Stronger hate crime statutes aid prevention

It's good to see Congress strengthening hate crimes laws to add gender, disability and sexual orientation to the already-covered race, religion and national origin. Someone who is moved to violence by hatred of an entire group of people presents a great danger to society, and additional punishment is needed to discourage such crimes.

I remember the news story of the thugs in Texas who randomly selected a black man and dragged him behind their pickup truck until he was dismembered. Some say they oppose hate crimes statutes because “Any crime is a hate crime.” No, it's not. Someone who robs a bank, for instance, isn't motivated by a hatred of banks. He's after the money.

Some say hate crimes punish thoughts. Our justice system already considers thoughts and motive of a criminal in sentencing. For example, the difference between murder and manslaughter rests on whether the killing was deliberate or premeditated. And the definition of fraud requires that the criminal knowingly intended to defraud a victim.

The Supreme Court unanimously found that hate crime statutes don't conflict with free speech because they don't punish individuals for exercising free speech. (A crime is not speech.) Rather, they allow courts to consider motive when sentencing a criminal for a crime.

George Hewland

Cedar Rapids