Utah gays exercize 2nd A rights


PDA






Ted Bell
January 21, 2003, 09:24 AM
http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Jan/01212003/utah/22192.asp

From the article:

In the absence of effective hate-crime laws, more gays are turning to guns to defend themselves, families and friends. Utah's Pink Pistols -- formed in November and now the nation's largest chapter with more than 100 gay, lesbian and straight members -- are believers in the loose-knit organization's national motto: "Armed gays don't get bashed."

Also from the article:

Others battling for gay rights favor passive or nonviolent tactics, the so-called moral high ground. But Nelson does not aspire to those heights, not if it means absorbing a beating or being killed while waiting for police to arrive.

"Is a Matthew Shepard dead on a fence morally superior to a Matthew Shepard having to explain to law enforcement officers why he shot the two perpetrators in self-defense?" he asks.

If you enjoyed reading about "Utah gays exercize 2nd A rights" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mrsMTN
January 21, 2003, 02:35 PM
It's a good organization. Been around for a few years now.

J Miller
January 21, 2003, 02:42 PM
Hate crime laws are another exersize in stupidity. You cannot legislate morality or behavior.

As for the gays and lesbians, if they want to purchase guns for self defence, more power to them.

I hope they vote that way when the elections come around.

blades67
January 21, 2003, 03:01 PM
You cannot legislate morality or behavior.

While that is a true statement, we can make laws that punish bad behavior such as beating or killing somebody. We can also make the punishment more severe when the bad behavior is motivated by the perpetrator's dislike of the victim's skin color or sexual orientation.

MitchSchaft
January 21, 2003, 03:08 PM
So you're basically saying that beating and killing is worse when the perp dislikes their skin color or sexual orientation?

CZ-75
January 21, 2003, 03:09 PM
In the absence of effective hate-crime laws,

I think this phrase explains a (victim) mindset that I don't wish to participate in.

There are plenty of laws against numerous crimes, including murder, but they don't really add up to a hill of beans when you're facing someone intent on violating them.

Not being gay, I can't speak for them, but "hate-crime" laws do nothing for me with regard to feeling safer.

I can see the Matthew Shepard case and think "would Matthew Shepard have felt better knowing his killers could get an extra few years for killing him because he was gay?" :rolleyes:

I think the statutes against murder are sufficient to PUNISH those accused of the crime, but no statute is sufficient to PROTECT.

Skunkabilly
January 21, 2003, 03:15 PM
Hate crime legislation :cuss:

I hate crime too. :rolleyes:

The Plainsman
January 21, 2003, 03:16 PM
Can you describe for me a "love" crime or at least a "non-hate" crime? I don't know of any violent crime that isn't a hate-crime. If I'm a bad guy, why is my violent crime any less serious just because my victim is the same race and/or sexual orientation as mine?

How about if the victim is older than the perp? Since age is defined as one of the "forbidden" discriminations, why isn't a violent crime against any person older than the perp, a hate-crime?

Hate-crimes are BS. A violent crime is a violent crime and should be punished accordingly, regardless of motive.

Drjones
January 21, 2003, 05:28 PM
blades67:

Hate crimes automatically place more value on the lives of certain individuals. (Hint: they're NOT white males.)

It basically goes like this:

"Oh, whitey killed another whitey? Hmmm....10 years."

"Oh, whitey killed a BLACKIE??? :what: Well, that was OBVIOUSLY motivated by whitey's hate for blacks, and I'll bet he even has some confederate flags stuck on the back of his pick-up truck. Whites killing blacks is REALLY bad. 80 years in the pen."



"Oh, straight guy killed straight guy. Bad."

"Oh, straight guy killed GAY guy??? What a horrible bigot! 80 years for you!"

Ewok
January 21, 2003, 05:40 PM
Hate crime, or bias-based crime (perhaps a better term) is basically small-scale terrorism. If killing someone as a terrorist act should be treated differently than "ordinary" murder, then so should killing someone as an act of bias. The point is that it isn't just a crime against the dead guy, but an act of intimidation against all others in the same bias classification.

I'm not saying I believe that hate crime laws are worthwhile, just explaining the rationale.

Drjones
January 21, 2003, 05:44 PM
:banghead:

Forgot to say what I wanted to initially:

I have several close gay friends. I got into a small debate via email with one on the RKBA (what else? :D )

He is a very well brainwashed anti, to say the least.

Other than that, gay, straight, bi, purple, black, yellow, or gold, I don't care. If you love guns, you're a friend of mine! :D

CZ-75
January 21, 2003, 06:20 PM
Hate crime, or bias-based crime (perhaps a better term) is basically small-scale terrorism. If killing someone as a terrorist act should be treated differently than "ordinary" murder, then so should killing someone as an act of bias. The point is that it isn't just a crime against the dead guy, but an act of intimidation against all others in the same bias classification.

Then add a separate charge of "terrorism."

I find "hate-crime" reminds me too much of "hate-speech," to remain very placid with regard to this issue. I think this is the slippery slope. I'm expecting "thought-crime" to be added very soon after we enact our first "hate-speech" legislation.

Perhaps, rather than being too offended at the next neo-nazi klansman skinhead product of years of selective inbreeding, we should view him as a canary with which to gauge our own freedom.

I would've used ultra-leftists as an example too, but they seem to get more respect from media and government authorities, from my anecdotal experience. :rolleyes:

Waitone
January 21, 2003, 09:58 PM
Hate crime laws are a way to criminalize public speech.

Political correctness is a way to criminalize private speech.

Hate crime laws violate the equal protection clause of the constitution.

Hate crime laws denigrate the value of a non-protected citizens.

Hate crime laws are disgusting in concept and uneven in application.

Hate crimes laws would not be attractive if the courts and LE simply enforced current laws.

denfoote
January 22, 2003, 06:34 AM
Is it true that Kel-Tek will make you a P32 with a pink frame???

Gordon
January 22, 2003, 11:37 AM
I should keep my mouth shut among friends BUT: do black people get charged with hate crimes for attacking whites in riots ect? I can't remember it happening. Are homosexuals charged with hate crimes for same gender Rape(sodomy)? Or are these "hate crimes" what me and Skunkabilly think they are?Crime is crime. Anything else is NEW SPEAK.:banghead:

Drjones
January 22, 2003, 01:23 PM
Gordon:

In my "Ethnic America" (read: "Whites are all satan") class I was forced to take we learned of ONE incident in WI, I think, where a black youth was charged with a "hate crime" because he beat a white boy.

Don't remember the specifics, nor if the "hate crime" charge actually stuck, but there's ONE incident.

I'd be willing to say its one of PRECIOUS few... :rolleyes:

:cuss:

TearsOfRage
January 22, 2003, 02:39 PM
Hate crime laws seem to have drifted away from their original intent, which most of you have probably never heard of.

There was a time when it was common for a crime committed against a minority to simply be ignored or laughed at by the local police and/or prosecutor, who were as bigoted as any one else.

Murder, assault, etc. are state crimes. The original hate crime laws made them federal crimes, so that they would not be investigated and tried by people from the same local culture as the perpetrators.

You may say, 'that was in the past, all cops, prosecutors, judges etc. now are saints', but I have spoken to people who have been victims of assault, tried to report it to the police, and were ignored.

The Plainsman
January 22, 2003, 03:21 PM
I hear you. What you describe is wrong, certainly, but two wrongs don't make a right. The source of the problem needs to be dealt with, but not by making new laws to cover the same crimes, only for different people. As Waitone & CZ-75 and others have pointed out, the invention of "hate- crime" is the first step on a slippery slope. :(

wingnutx
January 22, 2003, 04:52 PM
Pink Pistols are ok in my book. I'm amazed any gay person would want to be disarmed, being an obvious target for boneheads. Then again, I'm amazed that anyone would disarm themselves.

John Galt
January 22, 2003, 05:08 PM
As is usual, the article points out that "the left" are "racist" in that it seems all they think about. They think the rest of us are focused on it as well & hence the incredulous article.

When I come in contact with a homosexual or one of another race, it occupies at most a couple seconds of my thoughts. No big deal.

I never gave it much thought until paying a lot of attention to politics over the last dozen years. Now that they feel defeated on real issues in the last elections, it is the only card they have left to play. It's is all we will hear about until the next elections. It's an easy one for them because you can't really defend yourself as it is persectuting "thoughts". You can't prove whether you have them or not.

This story wasn't worth writing...

wingnutx
January 22, 2003, 05:19 PM
John Galt-

They will score an own-goal during the next primary, with Sharpton in the running. He's going to use that card against his opponents, one of which will be the Democrat's candidate.

I can't wait to see the self-destruction commence.

If you enjoyed reading about "Utah gays exercize 2nd A rights" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!