About time.

For those of you who don't want to read the link, here's a shortened version:

President Obama signed major civil rights legislation on Wednesday, making it a federal hate crime to assault people based on sexual orientation, gender and gender identity. The new measure expands the the scope of a 1968 law that applies to people attacked because of their race, religion or national origin. The U.S. Justice Department will have expanded authority to prosecute such crimes when local authorities don't.

The provision, called the Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act is attached to a defense authorization bill. It is named after Matthew Shepard, a gay college student tortured and killed in 1998, and James Byrd Jr., a black man who was chained to a pickup truck and dragged to his death the same year.

The measure expands current hate crimes law to include violence based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. To assure its passage after years of frustrated efforts, Democratic supporters attached the measure to the must-pass defense policy bill over the steep objections of many Republicans.

The measure was a priority of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., that had been on the congressional agenda for a decade. During the signing ceremony, Obama acknowledged Shepard's mom, Judy, and remembered that he had told her this day would come. He also gave a nod to Kennedy's family. Going forward, Obama promised, people will be protected from violence based on "what they look like, who they love, how they pray or why they are."

It seems like an historic achievement to me and I'm glad it happened.

quote:

Originally posted by CHAS:
About time.

Yep!

Unreal.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel:
The new measure expands the the scope of a 1968 law that applies to people attacked because of their race, religion or national origin. The U.S. Justice Department will have expanded authority to prosecute such crimes when local authorities don't.

Ok, I'll probably live to regret this bite. What is unreal about this? It sounds plausible to me that local authorities sometimes can't or won't prosecute these crimes. Shouldn't they be prosecuted?

Also, aside from the role of the federal government (I mean setting aside the whole issue of the federal government and prosecution, etc.), I hope you're not one of those people who denies that people commit crimes based on bias.

Daniel,

I can't remember. What was the verdict for the people who tortured and killed in the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Cases?

Chris,

I can't remember either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...Byrd,_Jr.#The_murder

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel:
Chris,

I can't remember either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...Byrd,_Jr.#The_murder

Do you think the hate crimes legislation just passed would make a difference in sentencing? These folks are all getting the death penalty or life sentences.

Daniel, I'm not being flippant, but do you think there's a difference between what happened to Matthew Shepard and for example a young couple carjacked at gunpoint then taken out and killed at point blank range?

Aren't they both hate crimes? Shouldn't they both be sentenced the same? Am I missing something?

quote:

Originally posted by Beacon Chris:
Am I missing something?

This is probably the most important part:

The U.S. Justice Department will have expanded authority to prosecute such crimes when local authorities don't.

There are plenty of municipalities in this country still where local authorities can not be trusted to do anything about a hate crime.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Miller:

quote:

Originally posted by Beacon Chris:
Am I missing something?

This is probably the most important part:

The U.S. Justice Department will have expanded authority to prosecute such crimes when local authorities don't.

There are plenty of municipalities in this country still where local authorities can not be trusted to do anything about a hate crime.

Steve,

Sounds like a good provision. Any others that would make a difference?

In my mind, that is the key provision. I'm surprised you're so dismissive of it.

If it's possible to put our philosophical and ideological differences aside regarding whether hate crimes need to be separated out from other crimes, the simple fact is that local authorities often don't prosecute them. That's not justice. This will hopefully increase the odds that victims of these crimes (whether we called them "hate" or not) will receive justice.

Nina,

Was I dismissive? I said it sounds like a good provision. Others?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Miller:

quote:

Originally posted by Beacon Chris:
Am I missing something?

This is probably the most important part:

The U.S. Justice Department will have expanded authority to prosecute such crimes when local authorities don't.

There are plenty of municipalities in this country still where local authorities can not be trusted to do anything about a hate crime.

This is all too common. In Rifle, Colorado there was a case in which the authorites seemed to say the victim was asking for it by being obviously gay.

It's a stupid term and a wholly unnecessary one.

All crime is committed with hate. Prosecute the crime not the thought.

You actually think someone assaults or murders without hate just because the person they assault or murder is the same race, sexual orientation blah blah as they are?

Yeah, OK.

As far as Federal; prosecution of crime where local authorities refuse to prosecute?

Sure. But not just because someone supposedly "had hate in their heart".