Interracial crime is not innately bias crime. You’re obviously confused about the concept.

All I’m really trying to say is that there are existing laws in place to deal with most of these situations, without the need for creating a class of persons, the commission of a crime against them being treated more seriously than crimes against other classses of persons.

But that isn’t how the laws work. The actual status of the victims is actually somewhat irrelevant. The only thing the law speaks to is the motive of the perpetrator. A large number of gay-bashing hate crimes are committed against straights who are mistaken to be gay. Likewise, some Sikhs have been victims of bias-crime assaults by thugs who thought they were attacking Muslims.

I thought the post made this clear. But really, you need to see that the categories that bias-crime laws feature do not have to do with the identity of the victim but with the motivation of the perp.

And of course, mens rea — i.e., the state of mind of the perpetrator, or intent and motive — are standard features of criminal law, particularly in the sentencing aspect. And bias-crime laws are almost purely sentence-enhancement statutes.

I left the south at seventeen because of the terrible hatred and violence there. My parents tried their best to shield me but it was in my face – on the bus, at a water fountain, segregated schools. The absence of blacks made them more present than less present. I heard ministers say they would not preach if blacks attended their church. Teachers say they would not teach blacks. The examples were everywhere by our elders.

Now when I return to visit my New Orleans family, blacks are absent from gatherings, neighborhoods, scarce in restaurants and still have most of the menial jobs. There has been some progress but that is mostly because of white flight. In the white areas I am back in the old south.

Maybe Democrats were and are naive about racism in the south but Republicans know that 90% of their party is Jim Crow Lite by a gentlemen Agreement. As long as they get the votes, the status quo will remain. If an LBJ comes along in the Republican Party, their constituents will desert them.

I am disgusted with both parties, Democrats for sticking their head in the sand and Republicans for being blatant racist. When have Democrats called Republicans on their racist position in the south? Never, that I know of.

The fact that intimidation is already a crime does not nullify the need for this law, which in effect simply requires that the assailant be punished both for intimidation and for the criminal act associated with the intimidation. Unfortunately, as Dave points out, that does not routinely happen in the absence of hate crimes laws. Likewise the law does not curtail the right of bigots to express their beliefs and proselytize to their hearts content. I for one fully support the rights of Nazis, skinheads, and the Klan to hold rallies and marches, give speeches, distribute literature, and maintain websites expressing their views. Those are protected speech, regardless of how personally repellent they are. It is when they attempt to directly intimidate people that I take exception.

First, there is no such thing as criminal assault in Indiana, and I can only speak as to the laws here. That crime is subsumed/replaced by either Intimidation or Attempted Battery. Oddly enough, assault (threats) remains a viable cause of action in civil courts.

As to your second point, sometime there are two crimes – sometimes not. Sometimes, there is first a threat, followed by action – other times there is simply action without other preceding threat at all.

All I’m really trying to say is that there are existing laws in place to deal with most of these situations, without the need for creating a class of persons, the commission of a crime against them being treated more seriously than crimes against other classses of persons.

Teddy’s example of hate-vandalism raises an interesting question though. Judges do have quite some leeway in state courts at least, in the imposition of sentencing, via the use of aggravating or mitigating factors.

madmommy @ 94

A pale beige Anglo in a sea of Polynesians? Is that the correct term, I don’t mean to offend.

A mere lad(8yro), transplanted from the Northwest Territories in Canada to Ewa Beach, Hawaii, in thirty days… Called it home ever since, yet, I’ve seen much of Europe, some of Asia, and all Fifty States, along the way…!!! *g*

CTut, I’ve often wondered, did you ‘go native’?
You’ve got a certain very polished um, nobility about many of your comments, and a definite knack with the ‘lingo’. Just curious.