18 September, 2018

Louisiana: More “Hate Crimes” Baloney, or, Soviet Crimes in America

Posted by Socrates in "civil rights", 'hate', 'hate' crimes, 'hate' laws, communism, constitution, constitutional rights, double standards, federal laws, First Amendment, jewed culture, jewed law, Marxism, Orwell, Socrates, Soviet Union, Soviet-style laws in America, thought crime, War On White People at 5:01 pm | Permanent Link

It’s unknown if the Feds are going to file federal charges or not in this case. Sometimes they do.

Regardless, let’s take a look at what Orwellian “hate crime” laws are about. Let’s say, just as an example, that Joe dislikes Black people (smart guy!). That’s Joe’s right: he’s allowed under constitutional law to dislike Black people [1]. Let’s say, again just as an example, that Joe punches a Black guy based on the fact that he doesn’t like Blacks. How can Joe receive more prison time (and possibly a federal conviction and sentence) for that crime, compared to if he punched a Black guy because the Black was simply being a jerk? Either way, it’s the same crime: an assault (usually a misdemeanor, unless it’s “aggravated”), and a local charge as well. Only idiots, liberals and Jews believe that you can have different punishments for the same crime [2].

Trivia: the first “hate crime” law was a law banning “anti-Semitism.” It was created by Jews in the Soviet Union in 1918.


[1] the First Amendment protects freedom of speech including in writing, in speech and in other forms of communications

[2] the idea of punishing the motive for the crime could be applied to so many crimes. Should a speeder get a bigger, or smaller, fine based on why he was speeding? (This is not to be confused with, say, the penalty for hot-blooded murder vs. cold-blooded murder, that’s a different thing. Planning a murder days or weeks beforehand is different from committing a spur-of-the-moment murder or a heat-of-the-moment murder. A person not having the time to think about committing a murder vs. him planning a murder long beforehand is a legitimate legal consideration re: sentencing since sudden passions (e.g., sudden anger) can momentarily override logical thought and reason)

Comments are closed.