Indiana is one of a handful of states without a hate crimes (or bias crimes) law. For many legislative cycles a bill was killed by the Republican leadership and some far right members. But with the rise of hate crimes both nationally and events in Indiana have pushed some in the GOP to move closer to a law that many can live with. In fact after a graffiti attack on a synagogue in Carmel, there was a real sense that the debate was over. But for some on the right the debate isn't. Some Republican members recently sent a letter to the Indianapolis Star calling the proposed bill would be a thought crime. But they were completely out of touch with what the law would do. Here is an example from their letter:
For example, imagine an individual enjoying a meal at an Indiana restaurant when his “Bernie 2016” t-shirt or her red “MAGA.” hat agitates another of the restaurant’s patrons. If an argument breaks out and the police are called, the t-shirt or hat might label the individual as someone who evidently hates others.
The dangerous legislation being proposed in Indiana would make it possible for prosecutors and judges to prosecute and sentence as a thought crime, which could be based on the personal political or religious beliefs of the accused.
This is nonsense because this is not how the 45 states that have these laws use them. In fact the t-shirt or hat is not a measure of hate but support. If they were attempted to be used to show hate that would be laughed out of the court room. But it is this type of fear mongering that makes it difficult to get people to understand what these laws can do.
Here is an example that can highlight how and why these laws are used and are important. Let's say you have a neighbor who plays music loudly late into the night. You try to get him to stop but he ignores you. You are mad, you hate him because of the music. You go over and spray paint "Move out you jerk" on his garage door.
Now you have a neighbor who moves in. He and his family are Jewish. They are quiet and you only see them when they come and go or are in their yard. But you hate them because they are Jewish. So you spray paint "Move out you Kike" on their garage. Is this really the same crime?
One is about responding to the action of terrible neighbor and the other is an attempt to keep people you hate out of your neighborhood. While both are property crimes and will involve both criminal and civil action, the attack on the Jews is an attack on a community. That is why bias crime laws are needed. We already have many laws that there are enhancements to the consequences of a crime because of the nature of the crime and sometimes the status of the victim. Bias crimes do not create a special status for individual victims, nor does it make thoughts illegal. But if you target a particular group with the intent of attacking their civil rights, such as trying to scare them out of a community you don't want them to live in, your sentence should be more severe than a simple graffiti charge. I understand with all the noise from right wing noise makers that people might not understand the way bias crimes work, but if these elected officials are going to spread such nonsense they should be sanctioned by their party.
We are living in a post truth society now. The President of the United States lies about objective facts multiple times a day. This isn't just the "all politicians lie" kind of thing. We must be careful to not allow the propaganda replace debate. There may be a clear conservative argument against bias crimes. I haven't heard it yet. I think because it is hard to hear of the noise of nonsense that exists. But in the end it is simple. Indiana needs a bias crime law to allow the justice system to provide real justice for targeted communities. Intent is part of a lot of crimes, let's be a state that says attacking people for who they are is wrong.
This is nonsense because this is not how the 45 states that have these laws use them. In fact the t-shirt or hat is not a measure of hate but support. If they were attempted to be used to show hate that would be laughed out of the court room. But it is this type of fear mongering that makes it difficult to get people to understand what these laws can do.
Here is an example that can highlight how and why these laws are used and are important. Let's say you have a neighbor who plays music loudly late into the night. You try to get him to stop but he ignores you. You are mad, you hate him because of the music. You go over and spray paint "Move out you jerk" on his garage door.
Now you have a neighbor who moves in. He and his family are Jewish. They are quiet and you only see them when they come and go or are in their yard. But you hate them because they are Jewish. So you spray paint "Move out you Kike" on their garage. Is this really the same crime?
One is about responding to the action of terrible neighbor and the other is an attempt to keep people you hate out of your neighborhood. While both are property crimes and will involve both criminal and civil action, the attack on the Jews is an attack on a community. That is why bias crime laws are needed. We already have many laws that there are enhancements to the consequences of a crime because of the nature of the crime and sometimes the status of the victim. Bias crimes do not create a special status for individual victims, nor does it make thoughts illegal. But if you target a particular group with the intent of attacking their civil rights, such as trying to scare them out of a community you don't want them to live in, your sentence should be more severe than a simple graffiti charge. I understand with all the noise from right wing noise makers that people might not understand the way bias crimes work, but if these elected officials are going to spread such nonsense they should be sanctioned by their party.
We are living in a post truth society now. The President of the United States lies about objective facts multiple times a day. This isn't just the "all politicians lie" kind of thing. We must be careful to not allow the propaganda replace debate. There may be a clear conservative argument against bias crimes. I haven't heard it yet. I think because it is hard to hear of the noise of nonsense that exists. But in the end it is simple. Indiana needs a bias crime law to allow the justice system to provide real justice for targeted communities. Intent is part of a lot of crimes, let's be a state that says attacking people for who they are is wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment