See other Editorial Articles
Title: Hate Crimes Prevention Act Sets Foundation To Destroy Free Speech In The U.S.
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.roguegovernment.com
Published: May 3, 2009
Author: Lee Rogers
Post Date: 2009-05-03 12:05:05 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 931
Comments: 36
As everybody is being distracted by the vastly overhyped swine flu hysteria, the U.S. House of Representatives voted in favor of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 which will serve as a mechanism to destroy free speech. This legislation will allow the federal government to provide support for state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies in the prosecution of any crime if it is believed to be motivated by prejudice based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. This bill sets the foundation for the government to impose greater penalties on individuals who have a belief system that might be perceived to be prejudiced against any particular group of people. Clearly, this bill is designed to setup the building blocks to destroy what’s left of the First Amendment. Below is the section in the bill that would allow the federal government to build the infrastructure necessary to support state, local or tribal law enforcement agencies to prosecute so called hate crimes. SEC. 3. SUPPORT FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS BY STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS. (a) Assistance Other Than Financial Assistance- (1) IN GENERAL- At the request of a State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency, the Attorney General may provide technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance in the criminal investigation or prosecution of any crime that-- (A) constitutes a crime of violence; (B) constitutes a felony under the State, local, or tribal laws; and (C) is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of the State, local, or tribal hate crime laws. What’s crazy about this legislation is that what defines a hate crime is based entirely off of subjective reasoning. So in essence, certain political points of view including particular religious points of view by an individual could potentially implicate them in a hate crime. Undoubtedly, this is an incredibly dangerous bill and unfortunately it will most likely be passed in the U.S. Senate and signed into law by the President. There simply is no need for a law like this. If you kill someone it is not relevant if the criminal had some sort of issue with the victim’s race, gender or religion. There are already too many laws defining criminal behavior and now this bill seeks to add additional crimes layered in with already existing offenses based upon how a crime might have been perceived to be carried out. This is an obvious attempt to destroy what’s left with the First Amendment and further train people to be forced into a mental box of politically correct thought and speech.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine. all (#0)
PORNOGRAPHY IS A.O.K. but not expression of religious beliefs: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I really don't think this will pass the senate even a blind man can see how this violates half a dozen constitutional protections....if I'm wrong the grand experiment is official dead
I hope you're not on board with this kind of legislation.
I'm still scoping it out. Sorry to disappoint you, but I need to read more about it before I can have an opinion on this.
You are wrong. As for the experiment? It's dead, Jim.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition On this we may agree
It wasn't an "experiment." It was our country. I don't know if it was Alexis de Tocqueville who started that talk, but it's out of line.
We're on life support as it is - this could put the final nail in our coffin.
It was his observation, that, imo, was perfectly correct. We were an unique Republic at that time. He also observed that when 'America ceases to be good, she would be no longer great.' I see nothing to refute his take on our country.
I just don't like the republic being described as an experiment. That gives the social engineers some kind of leeway. I think that attitude is partly what killed it. The constitution didn't leave a lot of freedom to "innovate" in the Federal government, but innovation started right away after it was established.
Please allow me to enlighten you. "The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered... deeply, ...finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people." Leftists and social engineers may have borrowed the term for propaganda reasons in later years, but no less a man than George Washington was the first to use the word "experiment" in public to describe his own country.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Thanks. But if those guys were perfect, we might not be in the mess we're in now. It's just one example of why I say we can't afford to be reactionaries. We have to look ahead and think for ourselves, learning from their mistakes.
It was the first time in the world's history that the people were to be sovereign, and that the government was accountable to them, instead of vice versa. 'A unique type of governance,' might be another expression, but ours is a unique adventure.
I would disagree the constitution held up almost true (some may argue) to form till the introduction of the 16th 17th 19th and 14th amendments but the death nail came with Nixon creating the EPA this agency destroyed whatever was left of the 10th Amendment
The 14th amendment was immediately interpreted as giving personhood to corporations. Also, the federal government ought not have had the right to block secession. I'm not making a pro-slavery argument, I'm just saying that the earthquake that rippled through the institution of states' rights just before and during the civil war was the beginning of the end.
It's the same old crap law that the ADL & Co. have been trying to shove down the gullets of the sheep for many years in an effort to shield The Tribe by hiding behind the poor, oppressed minorities known as fags and pedophiles. Same old tricks, different 'oppressed' people. Ferret Mike: I'm still scoping it out. Sorry to disappoint you, but I need to read more about it before I can have an opinion on this. Get off it, dude. You're down with this law. Anyone with half a brain is opposed to it on principle alone as the Soviet Union was infamous for its 'hate laws'.
See the article I just posted. This "experiment" was entrusted to the people because the founders knew they were neither perfect nor immortal. "The people" voluntarily gave up their Freedoms. Until we can change the people, we will not see Freedom return. It appears the founders predicted the demise of America because of inevitable human weakness and as the passage of time weakened resolve: The government set up by the Constitution--"is likely to be well administered for a Course of Years and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other." "The United States is Britain's very image and superscription . . . as true a gamecock as she and, I warrant you, shall become as great a scourge to mankind." Law Enforcement Against Prohibition That's a discouraging thought, Indie. Even if it were possible, we don't have billions and billions of dollars at our disposal to effect that kind of change.
"The United States is Britain's very image and superscription . . . as true a gamecock as she and, I warrant you, shall become as great a scourge to mankind." ----John Adams Dudes 'got it.'
Bankruptcy under the Federal Reserve Banking System trumps the CON-sti-stupid. The creditor rules the debtor, and all of the rhetoric is bullshit.
Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces. De La Boétie
americansfortruth.com/new...-crimes-bill-hr-1913.html Analysis of 2009 Hate Crimes Bill, HR 1913 Following is an outstanding analysis of the federal “Hate Crimes” bill, HR 1913, which could be voted on by the House of Representatives tomorrow (Wednesday, April 29). Shawn Akers is a relative newcomer to the pro-family movement but is shaping up to be a future all-star. He serves as a Policy Analyst with Liberty Counsel, and as Adjunct Professor of Law and Director of Academic Support with Liberty University School of Law. Akers is a close friend, colleague and former Regent Law classmate of Matt Barber, AFTAH Board Member and current Culture War heavyweight also with Liberty Counsel. (Barber will keynote AFTAH’s fundraising banquet on Saturday, Oct. 10 — save the date.) Keep an eye on Shawn. The Lord will be using him mightily as the heated culture war reaches a boil. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, www.aftah.com. Click here for the text of H.R. 1913, Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009; emphasis is author’s below: __________________________________________ The “Hate Crimes” Bill H.R. 1913, the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 200983; By Shawn D. Akers I. Characteristics A. “This bill would create a federal offense imposing federal criminal penalties – potentially in addition to criminal penalties imposed under state law” – on any defendant who chooses his victim in whole or in part because of the victim’s “actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin” or “actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.” “Violations would be punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years, or imprisonment for life if the offense results in death or ‘includes kidnaping [sic] or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.’” See Legislation Detail: www.overcriminalized.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?id=441. B. The bill includes the terms “Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity” – ambiguous terms that the drafters of the bill have refused to define. It places those descriptions on par with race, color, religion and nationality. C. As a matter of mechanics, the bill provides financial grants to state and local entities, provides additional personnel for investigation and prosecution, creates new federal criminal offenses, and creates a new evidentiary rule (no evidence of speech or associations is admissible to prove motive of defendant unless the speech or association is “specifically related” to the “hate crime”). D. The bill is couched in terms of providing assistance to state local and Indian governments but it reserves the right to act if they fail to exercise their jurisdiction, or leave “demonstrably un-vindicated the federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.”
The smooth criminal transition from Bush/Cheney to Obama
The people who voted for this bill should have plastic bags put over their heads. Then they should be tarred and feathered. Then a lead weight tied to their leg. Then dropped in the Hudson.
It's time to take care of ourselves, and our family and friends, and say, 'Screw-off, .gob.' This crap is just insanity. What are these fudge-packers thinking?
The smooth criminal transition from Bush/Cheney to Obama
Just damn!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Anyone with half a brain is opposed to it on principle alone Scope this one out: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...
Other countries began with this type of law and soon expanded it to protect cops, meter maids, tax collectors and other govt types who see themselves as victims of abuse. So, when the day comes that Mike and his pals can no longer display pictures of uniformed pigs at their protests without winding up on a chain gang for 90 days, he'll understand. If he abuses white cops it's because they're Nazis, and (we know what Mike's thinking) black cops are Uncle Toms. (you know, the same animus they have for black conservatives) Either way it's left wing bigotry that the law will soon check. "Oh no I DIDN'T MEAN THAT!"....Mikey cries..... Hell, if this law passes then I'm going to begin a campaign to include leftist bigots. (a simple process to amend it once the 1st amendment has been discarded for "the right reasons" and the govt will be happy to oblige!) I mean if a little bit of anti bigotry legislation is good then a lot is better, right? I mean, not all cops (or all blacks or all Jews) can be painted with the same brush. And, why should 2 or 3 dozen good cops be stereotyped and abused because 2 million abuse their authority? We need to protect our men and women in blue from smelly hippies and their commie inspired class hatred! STOP THE NAME CALLING! STOP THE HATRED! RESPECT THE POLICE!
Excellent reply HD. I can't speak for management, but anyone who supports this, even tacitly, belongs elsewhere. The shit is a deal killer. EDIT: I can see the day where any forum that disparages Zionists (code for Jews) and defends any Hamas initiative (they're terrorists) will be targeted and closed.
It's sometimes good to be reminded that others don't share our pro-liberty views.
I'm reminded of that every time I see our affirmative action hire in the Oval office.
I see your point about things being worse. I still say that the left gets its digs in when they're in office, and the right gets its when they're in. It doesn't matter anymore. We've lost the Republic. It's up to the American people to decide what to do about it.
Some American people will react positively to individual initiative. Don't wait for orders, act independently and forcefully as conditions warrant and as boldness permits.
Mike feels superior to us, at least until bluegrass points out the (purely coincidental I'm sure) similarity between Mike's enlightened universal love and the ADL's *anti German agenda. And, sadly, when the day comes that Mike can no longer honestly express his misguided but arguably sincere views he'll refuse to accept responsibility for his role as a Caucasian lemming. (or, he'll secretly gloat because his hatred of those who don't share his enlightened universal love is greater than his respect for the unique constitutional freedoms we forfeited) ______________________ * Are you a proud, European Caucasian? German. That's right, fella. Move to the rear of the car and sit with your ankles near the shackles to avoid being bitten by the dogs..... And the Peace & Reconciliation Committee will want to talk with you. It seems you have some female family members who are unaccounted for. And, what is racial hatred but your hostility for the love our brothers want to share wif yo wimmen?
Ferret Mike: "I'm still scoping it out." Are you done scoping yet, Mike?
Oops. See above.
total insanity, bump
#2. To: christine (#0)
What’s crazy about this legislation is that what defines a hate crime is based entirely off of subjective reasoning. So in essence, certain political points of view including particular religious points of view by an individual could potentially implicate them in a hate crime.
Amendment I
#3. To: lodwick (#1)
#4. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
#5. To: Deasy (#4)
#6. To: robnoel (#3)
I really don't think this will pass the senate even a blind man can see how this violates half a dozen constitutional protections....if I'm wrong the grand experiment is official dead
#7. To: IndieTX (#6)
#8. To: IndieTX, robnoel (#6)
You are wrong. As for the experiment? It's dead, Jim.
#9. To: robnoel. all (#3)
if I'm wrong the grand experiment is official dead
#10. To: Deasy. all (#8)
I don't know if it was Alexis de Tocqueville who started that talk, but it's out of line.
#11. To: lodwick (#10)
#12. To: Deasy, ALL (#8)
It wasn't an experiment. It was our country. I don't know if it was Tocqueville..but it's out of line.
- President George Washington
First Inaugural Address
New York City - April 30, 1789
#13. To: IndieTX (#12)
#14. To: Deasy (#11)
I just don't like the republic being described as an experiment.
#15. To: Deasy (#11)
#16. To: robnoel (#15)
#17. To: Ferret Mike, Deasy, christine, pinguinite, Jethro Tull, randge, HOUNDDAWG, farmfriend, scrapper2, Lady X, Esso, DeaconBenjamin, bush_is_a_moonie, Cynicom, Rotara, Prefrontal Vortex, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, Rupert_Pupkin, PSUSA, litus, wbales (#5)
#18. To: Deasy (#13)
(Edited)
--- -Benjamin Franklin
----John Adams
#19. To: IndieTX (#18)
(Edited)
Until we can change the people, we will not see Freedom return.
#20. To: IndieTX. everyone here (#18)
The government set up by the Constitution--"is likely to be well administered for a Course of Years and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other." --- -Benjamin Franklin
#21. To: robnoel (#15)
#22. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
(Edited)
#23. To: christine (#0)
#24. To: christine, everyone (#22)
#25. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
For all intents and purposes, Mike, it's thought crime legislation.
#26. To: christine (#25)
King and Hastings
#27. To: bluegrass, Ferret Mike (#17)
Ferret Mike: I'm still scoping it out. Sorry to disappoint you, but I need to read more about it before I can have an opinion on this.
Amendment I
#28. To: bluegrass, christine, Jethro Tull, Ferret Mike (#17)
Get off it, dude. You're down with this law. Anyone with half a brain is opposed to it on principle alone as the Soviet Union was infamous for its 'hate laws'.
#29. To: HOUNDDAWG (#28)
(Edited)
#30. To: Jethro Tull (#29)
#31. To: Deasy (#30)
#32. To: Jethro Tull (#31)
#33. To: Deasy (#32)
It's up to the American people to decide what to do about it.
#34. To: Jethro Tull, bluegrass, Ferret Mike (#29)
I can't speak for management, but anyone who supports this, even tacitly, belongs elsewhere. The shit is a deal killer.
#35. To: litus (#27)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...
#36. To: Ferret Mike, Deasy, HOUNDDAWG, Deasy (#35)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest