Hate Crimes Bill Will Criminalize Free Speech

[Cindi LaFontaine]

Democrats in the House passed so-called hate crimes legislation and the bill
is now on the fast track to the Senate.

It must be stopped, now, before liberals succeed in sneaking it
through the Senate!

Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that it
cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.

But others know better and have been sounding the alarm. Kevin
Theriot with the Alliance Defense Fund said it best:

"So-called 'hate crime' laws actually serve only one purpose: The
criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and
emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.' No
one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about
greater justice for Americans."

Mathew Staver with the Liberty Council claims:

"In and of itself this law can be applied to speech. The nature of assault -
putting someone in fear of their safety - what will that mean for someone
preaching against homosexuality?"

Connie Hair with Human Events called the House passage of this bill,
"yet another Democrat move toward the doubleplusungood Orwellian state" and
even President George W. Bush fought this legislation on the grounds that it
could be used to prosecute those whose views are out of line with those of
the radical gay movement.

Make no mistake, this horrendous piece of legislation is nothing more
than long overdue political payback for the RADICAL homosexual groups that
have supported liberals in Congress for years.

Congressman Louie Gohmert, a former judge, told Human Events about the
radical nature of this so-called hate crimes bill and what happened when
House Republicans tried to amend the bill so it did NOT OFFER PROTECTION TO
PEDOPHILES.

Take the time to read it... the sheer absurdity of what Gohmert
describes will make your skin crawl.

"'When we tried to get the term sexual orientation narrowed down to where it
didn't include something like a pedophile... that was voted down on party
lines... there are about 30 different types of sexual orientations, and they
can include exhibitionism and voyeurism or things that are so offensive such
as pedophilia or necrophilia. The problem is that the supporters of this
bill did not want to exclude any of those and even voted down the amendment
that would have excluded pedophilia.'"

"Gohmert pointed out the absurdity of the legislation as written which would
warrant the prosecution of a woman under the federal hate crimes statues if
she hits a flasher with her purse after he exposed himself to her.
Exhibitionism is a protected sexual orientation under this bill.

"'The one who did the flashing committed a local misdemeanor,' Gohmert said.
'The one who hit with the purse singled him out because he's an
exhibitionist, and therefore she has now committed a federal hate crime and
is looking at felony time.'"

Time is short. If we don't act today, we may be unable to stop this
Orwellian legislation from becoming law. Barack Obama will most certainly
sign it.

[Lars Eighner]

No, it won't, liar.

[Guillaume de Normandie]

Re: Hate Crimes Bill Will Criminalize Free Speech

Naw. You can still yell at people and call them faggot (just not
while you're murdering them), and not to worry, Cindi, but you can
still HATE all you want!!

[The Chief Instigator]

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
Democrats in the House passed so-called hate crimes legislation and the
bill is now on the fast track to the Senate.
It must be stopped, now, before liberals succeed in sneaking it
through the Senate!
Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that
it cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.
But others know better and have been sounding the alarm. Kevin
"So-called 'hate crime' laws actually serve only one purpose: The
criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and
emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.' No
one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about
greater justice for Americans."
"In and of itself this law can be applied to speech. The nature of assault
- putting someone in fear of their safety - what will that mean for
someone preaching against homosexuality?"
Connie Hair with Human Events called the House passage of this bill,
"yet another Democrat move toward the doubleplusungood Orwellian state"
and even President George W. Bush fought this legislation on the grounds
that it could be used to prosecute those whose views are out of line with
those of the radical gay movement.
Make no mistake, this horrendous piece of legislation is nothing more
than long overdue political payback for the RADICAL homosexual groups that
have supported liberals in Congress for years.
Congressman Louie Gohmert, a former judge, told Human Events about
the radical nature of this so-called hate crimes bill and what happened
when House Republicans tried to amend the bill so it did NOT OFFER
PROTECTION TO PEDOPHILES.
Take the time to read it... the sheer absurdity of what Gohmert
describes will make your skin crawl.
"'When we tried to get the term sexual orientation narrowed down to where
it didn't include something like a pedophile... that was voted down on
party lines... there are about 30 different types of sexual orientations,
and they can include exhibitionism and voyeurism or things that are so
offensive such as pedophilia or necrophilia. The problem is that the
supporters of this bill did not want to exclude any of those and even
voted down the amendment that would have excluded pedophilia.'"
"Gohmert pointed out the absurdity of the legislation as written which
would warrant the prosecution of a woman under the federal hate crimes
statues if she hits a flasher with her purse after he exposed himself to
her. Exhibitionism is a protected sexual orientation under this bill.
"'The one who did the flashing committed a local misdemeanor,' Gohmert
said. 'The one who hit with the purse singled him out because he's an
exhibitionist, and therefore she has now committed a federal hate crime
and is looking at felony time.'"
Time is short. If we don't act today, we may be unable to stop this
Orwellian legislation from becoming law. Barack Obama will most certainly
sign it.

It's just a convenient "coincidence" that you didn't bother to mention any
details about the proposed legislation, such as number and title. Thanks
for confirming your overactive imagination.

[(¯`·.žCraig Chiltonž.·Ž¯) Unemployed? No need to be: www.LayoffRemedy.com]

On Thu, 7 May 2009 14:50:10 -0500,

Hate Crimes Bill Will Criminalize Free Speech

Outright LIE. It will NOT. And we'll have a BETTER country from
the time it passes, on.

After watching the way that the RRR and LDS Cults LIED and
used such deplorable and propagandistic scare tactics on Californians
in order to CON them into voting for Proposition Hate, they have
LEARNED not to be conned AGAIN!

It's a case of "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame
on me."

After California, lower-intellect people might still not be able to
learn calculus. But millions of them WILL know better than to EVER
again listen to hateful BIGOTS, and be CONNED by their LIES.

<remaining LYING BULLCRAP flushed>

-- (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) <***@ymail.com>

http://www.LayoffRemedy.com.com -- Unemployment Solution!
http://www.ChristianEgalitarian.com -- Fight the RRR Cult!
http://spifar.blogspot.com -- Tactics: Defending Human Rights
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Exposing RRR Bigotry
http://www.shadowandillusion.com -- Learn "The LOPAQUA Secret!"
http://www.TravelForPay.org -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL!

[Jimbo]

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
Democrats in the House passed so-called hate crimes legislation and the bill
is now on the fast track to the Senate.
      It must be stopped, now, before liberals succeed in sneaking it
through the Senate!
      Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that it
cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.

You're just another sputtering idiot. The Hate Crime Legislation can
not be used to stifle speech or thought.

[d***@rocketmail.com]

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
      Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that it
cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.

You're just another sputtering idiot.  The Hate Crime Legislation can
not be used to stifle speech or thought.

And you're psychic, so you know how courts will interpret the
legislation.

[Anlatt the Builder]

Post by d***@rocketmail.com

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
      Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that it
cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.

You're just another sputtering idiot.  The Hate Crime Legislation can
not be used to stifle speech or thought.

And you're psychic, so you know how courts will interpret the
legislation.

This is a great reason to never have any laws at all! After all, we
are not psychic, so we can't predict how some court somewhere will
interpret some law somewhere. Therefore: get rid of all laws!

Meanwhile, back on the planet Earth:

We have had hate crimes laws for years, based on race, religion, and
other criteria.

They have never been applied to stop hate speech, which, you may
notice, still exists in the United States. (Check it out on the web!)

There is absolutely no reason to believe that simply adding another
criterion (sexual orientation) to hate crime laws will suddenly cause
them to be applied to hate speech. Every court precedent goes the
other way.

[Jimbo]

Post by Anlatt the Builder

Post by d***@rocketmail.com

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
      Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that it
cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.

You're just another sputtering idiot.  The Hate Crime Legislation can
not be used to stifle speech or thought.

And you're psychic, so you know how courts will interpret the
legislation.

This is a great reason to never have any laws at all! After all, we
are not psychic, so we can't predict how some court somewhere will
interpret some law somewhere. Therefore: get rid of all laws!
We have had hate crimes laws for years, based on race, religion, and
other criteria.
They have never been applied to stop hate speech, which, you may
notice, still exists in the United States. (Check it out on the web!)
There is absolutely no reason to believe that simply adding another
criterion (sexual orientation) to hate crime laws will suddenly cause
them to be applied to hate speech. Every court precedent goes the
other way.

Exactly. Well stated.

[Jimbo]

Post by d***@rocketmail.com

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
      Proponents of this so-called hate crimes legislation tell you that it
cannot be used to stifle speech or thought.

You're just another sputtering idiot.  The Hate Crime Legislation can
not be used to stifle speech or thought.

And you're psychic, so you know how courts will interpret the
legislation.

I know how the law reads, and I know how the courts have interpreted
similar legislation in the past. It doesn't take a phychic to
understand a law as it is written. Only a poo flinging idiot would
interpret this legislation to mean that their speech will somehow be
limited due to this legislation.

[Anlatt the Builder]

This is a lie.

We have had hate crimes laws for years, based on race, religion, and
other criteria.

They have never been applied to stop hate speech, which, you may
notice, still eixsts in the United States. (Check it out on the web!)

There is absolutely no reason to believe that adding another criterion
(sexual orientation) to hate crime laws will suddenly cause them to be
applied to hate speech. Every court precedent goes the other way.

[a***@anonymous.com]

It is important that people be able to hate:
hate their boss
hate their parents
hate women who say no
hate homosexuals

And the laws won't change because people have to be able to hate
privately or publicly.

When people get together in a group or organization, they often need to
raise money for printing and organizing meetings. All of these people
are free to write whom they hate and why they hate. The problem is they
are not allowed to do anything about the hate other than through
government legislation to change whatever existing laws that offend the
group. Most groups propose action, have raised money for action and as
long as the action isn't about harming anyone or proposing to harm
anyone that is okay. But without the ability to act, it makes most any
organization lame. And that is the purpose of the law to punish people
who actively try to harm or hurt the people they hate be it a wife, an
ex-wife, a woman, a girlfriend, an ex-girlfriend or a homosexual.

[Brian Oakley]

Post by a***@anonymous.com
hate their boss
hate their parents
hate women who say no
hate homosexuals
And the laws won't change because people have to be able to hate
privately or publicly.
When people get together in a group or organization, they often need to
raise money for printing and organizing meetings. All of these people
are free to write whom they hate and why they hate. The problem is they
are not allowed to do anything about the hate other than through
government legislation to change whatever existing laws that offend the
group. Most groups propose action, have raised money for action and as
long as the action isn't about harming anyone or proposing to harm
anyone that is okay. But without the ability to act, it makes most any
organization lame. And that is the purpose of the law to punish people
who actively try to harm or hurt the people they hate be it a wife, an
ex-wife, a woman, a girlfriend, an ex-girlfriend or a homosexual.

If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people. These laws they are trying to pass single out certain classes as
being more protected than others.
B

[Guillaume de Normandie]

Post by Brian Oakley

Post by a***@anonymous.com
hate their boss
hate their parents
hate women who say no
hate homosexuals
And the laws won't change because people have to be able to hate
privately or publicly.
When people get together in a group or organization, they often need to
raise money for printing and organizing meetings.  All of these people
are free to write whom they hate and why they hate.  The problem is they
are not allowed to do anything about the hate other than through
government legislation to change whatever existing laws that offend the
group.  Most groups propose action, have raised money for action and as
long as the action isn't about harming anyone or proposing to harm
anyone that is okay.  But without the ability to act, it makes most any
organization lame.  And that is the purpose of the law to punish people
who actively try to harm or hurt the people they hate be it a wife, an
ex-wife, a woman, a girlfriend, an ex-girlfriend or a homosexual.

If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people.  These laws they are trying to pass single out certain classes as
being more protected than others.

Nope. Straights are protected just as much as gays with these laws.
Muslims as much as Jews as much as Christians. Whites as much as
blacks.

[Dave Gibson]

When a society begins to accept and even condone depravity it is not long
for this world. We are constantly told by the left to embrace this
'lifestyle' and its participants. To now say anything negative about
homosexuality is considered to be 'hate speech'. In many states, we now see
the left pushing private businesses to extend insurance benefits to
'same -sex partners'. We also see lily-livered politicians caving into
pressure from gay rights groups. If we allow homosexual marriage to be
considered legal and valid...What abominations will follow? Legalized
bestiality? Will it become acceptable for adults to openly molest children?
NAMBLA members are no doubt salivating at the prospects! It is a very
slippery slope indeed.

The left and their anti-family agenda have left not one bastion of civilized
society untouched. They have even assailed The Boy Scouts of America for
their beliefs. The liberals have tried to force gay scout leaders upon that
organization. In a country where 90% of black children are born out of
wedlock, juvenile crime is sky-rocketing, and alcohol and drug abuse amongst
teenagers has reached an all time high...Do we really need another assault
on the family in the form of gay 'marriage'?

Homosexuality is a perversion, that is all, it is not a 'lifestyle'.
Homosexual 'marriage' if it is ever legalized in this country, will still be
illegitimate and void. Homosexuals do not deserve special preference under
the law. We don't need 'hate crime' legislation. It is already illegal to
assault or murder someone (how many times can you put someone to death for
the same crime?). Homosexuals are ranting and raving about not being able to
leave property to their 'life partner' or their 'life partner' not being
able to make 'deathbed' decisions for them. Nonsense! Anyone can go to a
lawyer and make anyone else their beneficiary and also give that person
'power of attorney' and create a living directive. What homosexuals are
really asking for with all of this legislation is the validation of
mainstream society (a big 'you're ok!'), telling them that their deviant
behavior is acceptable. They want this because, deep down they know how
disgusting their actions truly are and they feel terrible about them (that's
why there is such a high rate of suicide among gays and lesbians).

Man and Woman were created with different anatomy for a very good
reason...to compliment one another (i.e. to produce children). Man and Woman
are attracted to each other for a reason. We are driven by a desire to
perpetuate the species. Even if people are unconscious of this primordial
need to 'pair up', it is still why people enter into the union of marriage.

Now the homosexuals while being spurred on by the left, are pushing for
legal 'marriage'. They are striving now to send a nation already teetering
on the brink of moral disaster, spiraling down into the dark abyss where all
'once great' nations now lie. The time has come for the silent majority to
be silent no more and say: Enough

[Lars Eighner]

Post by Brian Oakley
If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people. These laws they are trying to pass single out certain classes as
being more protected than others.

This is a lie. Hate crime legislation does not depend upon the identity of
the victim, but upon the motive of the crime.

[Bob F.]

Post by Lars Eighner

Post by Brian Oakley
If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people. These laws they are trying to pass single out certain classes as
being more protected than others.

This is a lie. Hate crime legislation does not depend upon the identity of
the victim, but upon the motive of the crime.

Hence it makes certain thoughts a crime.
As currently enforced, the hate crime laws are racist.
I have yet to see any minority charged with a hate crime when a white
person is the victim.

[Lars Eighner]

Post by Bob F.

Post by Lars Eighner

Post by Brian Oakley
If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people. These laws they are trying to pass single out certain classes
as being more protected than others.

This is a lie. Hate crime legislation does not depend upon the identity
of the victim, but upon the motive of the crime.

Hence it makes certain thoughts a crime.

If it does, then so does all of Western law. The state of mind (mens rea)
is the heart of Western jurisprudence. It is the difference between
manslaughter and murder and between a tort and crime.

Post by Bob F.
As currently enforced, the hate crime laws are racist.

Bullshit.

Post by Bob F.
I have yet to see any minority charged with a hate crime when a white
person is the victim.

Then you are just not looking. In fact, the case in which the Supreme Court
upheld hate crime legislation was just such a case.

You are a racist pig with blinders on.

[juanjo]

Post by Bob F.

and

Post by Brian Oakley
If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people.  These laws they are trying to pass single out certain
classes as
being more protected than others.

This is a lie.  Hate crime legislation does not depend upon the
identity of
the victim, but upon the motive of the crime.

Hence it makes certain thoughts a crime.
As currently enforced, the hate crime laws are racist.
I have yet to see any minority charged with a hate crime when a white
person is the victim.

Poor Bob is short on logic and long on fear mongering. It does not
make certain thoughts a crime. You will be free to hate as much as
you wish. However if you go out and commit a violent assault on a
person based upon that hate, i.e. the KKK wannabes in Chico California
who some years ago decided to go "nigger hunting" and shot and killed
a black man walking down the street, the penalties they face are
enhanced because the motivation for the crime was their hatred of
black people. Likewise should a group of black men decide to go out
and do a little "cracker hunting" because they hate white people, they
face the same enhanced penalties. The statement you make that "I have
yet to see any minority charged with a hate crime when a white person
is the victim" simply shows that you have never bothered to look
around.

[Bob F.]

Post by Bob F.

and

Post by Brian Oakley
If you havent heard, there are already laws on the books about harming
people. These laws they are trying to pass single out certain
classes as
being more protected than others.

This is a lie. Hate crime legislation does not depend upon the
identity of
the victim, but upon the motive of the crime.

Hence it makes certain thoughts a crime.
As currently enforced, the hate crime laws are racist.
I have yet to see any minority charged with a hate crime when a white
person is the victim.

Poor Bob is short on logic and long on fear mongering. It does not
make certain thoughts a crime. You will be free to hate as much as
you wish. However if you go out and commit a violent assault on a
person based upon that hate, i.e. the KKK wannabes in Chico California
who some years ago decided to go "nigger hunting" and shot and killed
a black man walking down the street, the penalties they face are
enhanced because the motivation for the crime was their hatred of
black people. Likewise should a group of black men decide to go out
and do a little "cracker hunting" because they hate white people, they
face the same enhanced penalties. The statement you make that "I have
yet to see any minority charged with a hate crime when a white person
is the victim" simply shows that you have never bothered to look
around.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I submit that minorities many times target whites for robbery and other
crimes solely because of their race (i.e. whites are typically more
financially successful, ergo more suitable for being a victim), yet they
are seldom, if ever, charged with a hate crime.
But the whole concept of hate crimes is ludicrous because of the lack of
constant standards for applying it.
And even if a coherent standard could be created, it still punishes
thought.
If somebody robs me, I don't give a rat's ass about his motivation, I
just want to see that prick go to jail for a long time.
I submit it is you who is short on logic and long on race-baiting.

[Guillaume de Normandie]

Nobody's taking away an individual's right to hate. It's something of
a waste of energy, if you ask me, but if you want to hate, have at
it.

[Frank Provasek]

Since 1968, hate crimes laws in the US have provided additional
penalties when VIOLENT crimes are committed on the basis of a person's
race, color, religion, or national origin. Just as with the 16th
Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham in 1963 where four black
girls were killed by members of a Ku Klux Klan group, and the police
commissioner blamed...the U.S. Supreme Court...and no one was
convicted until decades later -- justice for gays and lesbians who
are victims of violence and murder is not found in certain areas where
the local view is that the victim "deserved it."

In no way is anyone's SPEECH criminalized by the Hate Crimes Bill.

[Gary]

This message is off topic in rec.collecting.coins. Please do not post
back into this group or we will TOS.

[Jerry Dennis]

This message is off topic in rec.collecting.coins. �Please do not post
back into this group or we will TOS.

Breathe, my friend, breathe. You've been on RCC long enough to know
that we can discuss a myriad of topics. What makes this OT bearable
is that no one is calling anyone names or flaming. It's amazing that
we can be in the middle of a controversal topic and still be civil.
Please enjoy it. In fact, why not throw your trime's worth in (hey,
coin reference!).

Jerry

[Tommy Ezell]

The haters are the ones on the left, the homosexualists, the baby killers,
those who would traiter our country. Come and get me "Brown Shirts" I am
waiting.

And by the way who defines all of this so-called hate? And further, even if
there was an unassailable way to define hate, what are any of you
"progressives," read liberal and/or democrats, afraid of? Do your ears
tingle and your eyes smart, your stomach churn and your brow flush when
someone is exercising their First Amendmant right of free speech or living a
conservative life? Do you have the right to live in a world were the Jesus
or Rightchousness or God is never mentioned or repeated or where never a
hushed epithet was expressed? I think not!!! And even if by some chicanery
or outright bullying and intimidation you should get your Hate laws passed,
what good will it do? You cannot control thoughts, actions, or pens.

And what or whom will be banned next-authors that don't tow the line? Those
word smiths that violate "proper speek"? Publishers of controversy? Who will
be the high priests of verbage? Shades of Orwell and Revelation!! God help
this confused world.

In a nutshell it seems a case could be made that those who would ban out
freedom of expression are those that already are indulging in a form of
hate. Maybe a law should be made to ban this printed hate speech!!!!!!

[PC]

Post by Tommy Ezell
The haters are the ones on the left, the homosexualists, the baby killers,
those who would traiter our country. Come and get me "Brown Shirts" I am
waiting.

You speakum English?

[anonymous]

For a tribute to "Bob F." and his point of view, here's
a convenient page:

http://www.tomswiftlives.com/who_is_the_mysterious_other

[Frank Provasek]

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
"So-called 'hate crime' laws actually serve only one purpose: The
criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and
emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.' No
one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about
greater justice for Americans."

Since 1968, hate crimes laws in the US have provided additional
penalties when VIOLENT crimes are committed on the basis of a person's
race, color, religion, or national origin. Just as with the 16th
Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham in 1963 where four black
girls were killed by members of a Ku Klux Klan group, and the police
commissioner blamed...the U.S. Supreme Court...and no one was
convicted until decades later -- justice for gays and lesbians who
are victims of violence and murder is not found in certain areas where
the local view is that the victim "deserved it."

In no way is anyone's SPEECH or THOUGHTS criminalized by the Hate
Crimes Bill.

Oddly, the biggest protesters are those who themselves have been
protected by such laws
for over 40 years.

[Brian Oakley]

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
"So-called 'hate crime' laws actually serve only one purpose: The
criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and
emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.' No
one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about
greater justice for Americans."

Since 1968, hate crimes laws in the US have provided additional
penalties when VIOLENT crimes are committed on the basis of a person's
race, color, religion, or national origin. Just as with the 16th
Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham in 1963 where four black
girls were killed by members of a Ku Klux Klan group, and the police
commissioner blamed...the U.S. Supreme Court...and no one was
convicted until decades later -- justice for gays and lesbians who
are victims of violence and murder is not found in certain areas where
the local view is that the victim "deserved it."

In no way is anyone's SPEECH or THOUGHTS criminalized by the Hate
Crimes Bill.

Oddly, the biggest protesters are those who themselves have been
protected by such laws
for over 40 years.

Just hang in the Frank. It will criminalize speech. The authors of this
bill even said that it could criminalize pastors sermons, and they had no
qualms about that happening.
B

[Frank Provasek]

Just hang in the Frank.  It will criminalize speech.  The authors of this
bill even said that it could criminalize pastors sermons, and they had no
qualms about that happening.
B

No Brian, it's the OPPONENTS of the bill who are claiming this. Read
the bill for yourself, particularly Sec. 8



H. R. 1913



SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes
Prevention Act of 2009’.




SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF HATE CRIME.
In this Act--



(1) the term ‘crime of violence’ has the meaning given that term in
section 16, title 18, United States Code;



(2) the term ‘hate crime’ has the meaning given such term in section
280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994
(28 U.S.C. 994 note); and


(3) the term ‘local’ means a county, city, town, township, parish,
village, or other general purpose political subdivision of a State.


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.



(2) PRIORITY- In providing assistance under paragraph (1), the
Attorney General shall give priority to crimes committed by offenders
who have committed crimes in more than one State and to rural
jurisdictions that have difficulty covering the extraordinary expenses
relating to the investigation or prosecution of the crime.



(b) Grants-



(1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General may award grants to State, local,
and Tribal law enforcement agencies for extraordinary expenses
associated with the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.



(2) OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS- In implementing the grant program
under this subsection, the Office of Justice Programs shall work
closely with grantees to ensure that the concerns and needs of all
affected parties, including community groups and schools, colleges,
and universities, are addressed through the local infrastructure
developed under the grants.



(3) APPLICATION-



(A) IN GENERAL- Each State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency
that desires a grant under this subsection shall submit an application
to the Attorney General at such time, in such manner, and accompanied
by or containing such information as the Attorney General shall
reasonably require.



(B) DATE FOR SUBMISSION- Applications submitted pursuant to
subparagraph (A) shall be submitted during the 60-day period beginning
on a date that the Attorney General shall prescribe.



(C) REQUIREMENTS- A State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency
applying for a grant under this subsection shall--



(i) describe the extraordinary purposes for which the grant is
needed;



(ii) certify that the State, local government, or Indian tribe lacks
the resources necessary to investigate or prosecute the hate crime;



(iii) demonstrate that, in developing a plan to implement the grant,
the State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency has consulted and
coordinated with nonprofit, nongovernmental violence recovery service
programs that have experience in providing services to victims of hate
crimes; and



(iv) certify that any Federal funds received under this subsection
will be used to supplement, not supplant, non-Federal funds that would
otherwise be available for activities funded under this subsection.



(4) DEADLINE- An application for a grant under this subsection shall
be approved or denied by the Attorney General not later than 180
business days after the date on which the Attorney General receives
the application.



(5) GRANT AMOUNT- A grant under this subsection shall not exceed
$100,000 for any single jurisdiction in any 1-year period.



(6) REPORT- Not later than December 31, 2011, the Attorney General
shall submit to Congress a report describing the applications
submitted for grants under this subsection, the award of such grants,
and the purposes for which the grant amounts were expended.



(7) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this subsection $5,000,000 for each of
fiscal years 2010 and 2011.




SEC. 4. GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Authority To Award Grants- The Office of Justice Programs of the
Department of Justice may award grants, in accordance with such
regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe, to State, local, or
tribal programs designed to combat hate crimes committed by juveniles,
including programs to train local law enforcement officers in
identifying, investigating, prosecuting, and preventing hate crimes.



(b) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.




SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO ASSIST STATE, LOCAL,
AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Justice,
including the Community Relations Service, for fiscal years 2010,
2011, and 2012, such sums as are necessary to increase the number of
personnel to prevent and respond to alleged violations of section 249
of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 7 of this Act.




SEC. 6. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN HATE CRIME ACTS.
(a) In General- Chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:




‘Sec. 249. Hate crime acts
‘(a) In General-



1‘(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR
NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law,
willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of
fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary
device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the
actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any
person--



‘(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance
with this title, or both; and



‘(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in
accordance with this title, or both, if--



‘(i) death results from the offense; or



‘(ii) the offense includes kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual
abuse, or an attempt to kill.



‘(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN,
GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, OR DISABILITY-



‘(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in
any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes
bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a
dangerouse weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to
cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived
religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender
identity, or disability of any person--



‘(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance
with this title, or both; and



‘(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in
accordance with this title, or both, if--



‘(I) death results from the offense; or



‘(II) the offense includes kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual
abuse, or an attempt to kill.



‘(B) CIRCUMSTANCES DESCRIBED- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the
circumstances described in this subparagraph are that--



‘(i) the conduct described in subparagraph (A) occurs during the
course of, or as the result of, the travel of the defendant or the
victim--



‘(I) across a State line or national border; or



‘(II) using a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or
foreign commerce;



‘(ii) the defendant uses a channel, facility, or instrumentality of
interstate or foreign commerce in connection with the conduct
described in subparagraph (A);



‘(iii) in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A),
the defendant employs a firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or
other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce; or



‘(iv) the conduct described in subparagraph (A)--



‘(I) interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which
the victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or



‘(II) otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce.



‘(3) ADDITIONAL FEDERAL NEXUS FOR OFFENSE- Whoever, in the special
maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or in
Indian country, engages in conduct described in paragraph (1) or in
paragraph (2)(A) (without regard to whether that conduct occurred in a
circumstance described in paragraph (2)(B)) shall be subject to the
same penalties as those provided for offenses under those paragraphs.



‘(b) Certification Requirement- No prosecution of any offense
described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States,
except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, the
Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any
Assistant Attorney General specially designated by the Attorney
General that--



‘(1) such certifying individual has reasonable cause to believe that
the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin,
gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any
person was a motivating factor underlying the alleged conduct of the
defendant; and



‘(2) such certifying individual has consulted with State or local law
enforcement officials regarding the prosecution and determined that--



‘(A) the State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to
exercise jurisdiction;



‘(B) the State has requested that the Federal Government assume
jurisdiction;



‘(C) the State does not object to the Federal Government assuming
jurisdiction; or



‘(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left
demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-
motivated violence.



‘(c) Definitions-



‘(1) In this section--



‘(A) the term ‘explosive or incendiary device’ has the meaning given
such term in section 232 of this title;



‘(B) the term ‘firearm’ has the meaning given such term in section 921
(a) of this title; and



‘(C) the term ‘State’ includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
and any other territory or possession of the United States.



‘(2) For the purposes of this chapter, the term ‘gender identity’
means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics.



‘(d) Statute of Limitations-



‘(1) OFFENSES NOT RESULTING IN DEATH- Except as provided in paragraph
(2), no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense
under this section unless the indictment for such offense is found, or
the information for such offense is instituted, not later than 7 years
after the date on which the offense was committed.



‘(2) DEATH RESULTING OFFENSES- An indictment or information alleging
that an offense under this section resulted in death may be found or
instituted at any time without limitation.



‘(e) Rule of Evidence- In a prosecution for an offense under this
section, evidence of expression or associations of the defendant may
not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the
evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in
this section affects the rules of evidence governing impeachment of a
witness.’.



(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new item:



‘249. Hate crime acts.’.




SEC. 7. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the
application of such provision or amendment to any person or
circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this
Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the
provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected
thereby.




SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be
construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal
prohibition by, or any activities protected by, the Constitution.



Passed the House of Representatives April 29, 2009.

[Bob F.]

Just hang in the Frank. It will criminalize speech. The authors of
this
bill even said that it could criminalize pastors sermons, and they had no
qualms about that happening.
B

No Brian, it's the OPPONENTS of the bill who are claiming this. Read
the bill for yourself, particularly Sec. 8
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fwankie, you are a blind idiot if you can't see what a slippery slope
the thought police are creating by the so-called "hate crime" laws.

[Brian Oakley]

Just hang in the Frank. It will criminalize speech. The authors of this
bill even said that it could criminalize pastors sermons, and they had no
qualms about that happening.
B

Quotes fron Frank P:

"No Brian, it's the OPPONENTS of the bill who are claiming this. Read
the bill for yourself, particularly Sec. 8"

"Oddly, the biggest protesters are those who themselves have been
protected by such laws
for over 40 years."

Not sure what you mean here Frank, but of course its the opponents that are
claiming that it will criminalze speech. Hate crimes legislation will
criminalize speech in the sense that anyone who acts on the words of someone
else, no matter how misconstrued they may take those words, are not the only
culprit. The one whose words he listened to will also be under inditement.
That is exactly what the legislators are shooting for. Because if they can
silence the pulpit and conservative talk radio, make it criminal, then the
far left will have free reign over the government. This happened in Nazi
Germany. Study the history. They outlawed other political parties, killed
Jews who protested. Dont tell me it wont happen. Its happened before, and
is happening here, in a much more incremental pace, so as to not rouse a
squak out of the people. Little by little, that is the game plan. An its
slowly working. And will continue to work unless people wake up. There are
several people already being prosecuted using local hate crimes laws that
didnt even commit a crime. The Philadelphia 7 is just one group. It will
happen again, and if they are not so blessed as to get a judge with any
sense, they will be jailed.
B


H. R. 1913



SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes
Prevention Act of 2009’.




SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF HATE CRIME.
In this Act--



(1) the term ‘crime of violence’ has the meaning given that term in
section 16, title 18, United States Code;



(2) the term ‘hate crime’ has the meaning given such term in section
280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994
(28 U.S.C. 994 note); and


(3) the term ‘local’ means a county, city, town, township, parish,
village, or other general purpose political subdivision of a State.


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.



(2) PRIORITY- In providing assistance under paragraph (1), the
Attorney General shall give priority to crimes committed by offenders
who have committed crimes in more than one State and to rural
jurisdictions that have difficulty covering the extraordinary expenses
relating to the investigation or prosecution of the crime.



(b) Grants-



(1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General may award grants to State, local,
and Tribal law enforcement agencies for extraordinary expenses
associated with the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.



(2) OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS- In implementing the grant program
under this subsection, the Office of Justice Programs shall work
closely with grantees to ensure that the concerns and needs of all
affected parties, including community groups and schools, colleges,
and universities, are addressed through the local infrastructure
developed under the grants.



(3) APPLICATION-



(A) IN GENERAL- Each State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency
that desires a grant under this subsection shall submit an application
to the Attorney General at such time, in such manner, and accompanied
by or containing such information as the Attorney General shall
reasonably require.



(B) DATE FOR SUBMISSION- Applications submitted pursuant to
subparagraph (A) shall be submitted during the 60-day period beginning
on a date that the Attorney General shall prescribe.



(C) REQUIREMENTS- A State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency
applying for a grant under this subsection shall--



(i) describe the extraordinary purposes for which the grant is
needed;



(ii) certify that the State, local government, or Indian tribe lacks
the resources necessary to investigate or prosecute the hate crime;



(iii) demonstrate that, in developing a plan to implement the grant,
the State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency has consulted and
coordinated with nonprofit, nongovernmental violence recovery service
programs that have experience in providing services to victims of hate
crimes; and



(iv) certify that any Federal funds received under this subsection
will be used to supplement, not supplant, non-Federal funds that would
otherwise be available for activities funded under this subsection.



(4) DEADLINE- An application for a grant under this subsection shall
be approved or denied by the Attorney General not later than 180
business days after the date on which the Attorney General receives
the application.



(5) GRANT AMOUNT- A grant under this subsection shall not exceed
$100,000 for any single jurisdiction in any 1-year period.



(6) REPORT- Not later than December 31, 2011, the Attorney General
shall submit to Congress a report describing the applications
submitted for grants under this subsection, the award of such grants,
and the purposes for which the grant amounts were expended.



(7) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There is authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this subsection $5,000,000 for each of
fiscal years 2010 and 2011.




SEC. 4. GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Authority To Award Grants- The Office of Justice Programs of the
Department of Justice may award grants, in accordance with such
regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe, to State, local, or
tribal programs designed to combat hate crimes committed by juveniles,
including programs to train local law enforcement officers in
identifying, investigating, prosecuting, and preventing hate crimes.



(b) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.




SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO ASSIST STATE, LOCAL,
AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Justice,
including the Community Relations Service, for fiscal years 2010,
2011, and 2012, such sums as are necessary to increase the number of
personnel to prevent and respond to alleged violations of section 249
of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 7 of this Act.




SEC. 6. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN HATE CRIME ACTS.
(a) In General- Chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:




‘Sec. 249. Hate crime acts
‘(a) In General-



1‘(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR
NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law,
willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of
fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary
device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the
actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any
person--



‘(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance
with this title, or both; and



‘(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in
accordance with this title, or both, if--



‘(i) death results from the offense; or



‘(ii) the offense includes kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual
abuse, or an attempt to kill.



‘(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN,
GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, OR DISABILITY-



‘(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in
any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes
bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a
dangerouse weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to
cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived
religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender
identity, or disability of any person--



‘(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance
with this title, or both; and



‘(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in
accordance with this title, or both, if--



‘(I) death results from the offense; or



‘(II) the offense includes kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap,
aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual
abuse, or an attempt to kill.



‘(B) CIRCUMSTANCES DESCRIBED- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the
circumstances described in this subparagraph are that--



‘(i) the conduct described in subparagraph (A) occurs during the
course of, or as the result of, the travel of the defendant or the
victim--



‘(I) across a State line or national border; or



‘(II) using a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or
foreign commerce;



‘(ii) the defendant uses a channel, facility, or instrumentality of
interstate or foreign commerce in connection with the conduct
described in subparagraph (A);



‘(iii) in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A),
the defendant employs a firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or
other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce; or



‘(iv) the conduct described in subparagraph (A)--



‘(I) interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which
the victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or



‘(II) otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce.



‘(3) ADDITIONAL FEDERAL NEXUS FOR OFFENSE- Whoever, in the special
maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or in
Indian country, engages in conduct described in paragraph (1) or in
paragraph (2)(A) (without regard to whether that conduct occurred in a
circumstance described in paragraph (2)(B)) shall be subject to the
same penalties as those provided for offenses under those paragraphs.



‘(b) Certification Requirement- No prosecution of any offense
described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States,
except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, the
Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any
Assistant Attorney General specially designated by the Attorney
General that--



‘(1) such certifying individual has reasonable cause to believe that
the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin,
gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any
person was a motivating factor underlying the alleged conduct of the
defendant; and



‘(2) such certifying individual has consulted with State or local law
enforcement officials regarding the prosecution and determined that--



‘(A) the State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to
exercise jurisdiction;



‘(B) the State has requested that the Federal Government assume
jurisdiction;



‘(C) the State does not object to the Federal Government assuming
jurisdiction; or



‘(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left
demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-
motivated violence.



‘(c) Definitions-



‘(1) In this section--



‘(A) the term ‘explosive or incendiary device’ has the meaning given
such term in section 232 of this title;



‘(B) the term ‘firearm’ has the meaning given such term in section 921
(a) of this title; and



‘(C) the term ‘State’ includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
and any other territory or possession of the United States.



‘(2) For the purposes of this chapter, the term ‘gender identity’
means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics.



‘(d) Statute of Limitations-



‘(1) OFFENSES NOT RESULTING IN DEATH- Except as provided in paragraph
(2), no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense
under this section unless the indictment for such offense is found, or
the information for such offense is instituted, not later than 7 years
after the date on which the offense was committed.



‘(2) DEATH RESULTING OFFENSES- An indictment or information alleging
that an offense under this section resulted in death may be found or
instituted at any time without limitation.



‘(e) Rule of Evidence- In a prosecution for an offense under this
section, evidence of expression or associations of the defendant may
not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the
evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in
this section affects the rules of evidence governing impeachment of a
witness.’.



(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new item:



‘249. Hate crime acts.’.




SEC. 7. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the
application of such provision or amendment to any person or
circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this
Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the
provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected
thereby.




SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be
construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal
prohibition by, or any activities protected by, the Constitution.



Passed the House of Representatives April 29, 2009.

[anonymous]

I think what has been said in this newsgroup is about as much as anyone
can say in terms of free speech. And that is awesome.

[Yhtapa]

Post by Cindi LaFontaine
Democrats in the House passed so-called hate crimes legislation and the bill
is now on the fast track to the Senate...

ZZZZZZZZZZZ