Hunting Murders — Hate Crime?

This afternoon I heard radio talkshow host Michael Savage, in his vitriolic way, describe the Wisconsin hunting murders as a Hate Crime.  As savage puts it, you have  6 dead (and  2 wounded) whites and one live Hmong. This fits the definition of a hate crime.

Savage goes on to point out that the Hmong have never really adapted to life in America. The Hmong, he says, have formed their own communities and are largely unwilling to assimilate into our culture or learn English.

As a conservative  I like the idea of making this a hate crime. When Matthew Sheppard was murdered  it became a famous hate crime. Because Matthew Sheppard was gay. In this case, the victims are all white so it could not possibly be a hate crime.

Like Savage, I believe that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If violence against gays is a hate crime why isn't violence against whites?

The only problem is that I do not believe in Hate Crimes.

The idea behind hate crimes is that a crime commit ed out of hatred is somehow worthy of double punishment. Today 43 states and the District of Columbia have hate crime laws. I take issue with the very idea of hate crime laws.

I have two problems with hate crimes :

1.	Hate crimes are already crimes. For example, the murder of Matthew Sheppard was a murder. The criminals who commit ed the crime  already deserved the death penalty. The fact that hate was a motivation should not make a difference.
2.	Hate crime statutes, especially those in the 23 states and the District of Columbia that  include sexual preference are a form of incrementalism. They are part of a larger agenda to force society to accept homosexuality as normal.

I understand that in law, Mens Rea or state of mind is a factor in obtaining a conviction. But it seems backwards. Normally things like catching one's spouse in an affair is a mitigating circumstance. What if  one had an irrational fear or hatred of homosexuals or Hmong or whites. Doesn't it follow that if one commited a crime against someone from one of these groups, the hatred or fear would be a mitigating factor.

I remember one of the cases that led to the current spate of Hate Crime legislation. The year was  1982. America's automakers were coming to grips with the tremendous demand for Japanese cars. Vincent Chin, a Chinese-American engineer, was at strip club two days before his wedding. An argument ensued and soon Chin was in a coma and in four days he was dead.

Chin and his friends left the bar. An unemployed auto worker and his son-in-law also left the bar and searched for Chin. When they found him, the beaten Chin to death with a Louisville Slugger baseball bat. The greatest injustice was yet to occur, in the trial that followed, Chins murderers received manslaughter convictions and probation. They spent no time in Jail for this heinous crime.

The problem here was not that Chin's killers acted out of racist motives. The problem was that a Detroit judge allowed a manslaughter plea in what should have been at least second degree and more likely a first degree murder case. (First degree since after the left the bar, the killers had time to cool off and had to plan to take the bat from their trunk.)

A judge who would not correctly apply the existing statute would have been no more likely to apply a hate crime statute. But the existing law, correctly applied would have been sufficient.

The other problem is that hate crimes are part of a brilliant strategy to make homosexuality seem normal in American society. If hate crimes are already crimes, it follows that any crime committed against a homosexual is already a crime. Therefore is can and should be prosecuted under existing statutes.

By adding sexual preference to state hate crime statutes, activists have succeeded in officially recognizing and protecting homosexuality. The danger is that such laws are a first step toward making it illegal to oppose homosexuality. Blogs like this one, churches (and yes mosques and synagogues) that preach against homosexuality even church schools may be in legal danger for teaching that homosexuality is wrong.

In the opinion of this dis-oriented author —the time is coming when churches who support the established biblical teachings against homosexuality will be in danger of losing their tax exempt, 501(c)(3)  status.

While the Wisconsin hunting murders fit the definition of a hate crime such statutes are unnecessary. The fact that the shooter is Hmong and the victims white shouldn''t make any difference.

Murder is already illegal in Wisconsin, unfortunately Wisconsin does not have the death penalty.