Obama just signed the defense appropriations bill. Part of this bill makes it a federal crime to commit a "hate crime". A question for anyone who cares to respond: why is it worse to commit a crime of violence against someone because they are a member of a group spelled out in the legislation than it is to commit the same crime against someone who's not a member of such a group? Why is it a lesser offense to assault a heterosexual anglo saxon male than than it is to assault a gay person, regardless of their sex, or an African-American, or any other minority spelled out in the legislation? The assault affects the recipient of it exactly the same. There are already laws on the books covering the crime of assault. Punishment is spelled out in these laws. Now we have a federal law saying that such an assault is worse when committed against a member of a group specified in the just-signed legislation. I don't understand the reasoning behind legislation such as this, and I don't agree with it. I would invite comments, whether you agree or disagree.
If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. (Mark Twain).
|Guns Lot Activity|
Currently Active Users: 983 (1 member and 982 guests)
|Guns Lot Statistics|
|Topics: 8,690, Comments: 161,625, Members: 23,517
Welcome our newest member: Hank6046