« Man tried to leave baby at Florida strip club, authorities say | Main | IL man accused of attacking neighbors with shovel, then bow and arrow »

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b1b869e200e5521a57da8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Should hate-crime laws cover the homeless?:

Comments

Hate crimes are a waste of time. It's like the conspiracy charge. It's used when nothing else can be used. I would expect people to be smarter than to actually think you can regulate thought or make certain thoughts illegal.

How ridiculous. So we are going to legally value the life of a homeless person more than somoene who is not. What message does that send. We dont need more legislation. We need equality in criminal prosecution. Murder is murder regardless of who it is.

We need to prosecute people who murder and we need to prosecute rich and high level politicans when they break the law too.

perhaps we need a law that requires prosecutors to administer thier duties fairly and responsibly or face prosecution themselves.

So if a homeless person commits murder against a person who owns a home could that be considered a hate crime? Do they hate me for having a roof over my head?

i think an assault and/or murder charge should be enough to deter violence against the homeless, no extra should be needed. Perhaps consideration if their homelessness has made them largely unable to defend themselves, but certainly not a hate crime.

Labeling any crime as a so-called hate crime diminshes the other, equally heinous crimes that are not labeled hate crimes because they aren't committed against a special interest group.

Note to well-meaning fools: Murder is already a crime, usually motivated by adverse feelings toward the victim.

Legislators who have time to discuss this politically-correct BS should adjourn instead, save the state its per diem, and go home to a real job.

All "hate crimes" do is increase hate by implying that one person or group is somehow better or more worthy of protection than another.

Legislators who have time to discuss this politically-correct BS should adjourn instead, save the state its per diem, and go home to a real job.
-KC

Or face a charge of loitering. ; )

I am giving you a standing ovation on that one KC cicero!

Treating individuals as members of "protected classes" has worked so well for us. Are you folks sure we don't need more protected classes? (sarcasm off)

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About the McClatchy Company | Copyright