Say Anything Blog

Dude, I was just going to post a comment, wondering about the possibility of these being a fake crime.

Er, these = this.

“We want to continue with the rally, but adjust our message accordingly,” said James Sink, who recently became a student at North Dakota State University and is a member of the Fargo-Moorhead 10 Percent Society.

10 Percent Society? Still spreading the Kinsey lie, I see.

Sink said it is important for people to know bias crimes do happen and it’s “extremely serious” when false claims are made.

Yeah, pretty soon people, like me, see these stories and the first thought is that it’s fake.

“It’s unfortunate it had to happen in this case,” he said.

So, he would have rather have this be a real “hate crime” so they could have their rally and really get folks riled up, instead of having egg on his face?

"Hate crime” = most likely a hoax.

The people apt to conjure up such thought crimes rarely bother themselves with reality. “Hate crime” hoaxes come with the territory.

Crime is crime. The “balkanization” of crime into varying degrees is not a good thing. It allows for more and more criminal offenses to be created from a single action. This is not what our founding fathers had in mind.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Fargo went through this hate crime baloney over ten years ago! Has nothing been learned?

Has nothing been learned?

If I beat you up and break your arm with a lead pipe, I receive one sentence.
If I beat you up and break your arm with a lead pipe, and call you a dirty name, I receive a much harsher sentence. Go figure!

Excuse me, you were saying?

I remember a conversation I had with a liberal boss of mine back in the seventies. He was adamantly against the death penalty. “All murderers are crazy! You have to be crazy to kill someone, and it would be immoral to put a crazy person to death.”
When I asked about someone who killed someone during the commission of a crime, say a bank robbery, his argument was “You can’t really know what was in his heart, if he really intended to kill anyone when he took that gun to the bank.”

Now, with “hate crime” laws, we assume we really can know what is is a man’s heart based on what he might say during the commission of another crime.

This of course, overlooks the fact, that if I’m angry enough at you to break your arm, I might be more than angry enough to call you names while I’m doing it!

And if you’re black, or Asian, or fat, or a woman, I might use an epithet designed to hurt you as an individual, whether or not I hate your race, creed, color or sex…

Excuse me, you were saying?

Instead of higher sentences for “hate crimes”, what about reducing sentences for crimes committed out of love?  Say you beat someone to a pulp because you honestly, truly wanted the very best for that person, and your sentence would be halved.  Or maybe you shot someone in the head because you wanted them to have a wonderful life, and because of this you’d get life instead of the death penalty.

Hey, if a “hate crime” law makes sense, so does this.  Maybe there should be an amendment to the Constitution that says if a law only makes sense while intoxicated, it’s null and void.