Got Hate Crime? It's All around This Board..

fgarvb1

We are in for it now.
Joined
Dec 10, 2000
Posts
12,729
How many of us on this board would go to Jail?


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1105:



THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPO's PDF Display Congressional Record References Bill Summary & Status Printer Friendly Display - 18,380 bytes.[Help]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)

S 1105 IS


110th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1105
To provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

April 12, 2007
Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. SMITH, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. SPECTER, Ms. MIKULSKI, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. BROWN, Mr. KERRY, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. DODD, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. BIDEN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. BAYH, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. REED, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. OBAMA, Mrs. BOXER, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs. CLINTON, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. CASEY, Mrs. MCCASKILL, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mr. SALAZAR, and Mr. JOHNSON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.

(2) Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive.

(3) State and local authorities are now and will continue to be responsible for prosecuting the overwhelming majority of violent crimes in the United States, including violent crimes motivated by bias. These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more effectively with greater Federal assistance.

(4) Existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem.

(5) A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected.

(6) Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways, including the following:

(A) The movement of members of targeted groups is impeded, and members of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence.

(B) Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity.

(C) Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.

(D) Channels, facilities, and instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence.

(E) Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce.

(7) For generations, the institutions of slavery and involuntary servitude were defined by the race, color, and ancestry of those held in bondage. Slavery and involuntary servitude were enforced, both prior to and after the adoption of the 13th amendment to the Constitution of the United States, through widespread public and private violence directed at persons because of their race, color, or ancestry, or perceived race, color, or ancestry. Accordingly, eliminating racially motivated violence is an important means of eliminating, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery and involuntary servitude.

(8) Both at the time when the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States were adopted, and continuing to date, members of certain religious and national origin groups were and are perceived to be distinct `races'. Thus, in order to eliminate, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery, it is necessary to prohibit assaults on the basis of real or perceived religions or national origins, at least to the extent such religions or national origins were regarded as races at the time of the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

(9) Federal jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.

(10) The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes.

SEC. 3. 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. 4. 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 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 Indian 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, and Indian 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, and Indian 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, and Indian law enforcement agency has consulted and coordinated with nonprofit, nongovernmental victim services 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 30 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, 2008, 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 2008 and 2009.

SEC. 5. 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. 6. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO ASSIST STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of the Treasury and the Department of Justice, including the Community Relations Service, for fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010 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. 7. 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) 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, 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, 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.

`(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- In this section--

`(1) the term `explosive or incendiary device' has the meaning given such term in section 232 of this title;

`(2) the term `firearm' has the meaning given such term in section 921(a) of this title; and

`(3) the term `gender identity' for the purposes of this chapter means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics.

`(d) 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 analysis for chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`249. Hate crime acts.'.

SEC. 8. STATISTICS.

(a) In General- Subsection (b)(1) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note) is amended by inserting `gender and gender identity,' after `race,'.

(b) Data- Subsection (b)(5) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note) is amended by inserting `, including data about crimes committed by, and crimes directed against, juveniles' after `data acquired under this section'.

SEC. 9. 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.
 
Hate crime legislation is bullshit. Here come the Thought Police.
 
I really like this part.

`(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, 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--
 
Cap’n AMatrixca said:
Does this have a point?

Or is it a busybody parody?


The point is that if Bush signs this bill or the senate overrides the veto this board is history along with lots of other rights and even businesses.

That's the point.
 
LOL!

Have fun.

I have to go clear some land and hate speech my chainsaw!
 
miles said:
So is someone like LT - a black moron - covered twice by this legislations?

There was a rumor that Obama was going for a sex change and a conversion to Judaism. Skip the election and go for a direct appointment for life. Piss the Arab vote off though.

Ishmael
 
fgarvb1 said:
The point is that if Bush signs this bill or the senate overrides the veto this board is history along with lots of other rights and even businesses.

That's the point.
This bill is in regards to crimes of violence motivated by race. It still does not inhibit freedom of speech and therefore does not touch this board.

Learn to read. I don't have a law degree but it is very explanatory.
 
Redneck_Cowboy said:
This bill is in regards to crimes of violence motivated by race. It still does not inhibit freedom of speech and therefore does not touch this board.

Learn to read. I don't have a law degree but it is very explanatory.

In 2005 'hate crimes.' as defined by the FBI consituted 0.9% of all felonius crimes. Over half of those were crimes perpetrated by minorities against whites. In 2006 those crimes so designated constituted 0.7% of all crimes with the same racial ratios. (Source, FBI UCR)

Is this a real national problem?

Ishmael
 
Ishmael said:
In 2005 'hate crimes.' as defined by the FBI consituted 0.9% of all felonius crimes. Over half of those were crimes perpetrated by minorities against whites. In 2006 those crimes so designated constituted 0.7% of all crimes with the same racial ratios. (Source, FBI UCR)

Is this a real national problem?

Ishmael
I really do not think so. It is just that those few hate crimes that do get publicity are usually blown up for sensationalism to sell papers. We do the same with pit bull attacks when most of the serious attack are from German Shepherd's. Fuck those damn Germans anyway.
 
Redneck_Cowboy said:
I really do not think so. It is just that those few hate crimes that do get publicity are usually blown up for sensationalism to sell papers. We do the same with pit bull attacks when most of the serious attack are from German Shepherd's. Fuck those damn Germans anyway.

So why in the fuck are OUR SERVANTS wasting time on this shit?

Ishmael
 
(6) Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways, including the following:
(A) The movement of members of targeted groups is impeded, and members of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence.
(B) Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity.
(C) Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.
(D) Channels, facilities, and instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence.
(E) Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce.



LOL. This is just a pre-election show-boat stunt by some Members of the Senate. They know better, too! Since the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has been quite jealous of the police power given to the several States. They looked high and low for some justification to take control over the health, education, welfare, morals, and criminological treatment the States exercise over the People within their respective jurisdictions. But for the Commerce Clause (Article 1 section 8, clause 3) they could find no rational basis to insinuate themselves into a position of power in that regard:

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The “money-method” is the most effective avenue for the federal government to accomplish this extra-Constitutional end run, through entitlement programs: If the U.S. Government gives money to a State, it can attach strings to that program – rightfully so, since it is Federal money and they get to buy what they want. This is most obvious in the Interstate Highway System and in Public Education.

But all is not enough when it comes to feeding the voracious appetite for what we call the Police Power Craving of the central government. As a result of the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the resultant 14th Amendment, rammed down the throats of the Southern States as the price for re-admission to the union and the return of their seats in the Congress, the rationale for Commerce Clause Cancer seemed to make sense. Again, during the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, the People relied on the central government to help them achieve what was promised and not delivered by the States for over 100 years.

While I don’t object to the federal legislation proposed by the bloated Senator from Massachusetts on moral principles, I have to observe that he and his cohorts really should know better! They got their fingers burned in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) the so-called Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990].

In that case, the Government's essential contention was, simply put, that the act was valid because the possession of a firearm in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce, just as the proposed hate crime election confection currently on their political plates. The Government argued that possession of a firearm in a school zone may result in violent crime and that violent crime can be expected to affect the functioning of the national economy, mostly by disrupting or impeding the willingness of individuals to travel to areas within the country which they think are unsafe. As a result, the Government argued that Congress could rationally have concluded that their Gun Control Grab for Police Power substantially affected interstate commerce.

Did they get a BELL? or a BUZZER?

BUZZER! Oh, I’m so sorry, but you still go home with this attractive set of plastic steak knives – now let’s welcome our new contestant……

In declaring the act unconstitutional in Lopez, the Supreme Court finally said enough for the central government’s use of the Commerce Clause to nose into the province of the several States’ constitutionally reserved Police Power, saying:

"This rationale lacks any real limits because, depending on the level of generality, any activity can be looked upon as commercial. Under the dissent's rationale, Congress could just as easily look at child rearing as "fall[ing] on the commercial side of the line" because it provides a "valuable service - namely, to equip [children] with the skills they need to survive in life and, more specifically, in the workplace." . . . We do not doubt that Congress has authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate numerous commercial activities that substantially affect interstate commerce and also affect the educational process. That authority, though broad, does not include the authority to regulate each and every aspect of local schools.

"The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce. Respondent was a local student at a local school; there is no indication that he had recently moved in interstate commerce, and there is no requirement that his possession of the firearm have any concrete tie to interstate commerce.

"To uphold the Government's contentions here, we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States."


Same deal here. They know damn well that their hate crime act, if passed by Congress, would be vetoed by the President (one of the traditional jobs of the President is to veto legislation that he feels is unconstitutional – if fact that was the ONLY use of the veto power for a long time). Why? So they can go around the country announcing, “Bush and the Republicans Support Hate – Yet Again!!!! The sky is falling; the sky is falling!” etc. Their little act is bullshit; if they want to really put into place the restraints on hate that they sincerely desire, they should do so with an entitlement act – any State that enacts ant-hate-crime legislation will receive $…… from the Government for XYZ program(s). Cheap and obvious politics – as usual.
 
All the usual suspects involved in the crimes against the true meaning of Constitution...they go so far out on the limb except on the 2nd amendment...then their tune changes...
 
miles said:
So is someone like LT - a black moron - covered twice by this legislations?
Good thing the coffee cup was empty. Too early in the day to clean up the keyboard.
 
Well, hate what or who.

See it's not enough that punishment has been set for all known acts of unlawfulness now certain people want special laws because they feel that they are special and doing or talking about them or even think about them in any way they don't agree with should be a crime.

The dangerous part is "OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED"

Who does the perceiving? What standards are set or used.

And why should they have more rights or protection then you.

And if they don't then why hate crime laws?

Because certain people don't like NOT being agreed with in every way.

I'll be not cry when Ted joins his ancestors.
 
Back
Top