Hate Crimes

Be careful what you think...

    Matthew Shepard died Monday, October 12, 1998, from injuries suffered at the hands of two individuals. He was severely beaten, tortured, and tied to a fencepost, left for dead in near freezing temperatures. Doctors say they were unable to operate on Matthew due to the fact his skull was fractured so badly. This was a deplorable act, allegedly committed by Russell Henderson, and Aaron McKinney, two men who had met Shepard in a bar. If these two are guilty, they should be punished to the full extent of the law. No doubt about it, this sort of despicable crime must not go unpunished. However... there are some people who are saying that's not good enough. It's not enough that whomever committed this crime be punished to the full extent. Because Matthew Shepard was openly gay, they want to be certain those who did this are punished beyond the full extent of the law. They want them to be punished for the way they think, as well as the act they committed. They want them punished for a "hate crime".

    Now again, let me restate that I believe what happened to Mr. Shepard to be inexcusable. But that means it is inexcusable whether the victim is straight, gay, black, white, Muslim, Catholic, what have you. Criminal acts have set punishments, and well they should. You speed, you get fined. You sell drugs, you go to jail. You kill someone, you die (in many states). If you commit the act, you pay the penalty. But now, people seem to want to punish you for what you believe. They want it made criminal to dislike someone due to their sexual orientation, their ethnicity, their religion, etc.   It's not enough to be shunned as stupid for bigoted thoughts and ideas - now they want to criminalize it. Disagree with their way of thinking?  Too bad for you, buckaroo!  You're now a "hater", and you'll be subject to stiffer penalties for anything you do. If you're going to kill someone, for God's sake, make sure it's a straight, white male, because if it is anyone else, they'll find a way to make certain you fall under the "hate crime" laws, and you'll get the chair. (Of course, straight white males, being the cause of every bad thing that has ever happened, from the common cold to menstrual cramps, are fair game.) Attack a homosexual male?  You're a homophobe - regular sentence PLUS hate crime added on. Attack a woman? You're a misogynist - regular sentence PLUS hate crime added on. Attack a black man, if you're white? Racist - regular sentence PLUS hate crime added on. And so on, and so on. But hey, why stop there?   If someone attacks me, can I claim they don't like bald men? They must be antifolliculaphobic, so let's tack on hate crime sentencing too!  If a female attacks another female, can the victim claim that her attacker just didn't like her perfume? She's a fragraphobe - regular sentence PLUS hate crime added on! Wait... why make it have to be an attack?  Let's go down a level!  I voted Republican last election. Why can't the Democratic candidate claim I was discriminating against him because of his views on taxes?  I'm a taxophobe. My vote is thrown out, PLUS I get a sentence for a hate crime!  This is great! Shall we continue?

    Okay, so I'm exaggerating to make a point. The fact of the matter is, we have laws on the books to punish people for criminal acts. The beating of Matthew Shepard was criminal. It shouldn't be MORE criminal because he was gay, any more than it would be less criminal were he not gay. What if his attackers weren't aware of his sexual orientation (in this case, they were, but just for the sake of argument...)? Are they still guilty of a hate crime? Let me tell you... that should not matter! The victim was beaten! That is already a crime! If you think the punishment for beating someone to death isn't severe enough, then change that! But don't go out of your way to make special sentences and circumstances for different groups. Otherwise we end up with a sentencing structure like this:

Therefore, if I, for example, were attacked by a black lesbian Jewish woman, and the mandatory sentence for my beating were 25 years, she only has to be sentenced for seven years (25 mandatory, minus 5 because I'm male, minus 4 because I'm straight, minus 3 due to the fact I'm white, and minus 6 since I'm Catholic). But were the situation reversed, and I were the one doing the beating, I'd get a 58 year sentence.  Mix and match how you want. See? Easy!   And incredibly stupid. A murder is a murder, no matter who is killed. It's wrong, it should be punished, end of story.

    Lastly, does it not frighten you that people want to legislate how you think? Why stop with crimes? If it is illegal (as opposed to just plain stupid) to have bigoted beliefs, then who is to say what is a "good" stereotype to hold, and what is "bad"? We have a few freedoms in this country. One of those is to think and say what we feel, even if it is generally considered wrong. You are not allowed to act on those feelings, but you sure as hell can't be punished for thinking them. At least not yet. If this hate crime hysteria takes hold, soon you will be. Big Brother most certainly is watching us, but in spite of what liberals may tell you, he's coming from their side of the ideological fence.

    So in conclusion, if hate crime legislation is ever put to a ballot in your area, I urge you to vote it down. Vote in favor of tougher sentencing laws for everyone. Vote in favor of holding judges accountable for the sentences they do hand down. But don't vote to turn control of your thoughts, however wrong they may be, over to the politicians. Once we start down that slippery slope, there's no climbing back to the top.

Want to tell me how YOU feel? Go to the Survey Page, or e-mail me by clicking on the icon below.