An opinion writer bemoans that Michigan's latest hate crime bill, the penalizes someones acts based on the subjective impact on another person, is delayed, and had it been in effect, it would criminalize conduct such as displaying a KKK flag in view of a Black person.
Detroit Free Press: Michigan lawmakers are supposed to protect us. Why are they letting hate crime bill wither away?
I blogged on this situation before. A White and a Black neighbor got into a dispute, and White neighbor thought it would be just the thing to fly a KKK flag in view of Black neighbor's house.
Now, the writer of the op-ed bemoans this and would want the neighbor charged with a hate crime.
Now, flying a flag, even one of a very repugnant organization, is protected by the First Amendment. Note that this is going on in Michigan, a state, while of the North, and which oft looks down on the Southern states as backwards, racist and discriminatory, has always had quite a major backwards and racist KKK presence.
However, charging the jerk with a hate crime because a third party is offended is not appropriate and makes this hate crime bill far too overbroad and exactly what most people were warning it could be used for - punishing views people don't like. It is far better for the guy to display to all and sundry that he's a complete, presumably racist, idiot than for it to be hidden. In short this idiot certainly showed his ass to the world. After all, when someone flies a flag on their own property, you know exactly who they are, and what they support, and you can judge them accordingly.
Again flying a KKK flag is absolutely the act of a jerk and a moron, and not to be condoned. But, being an absolute jerk is not a crime, nor should flying a flag on your own property even when it represents a reprehensible organization. After all, it tells everyone far and wide that the flier of that flag is a moron and not to be associated with in civilized company.
4 comments:
huh. Until just now I was unaware that there was a flag for the KKK.
Now I know.
I always thought that a hate crime should involve action, and not words or suspected attitude. Otherwise, why do we even bother to pretend that we have a 1st amendment? You cannot legislate good manners or a good upbringing.
Back when I was a young mother in Il. the KKK wanted to march on a Saturday in town outside of Chicago. They got the permit and much was being made of this with protesters outrage over such a thing. I had thought then as now they had as much of a 1st amendment right as I had. I hated their belief system but I sure wouldn't show up for it. Even the papers (back when we had Actual newspapers) seem to think they didn't have the "right" to do this. But the protesters showed up, KKK showed up and marched. No violence and then everyone went home. To look back and say that that was "the good old days" makes me very sad for what we've become.
B: Apparently there's quite a number and variations of KKK flags around. Interestingly enough, the KKK failed to pay its taxes in the 1930s and 1940s and as a result the organization was disbanded - twice, and it lost any exclusive claimk to use of the name.
pigpen51: Exactly, hate crimes should have some criminal action attached to them in order for them to be hate crimes and not protected (yet distasteful and reprehensible) speech.
glasslass: Yep, remember when the ACLU defended the KKK and Nazis right to expression, as odious as it may be? Good times, that.
Post a Comment