|Home | Cover America | Canada & World | Guns, Crime, Terror | Environment | Faith | Lifestyles | Tech | Toons | Videos|
Fire bomb, Montreal, hate crime, Liberals
The inanity of hate crimes
By John Burtis
Tuesday, September 5, 2006
CBC News reported Saturday that a masked individual, caught on a security camera, walked up to the doors of an Orthodox Jewish school in Montreal, and tossed a Molotov cocktail. The damage, as reported, was minimal. The article states that "the police have been unwilling to declare the attack a hate crime." It has been, however, declared an "unexplained" case of arson.
A few years ago hate crimes were all the rage, and every good penal code had to have them. The liberals wept over the lack of them, and they were supposed to show, through a series of positively dreadful goings on, that "hate" was involved in the commission of certain criminal acts, something more than just your regular garden variety criminal behavior. Though how the cops were supposed to discern this special sort of hate from the regular kind was sort of unclear.
But a few things were given. Hate was practiced by whites on a regular basis, just as it was continually practiced against gays. Hate was everywhere. It had to be reined in. Detestable oppressors were at large in the land. Hate would provide feathers in many caps.
But you have to be real careful about judging the application of hate, because, you know, it might cause a backlash among some communities, who might view the use of a word like hate as a slur and cause them no end of anxiety.
So hate crimes became a joke. And cops, like those who sat around after the recent shooting spree in Seattle and took quite awhile to decide that it was a indeed hate crime, were viewed as slow on the uptake by a public who saw one plain as day and got a black eye for their efforts.
You remember the Seattle caper, where a supposed nut, variously described as Muslim, or as a Muslim who recently converted to Christianity, or as a confused Muslim, or as a Muslim decrying the activities being used against the murderous minions of Islamist fascism by an outraged Israel, or whatever the Press was gainsaying at the time, shot seven women working in the Jewish Center, killing one. He called the police and told them he did it because he was sick and tired of the "Jews."
The perpetrator had hidden himself in the lobby behind some plants and had taken a girl hostage with a semi-automatic pistol to gain entry in the Center by holding the weapon to her head, before he went on his murderous spree. And yet there was initial doubt about whether this was a hate crime.
Yet when a gay person is attacked, there is never any question about it being a hate crime. It is the law. And it's all so easy that way because it avoids all manner of thinking on behalf of the police and public.
As a cop you see many senseless crimes. The whippings of children, the beatings of the elderly, and many times the excessive violence used would indicate to a reasonable person that hate must be involved. But no, there is no hate, because hate is a special crime, reserved for the destruction of certain individuals, who appear to be guilty of their special crimes from the get go.
Hate has become a weapon, forged in political correctness, and used against those in the majority, against targets in our topsy-turvy view who deserve to be found guilty, while it will not be applied in other lesser cases, or in those without attached political fanfare.
And hate crimes have become a tool used to control the great masses, while allowing the smaller number of offenders to run rough shod over us without having this moniker hung around their necks or in the press out of fear of a greater public response verging on riot.
So hate, in the end, has become an element of governance by fear, to be lorded over us. And the fear of having a hate crime inflicted on those groups who actually practice it, like the boyo who tossed the gasoline filled bottle against an Orthodox door, has done absolutely nothing to curb their activities.
This concern will give the police pause in their use of this term in the determination of a crime, while the senseless lengthy battering of a drunk by a gang wearing colors is never a hate crime and requires no such process.
Ah, hate crimes. - another liberal joke, floated with the idea that some crimes are more dreadful than others - fail to recognize the simple fact that all violent crimes, from assault to murder, represent some level of hate.
So, today cops sit around, and chat about hate crimes and try to decide which ones to proceed with, which ones might disturb a volatile community, crimes that might enrage already gagged up illegal aliens, violence that might upset local Democratic leaders and serve to schlep Jesse Jackson or Rev. Al Sharpton into town, or capers that might drag Howard Dean and his camp followers into the city.
And the old police ways of determining which crimes to tackle and in which order – the flipping of coins, picking of cards, mental telepathy, telekinesis, stone/scissors/paper, leg or thumb wrestling, looking at the actual incident number – fly out the window because hate crime determination is now being made by the top brass in secret cabals due the political ramifications attached to the determination.
Nope, tackling the hate crime issue in a police station today has become as convoluted as the conversations accompanying Einstein's discussion on special relativity at the 1927 Solvay Conference.
The time could be better spent on chasing hoodlums of every stripe.