Comments on: US Senate Passes Hate Crimes Bill; Faces Veto Over F-22 Funding

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:55:57 +0000

Read my last two comments carefully. If you still sense cognitive dissonance, I guess I’ll just have to live with you having such a perception.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:50:48 +0000

Timothy, I sense some congnitive dissonance. You say you’ve never favoured hate crimes sentencing enhancements and that you support the Matthew Sheppard Hate Crimes Bill. You can’t have it both ways.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:33:39 +0000

Priya,

I’ve never favored hate crimes sentencing enhancements. I’ve always favored allocating resources for solving and tracking hate crimes. And I’ve always believed that sexual orientation should be included in such groups as are defined by hate crimes laws in the same way that race and religion are.

This is not a new position for me nor should any observant person be surprised by my position.

Incidentally, I don’t oppose the Matthew Sheppard Hate Crimes Bill. I support it.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:30:16 +0000

TRiG,

I agree that there is rationale for hate crimes legislation. I don’t find it convincing, but that isn’t to say that others won’t.

I think we all agree that there is, in Priya’s words, a systemic societal problem. But it is not reasonable to demand that we all agree on the solution.

However, I do fully agree with you:

Either no hate-crimes legislation, or full hate-crimes legislation. The only reason to want partial hate-crimes legislation (such as exists in the USA at the moment) is prejudice and bias.

Or, as I said it,

I do, however, believe that if hate crimes enhancements are to exist, then it is illogical and even immoral to exclude one of the most frequent victims of identity based crime.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:19:37 +0000

I’m not accusing you of anything, you’re hearing things I didn’t say. I was just curious – care to answer the question, or do you want to change the subject?

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:18:08 +0000

Priya,

I wonder, prior to the proposal to add gays to the hate crimes law how often did you ever oppose it?

Are you accusing me of anti-gay bigotry? I think perhaps you are a bit too emotionally vested in “winning” the argument.

By: Timothy (TRiG)

Timothy (TRiG) — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:53:56 +0000

How are other clowns (who didn’t know Pickles personally) going to feel when they hear of Pickles’ death? Will they be frightened? Would they have reason to be frightened?

There is a very real difference here, and it’s not, on the face of it, ridiculous for that difference to be echoed in law. Law should be based on reality, and reality on the ground is a little different for clowns and for gay people.

Whether or not you agree with hate crimes legislation, you have to agree that there is a rationale for it. It’s not pulled out of the air.

And I stand by the second paragraph of my post above:

Either no hate-crimes legislation, or full hate-crimes legislation. The only reason to want partial hate-crimes legislation (such as exists in the USA at the moment) is prejudice and bias.

TRiG.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:53:03 +0000

So, do you have any examples of the hate crimes solution becomeing a bigger problem than the issue it seeks to resolve? I wonder, prior to the proposal to add gays to the hate crimes law how often did you ever oppose it?

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:02:06 +0000

Priya,

I don’t agree that systemic problems deserve every legal effort. I’ve observed politics long enough to know that quite often the “solutions” become bigger problems than the issues they seek to solve and not uncommonly result in precisely the opposite consequence as desired.

On this issue, like many, you and I come from very different ideological perspectives.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:24:18 +0000

Timothy, systemic problems like these deserve every legal effort that we can put forward to addressing them. I’m disappointed you don’t feel the same way. And you did say we shouldn’t try to use the law in this way to remediate the situation – now that reflects negatively on you, not me.