Hate Crimes Matthew Shepard Act

A hate free zone is a place free of all evil slurs and awful names. It is a place where if you don’t have anything nice to say, you don’t get to say anything at all. It is a place where everyone agrees with one another, and if you disagree, you are evil. Harsh words cannot be spoken about anyone, because a hate free zone is a place where no one’s feelings can be hurt. Not only that, but you cannot offend any minority by doing things that go against what they believe, or make them sad. A hate free zone is a place in which the constitution doesn’t matter, because the Golden rule is what you need to live by. Americans enjoy rights that most other people on this planet would never even dream of; why are we willing to throw all of that away in order to become a hate free zone?
House democrats passed a bill adding acts of violence on the basis of sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, and disabilities to the list of hate crimes punishable by federal law. It makes sense to label these specifically “hate crimes” because apparently people are stabbing their friends out of love these days. The hate crime is a product of the goal of having a sad free zone. It already includes acts of violence on the basis of race, religion, color, and national origin, because those are the only ones we are sure of so far. Apparently we are at fierce debate with ourselves over whether crimes committed towards any majority of people have hate motivation. But be patient, the mystery shall be solved soon enough as we cross victims off of our lists and celebrate clarity: Attacking people is hate motivated.
Motives aren’t crimes, hate crimes are redundant of laws we already have in place, and equality under the law is threatened when the weight of a crime changes from victim to victim.
What a person is thinking while committing a crime is not a crime itself, and doesn’t change what the criminal’s actions are. To suggest that what a person is thinking does change the crime is like suggesting that what a student is thinking changes their answers. Either way, the end result is all we see. The motive of a murder does not change the fact that a human life has just ended. Whether the murderer’s motive was race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, thievery, jealousy, anger due to a parking ticket, getting the wrong order at a drive thru window, it’s simply irrelevant when it comes to what the crime has ultimately cost: A Human Life. If I attacked a black, gay, Jewish man in a wheelchair, I’m not sure what crime I would committing. That’s what happens when the motive outweighs the crime itself.
Hate crimes are redundant of laws we already have. It’s not as if homosexuals and transvestites roam the streets vulnerable to any and all attacks because the law doesn’t protect them. It’s not as if the wheelchair bound have to kick it into high gear in order to escape the angry mob of people wanting to play “kill the handicapped!” We just so happen to already have laws against murder, rape, battery, assault, and just about anything that hurts you, that apply to all the citizens in this country. If we didn’t, we wouldn’t be so worried about the minority of the population in an every man for himself society. Once again, the motives of these crimes does not change the crimes themselves. Redundancy in the law has no merit and creates an atmosphere in which different laws apply to different people.
When the penalty of attacking one person is more than the penalty of attacking another, it logically follows that the first victim is worth more than the other. So I guess we are putting values on people now. What a brilliant idea! And we know it works too, because we have seen this before in history. I just can’t put my finger on the best example: Hitler or Stalin? Is it really any less tragic for a white man that has three kids to be murdered than it is for a gay college student who should be looking forward to the rest of his life to be? It is the same crime, and should have the same penalty. A common argument in support of the hate crimes bill is that these specific groups are attacked more than others. If the crimes are being committed excessively and we need to raise the penalties in order to uphold order, then the penalties need to be changed for everyone, regardless of who the victims are. If we are unequal under the law, then we are unequal as citizens, and that is Un-American.
Motives aren’t crimes, redundancy in the law hinders the law, and who the victim is should not change what the crime is. A land of freedom cannot be a hate free zone.