Michigan Votes Forum

Great -- a law that depends on MIND READING!  Aren't those crimes bad enough to merit stiff penalties on their own?  Now we penalize the REASON?  What is this -- a "think PC or else" law?  Somebody needs to get real here and focus on something important... like the ECONOMY or something.  What's next?  Jail time for Polish jokes?

Why not just punish the crime, and not the presumed motivation behind it?  

I believe these bills should apply to the officers of the courts (JUDGES) who have proven repeatedly with no repercussions of bias in rulings and strong abuse of authority. I would be willing to bet this bill and possible law could not be applied to misconduct by judges.

When is legislation really going to protect the people on equal levels and playing fields to hold all accountable by laws? Some very fine examples are located at www.lawliars.com

This abuse must come to a head and be addressed, and it must start at the capitol.

Rep. Schuitmaker, having reserved the right to explain her protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:

“Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I agree with the intent of this bill that we should not be a society that tolerates hate of any kind. This is a noble principle. But as I have stated in the past - the problem with these bills is it provides different victims with greater rights and for this reason it is unfair. A crime is a crime and our justice system should be fair. Why treat victims unfairly? My substitute will allow us to find that common ground.”

 It looks like almost everyone would fall under one of the categories. The only non-protected class that I see are midgets. Will we still be allowed midget tossing at bars?

We still are waiting for a real and persuasive evidence to support the contention that “bias-motivated” crimes are more serious (do greater harm to the victim and society), and therefore warrant more severe punishment than otherwise identical crimes motivated by something other than “bias.”

Until that is forthcoming, there is no justification for even considering a law such as that proposed by HB 4836.

 Freespeaker, Maybe someone will make you an example. Then maybe you will feel the difference. You're trying to come on as a legal intellectual. It isn't working.

albaby2:

 Freespeaker, Maybe someone will make you an example. Then maybe you will feel the difference. You're trying to come on as a legal intellectual. It isn't working.

Hm-m-m-m-m.  Is that some kind of threat?

I am still waiting to see persuasive evidence that crimes motivated by "bias" are more severe than otherwise identical crimes motivated by something other than bias.

And I repeat that until such evidence is produced, there is no reason to even consider this type of legislation.  

That is not intellectual posturing, it simply is an honest challenge to those who support this legislation to validate its need.  If the need for a law like this cannot be validated, there is no good reason or purpose for its being enacted.

 This House Bill #4836 thoroughly disregards and ignores our U.S. Constitutions "Equal Protection" under the law.  It creates a  "Super" unlawful class of individuals.  Any of our elected representatives who support this have violated their oath of office.  It is similar to the idea that Aryan's are a superior race. 

Man cannot and should not be involved in creating a Utopian nation, because  throughout history when man tinkers with the Rule of Law, Common Law and our miracle creation of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights some individual loses their freedoms and liberties.

Hitler and Stalin tried to devise their idea of Utopia -- the consequence was that many suffered and died. 

It is up to the courts and juries to decide the degree of punishment for an offense against another under the Rule of Law and our U.S. Constitution.

"Bias-motivated" crimes are just what the term conceptualizes - "bias" means -- partiality, prejudice, favoritism and a  preconceived notion.  That concept runs totally counter to "Equal protection under the law." 

"Bias-motivated" crimes are just what the term conceptualizes - "bias" means -- partiality, prejudice, favoritism and a  preconceived notion.  That concept runs totally counter to "Equal protection under the law." 

Absolutely correct-and that is why there are so many different levels of appeal because equal protection under the law exists only in theory-not in practice  The blindfold on the statue of justice is supposed to suggest impartiality but in  it also limits her vision. She apparently couldn't see the injustice meted to minorities.

Judges are not always fair or impartial. Why do you think political parties want to appoint so many judges when they get in power?  To uphold the Constitution? LOL That's what they claim, but in practice they want to bias the courts in their favor. So much for impartiality, equal protection, etc.  (The liberal way is to legislate from the bench). Sandra Day O'Connor ( a Reagan appointee)suspended the 14th amendment (in Grutter or Gratz) because she thought we should wait for 25 years to see if affirmative action was still needed then. Did she rule on the constitutionality of the case or her empathy?. She's the kind of judge Obama is looking for. What you are saying is that the judge should rule on the serverity of a case using  empathy. Some judges have less empathy toward those not like them. That's why we need to set standards-to remove subjectivity from judgements.

According to the MichiganVotes (Mackinac Center) synopsis of this bill:

Passed in the House (66 to 43) on May 20, 2009, to establish a new “bias-motivated” criminal offense for a person who selects the target of a violent crime or property crime based on a perception of the victim’s disability; gender; national origin or ancestry; age; race, color, or ethnicity; religion; sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression of gender; or a person’s or group’s association with one or more of these. Violations would be subject to up to two years in prison and a $5,000 fine if the underlying (“predicate”) crime is a misdemeanor, and up to 50 percent more than the sentence authorized for the predicate crime if it is a felony. A person could not be convicted of both the predicate crime and the “bias-motivated” crime (prosecutors would have to choose one or the other).

The questions remain:  Is a crime motivated by “bias” (as described above) really more severe in its impact on victim and society and so deserving of extra punishment?  If so, why and how?  Supporters of this outrageous legislation have yet to answer those key questions.

Without coherent, concrete answers to those questions, this is just more emotion-based, feel-good, politically “correct” legislation of the sort that has led to the deplorable growth in Michigan prison population over the years.  It should be rejected by the Senate. 

 In recently speaking to a dear friend of mine regarding the denigration of our U.S. Constitution by those we have elected to serve, and who have taken an oath of office -- he stated that we should be asking them, "What Article, Amendment or Section in the U.S. or State Constitution would you like to  remove or change?"    If they  even bothered to answer (we the peon's in their eyes)  that would sure give us clue of what their true motives are.    

It seems more and with increasing velocity they are not only violating our Constitutions' (meaning Federal and State), but they are shrinking and decreasing the rights of the people, while increasing and expanding government authority greatly beyond the boundaries of the Rule of Law. 

I hope we have enough intelligence in the Senate to have this bill tossed in the un-Constitutional trash heap.