them in plausible circumstances.Plausibility was always missing from the Smollett story. Mr. Sharpton, wholargely kept his distance aside from issuing an initial supportive statement,has good reason to be highly attuned to the possibility that such accusationsare false. It’s a wonder that so many in the national media have yet to catchon.

Appeared in the February 23, 2019, print edition.

 

[bwframe]

Top CEOs urge key lawmakers to overhaul bias-crimes legislation

 

[rob63]

This is so bizarre it could go in a lot of different threads. It's an old story, but I just saw it at the bottom of a page someone else linked to in another thread. My apologies in advance if it is a dupe...

Lamar, SC – Lamar’s Volunteer Mayor Darnell Byrd-McPherson has declared she was the target of a hate crime, even though police determined that the “yellow, sticky substance” she found on her vehicles was the result of pollen - not vandalism.

“We are grateful the person or persons did not try to take our lives but the culprits will be identified and prosecuted,” Byrd-McPherson said in a statement, according to WPDE. “Love conquers hate and my husband and I refuse to be intimidated by those who perpetrated this act of vandalism which I classify as an act of hatred.”

The alleged incident occurred at approximately 10 p.m. on Feb. 7, the mayor told Newsweek.

“My husband went out to the car to get some things out of the garage,” Byrd-McPherson said. “He says, ‘Somebody’s painted your car!’”

A neighbor happened to stop by around the same time, and joined Byrd McPherson and her husband outside, she said.

They began “scraping” the “grainy substance” from the vehicles.

“They started rubbing it, and it was this yellow, sticky substance. So it was like, ‘What is this?’” she told Newsweek.

Byrd-McPherson said that she drove her car the following day, and that she “thought [the substance] was pollen,” WPDE reported.

It was unclear why she changed her mind and determined that the substance was the result of a hate-crime fueled vandalism, but she did note that Lamar has a history of racism.

https://defensemaven.io/bluelivesma...ubstance-found-on-car---5H9fa2H0eZQWH0mHIf9Q/

 

[DoggyDaddy]

This is so bizarre it could go in a lot of different threads. It's an old story, but I just saw it at the bottom of a page someone else linked to in another thread. My apologies in advance if it is a dupe...

Lamar, SC – Lamar’s Volunteer Mayor Darnell Byrd-McPherson has declared she was the target of a hate crime, even though police determined that the “yellow, sticky substance” she found on her vehicles was the result of pollen - not vandalism.

“We are grateful the person or persons did not try to take our lives but the culprits will be identified and prosecuted,” Byrd-McPherson said in a statement, according to WPDE. “Love conquers hate and my husband and I refuse to be intimidated by those who perpetrated this act of vandalism which I classify as an act of hatred.”

The alleged incident occurred at approximately 10 p.m. on Feb. 7, the mayor told Newsweek.

“My husband went out to the car to get some things out of the garage,” Byrd-McPherson said. “He says, ‘Somebody’s painted your car!’”

A neighbor happened to stop by around the same time, and joined Byrd McPherson and her husband outside, she said.

They began “scraping” the “grainy substance” from the vehicles.

“They started rubbing it, and it was this yellow, sticky substance. So it was like, ‘What is this?’” she told Newsweek.

Byrd-McPherson said that she drove her car the following day, and that she “thought [the substance] was pollen,” WPDE reported.

It was unclear why she changed her mind and determined that the substance was the result of a hate-crime fueled vandalism, but she did note that Lamar has a history of racism.

https://defensemaven.io/bluelivesma...ubstance-found-on-car---5H9fa2H0eZQWH0mHIf9Q/

Probably tree pollen. And everyone knows that trees can have some pretty bad attitudes.

There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas
The trouble with the maples
And they're quite convinced they're right
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade?
There is trouble in the forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the maples scream 'oppression!'
And the oaks, just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
'The oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light'
Now there's no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet,
Axe,
And saw

-- Rush