MyFox
 

4Justice's Blog

by 4Justice from Houston Texas

Last Post 191 days, 16 hours Ago


HATE CRIMES MUST GO
Sep 27, 2007 | 1:54 AM
Category: News
Report This Post


The Matthew Shepard Act (S 1105) will be voted on Thursday Sept. 27, 2007

This legislation has been endorsed by over 280 Civic, Religious and Law Organizations.

It would provide funding to help Law Enforcement Agencies investigate and prosecute violent Hate Crimes.

I am a supporter of the Human Rights Campaign and hope this well needed bill will pass.

We have the right to have an opinion and we have the right to be selective but no one has the right to be violent to another person due to their passion and hate because they do not agree with their race, color, looks, disability or even sexual orientation.

Matthew Shepard was a young student at the University of Wyoming.

October 7, 1998, Matthew met Aaron McKinney and Russel Henderson at a bar and shortly after midnight they offered Matthew a ride home.  Their intent was to rob Matthew at gun point.  Then later with Matthew's keys, go and burglarize his home.

They pistol whipped and severely beat Matthew until he became unconscious.
They took him to a rural area, tied him to a farm fence and left him to die.

He was found 18 hours later with severe brain stem damage with injuries deemed to be too severe for doctors to operate.

There were about a dozen lacerations around his head and neck. He was pronounced dead at Poudre Valley Hospital in Fort Collins.

His two assailants, Aaron McKinney and Russel Henderson were arrested, convicted and imprisoned under statue laws.

This Hate Crime legislation would carry a stronger penalty and close loopholes.

 R.I.P.   

15 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 15
Page 1 of 2
1
2
 Last
Pol1
Sep 27, 2007 | 12:36 PM

Sorry, I don't believe in hate crime legislation at all. Folks don't harm another person because they like them. They do it because the are angry at the other person, because they hate the other person (for whatever reason), or because they just don't care (for the heck of it or just because that person is in the way). Each should receive equal punishment. Murder or assault is no less a crime just because the person was not of a particular race, faith, sexual orientation, etc.
The use of "hate crime" is just a form of socially acceptable bigotry IMO.
Wonderful-World read my blog view my photos
Sep 27, 2007 | 5:26 PM

I agree, Pol. Lady Justice is supposed to be blind, but I wonder how differently some trials might turn out if the accused, witnesses and victims were not seen, but only heard. Any violent crime arises from some form of hate. To segregate its definition is ridiculous.
4Justice read my blog view my photos
Sep 27, 2007 | 5:59 PM

pol1.
I can understand your point and would agree had it not for the run away Judicial system we have adopted as of late.

No one likes more and more legislation being enacted but in this particular case we must put an end to swing door actions by laid back encumbered Judges.
Too many thugs repeat their hate crimes without fear and with impunity.

The Human Rights Campaign won the first stage as the Bill passed this afternoon in the Senate
However it has a tough road ahead to survive final negotiations with a very strong pressure from the radical right people who insist their way or nothing.

Pres. Bush has threatened to veto it as he does with most bills that have no interest value in his or Corporations favor.

We must ensure the freedom and protection of all Americans to enjoy the entitled freedom without fear of Mob rule and gang violence.

Hope you may reconsider this particular action for the safely of all peoples existence.
Thanks for your input and its good to hear other opinions.
4Justice read my blog view my photos
Sep 27, 2007 | 6:22 PM

WW
In the case of Matthew Shepard, he was not seen as he was brutally murdered.
Many other cases are similar but not herd due to lack of evidence and the assailants go free.

Just of late we've had a return of elderly widows being brutally mugged on their own door step after being followed home from the stores.

The take being a ring on the finger and credit cards.
The assailants IF caught do the minimum or probation while the victim suffers for ever.
Under a Hate crime bill they would not get away so lightly and would be held accountable, pay the price for the many premeditated concocted crimes they carry out daily.
PBMom read my blog view my photos
Oct 1, 2007 | 8:32 PM

I agree with this bill. If Bush vetos, I hope it is overturned.
HereAmI read my blog view my photos
Oct 9, 2007 | 8:26 AM

If you are concerned we are not enforcing the existing laws in failing judicial system, what will be different about this one?

Unprovoked violence against another is disrespectful of their humanity and thus is hateful.

Why do we need more legislation which separates us into categories of difference?
4Justice read my blog view my photos
Oct 9, 2007 | 12:35 PM

There should be no categories of difference.
Because you hate some other person, animal or being does not give you the right to take physical action to harm them because you do not agree with their gender, speech, looks, race, color, height, weight or social habits etc.etc.

Judges and even Jury members are prone to being partisan and many times make corrupt and unfair decisions for their own gratification.

To stop the ongoing gang violence, we need more stringent laws where judges cannot be fooled by slick and slimy attorneys and must abide by the penalties to fit the crime.
That's what their job is all about, not to make their own laws to suit their own ego.

Think of the Mafia and how they got away with so much crime and do today, especially the violent non publicized ethnic varieties forming groups mostly illegal aliens.
No, not the MS13 gangs but the Russian, Eastern European and Asian Thugs.

People harming themselves with chemical abuse get harsher prison time than those that do physical harm or rape and murder to others.

We need to confine these criminals together on some far away Island.
They would then be able to let their violent emotions loose upon themselves.

If you don't agree to have laws strengthened to suit the crime then wait until you are violated without cause and you'll be thinking different.

This blog was to show how 3 evil monsters predominately and maliciously killed another human being for monetary gain and showed no remorse for their actions in the murder.
HereAmI read my blog view my photos
Oct 9, 2007 | 2:02 PM

It could be I do not understand your position.

“This blog was to show how 3 evil monsters predominately and maliciously killed another human being for monetary gain and showed no remorse for their actions in the murder.”

I agree evil intent is necessary to beat a person to death yet I disagree there is any more or less evil because of a victim’s protected classification. When a person beats and violates another it is evil. The violent act of killing, outside of self defense, is the evil and it is a violent murder regardless of the motivation being theft, morbid curiosity, race, color, looks, disability or even sexual orientation of the victim.

I agree, “There should be no categories of difference” In Hate Crimes legislation I see government differentiation of a crime based upon race, color, looks, disability or even sexual orientation of the victim.

New legislation is not required. Better judicial application of laws that exist is likely a good course of action and follow through with penitential consequences.

“…wait until you are violated without cause and you'll be thinking different.” Your have little knowledge of my experience.

I enjoy the blog as an opportunity to share thoughts and ideals. You and other bloggers cause me to think through issues. This sometimes results in a change in my posture on such issues; sometimes it reinforces my position.

Thank you and good blogging.
PBMom read my blog view my photos
Oct 9, 2007 | 7:44 PM

There is a difference between random acts of violence and violence directed at a specific individual or group of individuals because they are different.
HereAmI read my blog view my photos
Oct 9, 2007 | 9:37 PM

Someone please help me understand this concept of the difference in degree of evil (hate) based upon the intent of the following scenarios.

Alfred beat my child to death because my child is a purple panda.

Betty beat my child to death for my child’s lunch money.

Carl beat my child to death out of the curiosity of watching my child die.

Donna beat my child to death for sexual gratification.

Can you place these situations in order of least to worst evil?
What criteria did you use to determine this order?

I cannot see the difference. My child was beat and suffered a heinous death. Random or intended, all four of these situations would provide that a complete disrespect and disregard for person has occurred.

Respectfully,
hereami
Page 1 of 2
1
2
 Last


Write your comment below:




4Justice

Just looking for Justice in this society. Peace on Earth. Peace in our time and Good Will towards ALL men.

Member Since: 1/31/2007


 

View All Photos


RSS: XMLWhat is RSS?