H.R.1913 - Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009

To provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes. view all titles (4)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 as reported to house.
  • Short: Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 as passed house.

Comments Feed

Displaying 31-60 of 205 total comments.

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 05/03/2009 7:23am

    Your right to commit hateful crimes?

  • Comm_reply
    Sunnydayz 04/29/2009 4:39pm

    why does it need to be passed when there are already laws against this type of thing? What makes it different?

  • Comm_reply
    Suenew 05/26/2009 7:47pm

    You are right. And for the law to say it is hate crime, they would then need to read the mind of the person who said or did something. It seems to be more of a hate crime to accuse another of a a hate crime.

  • Comm_reply
    BartelsK 05/02/2009 7:16am

    You defeat your argument with your example. This bill only protects 1 class (that is by choice on birth). That class is sexual orientation. When they attempted to ad amandments to protect the pregnant, the elderly and veterans those amendments were shot down. So your wexamply of a Jewish hate crime willn ot be protected as a hate crime under this bill it will just be vandolism.

  • Comm_reply
    bbs 05/03/2009 4:00pm

    I disagree. They are already equally protected under the 14th ammendment. Vandalism is vandalism and the crime to them should be no more than if it was painted on my house.

  • Comm_reply
    jamessays 07/27/2009 7:21pm

    In which case, if you believed this, at best you could say you are indifferent to the passage of this bill—not against it.

  • kjschultz99 04/19/2009 7:05pm

    There are already laws for people who commit violent acts against others for any reason. Motives run rampant and the more random the crime the more it affects the ‘well-being’ of the community – mainly while the person has not yet been caught. This legislation does nothing to eliminate or even reduce crimes based on ‘hate’. If anything, it entices the very motives they claim to address.

  • Comm_reply
    prodriver8108 04/26/2009 9:15pm

    I tend to agree. Why are we wasting are tax dollars over another bill when there seems to be enough laws to handle those that actually commit a crime. I don’t agree with what everyone else says and I’m sure they don’t agree with what I say. Does that mean we should be allowed to say it at all. What are we? A bunch of pansies…mama he called be a bad word. LOL Its laughable that grown men and women are actually seriously considering this in Congress.

  • pennyarc7 04/20/2009 8:24am

    This Bill needs to be defeated, it is a direct attack on States and individual rights.

    ‘(A) the State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction

    also:
    ‘(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.

    This leaves the door open for the Federal Government to determine when it needs to move in and take over at the State level.

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    Sunnydayz 04/29/2009 4:44pm

    I agree it needs to be defeated… there are already laws for this type of thing and this bill has too broad of an interpretation. Thank goodness Texas is declaring it’s 10th amendment right of sovereignty! The federal government is getting too oppressive!

  • Comm_reply
    bmwtriton 12/02/2009 10:56am

    " the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence."

    This is double jeopardy, which is prohibited under the 5th Amendment. Federal interests do not trump our rights except in extreme em,ergency, such as foreign invasion. This means if someone is aquitted of a crime, the Federal government could decide the verdict is not in the “Federal interest” or that the sentence was not harsh enough and retry the individual in federal court. Innocent people can and will be hurt under this clause.

    It is unconstitutional to be tried twice for the same crime, which this bill could do.

  • Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    Zee 04/27/2009 3:04pm
    Link Reply
    + -2

    Can you outspend Soros?

  • Comm_reply
    HughesAero 05/23/2009 5:15am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Vote ’em out.

  • Buckskin1 04/20/2009 5:57pm

    I agree with this bill being unconstitutional. It is just one more freedom being placed in jeopardy by the current administration. Look at the DHS assessment released April 7th to law enforcement across the nation. That in itself is a hate crime as well as profiling before arrest are to be made. It is also totally unconstitutional because it infringes upon religion, free speech and rights to peaceable assembly. It is only going to get worse before it gets better. It will take all Americans (people who still believe in what the Constitution stands for and why it was written) to handle this crisis. Wake up people because the wheels of change are rolling real fast and at present the government is trying to become CFO, CEO, President, Vice President and Board of Directors for more financial institutions. Before long they will have all our money, at least the part that is left when China gets ready to call our hand on our loans. Where are all the watchdogs when you need them?

  • Comm_reply
    ftcopeland2002 04/22/2009 10:57am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    IT’S NOT GOING TO GET BETTER WHEN NEXT THEY WILL INVADE YOUR HOME WITHOUT A CAUSE.

  • Comm_reply
    prodriver8108 04/26/2009 9:11pm

    Patriot Act already gives them this ability. They need little reason, only suspicion.

  • Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Spam Comment

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • kbrady 04/22/2009 8:00am

    A crime is a crime no matter who the victim is. Everyone deserves equal protection, not preferred protection for a select few.
    Also, even though there is a promise that it will not effect free speech, someone will eventually (probably sooner than later) redefine the wording to restrict speech that they find offensive.

  • Comm_reply
    Eleora 04/22/2009 10:43am
    Link Reply
    + -2

    Exactly! We already have punishment for crimes.

    If we look at other countries with similar measures, those who disagree with homosexuality due to faith often find themselves in very uncomfortable positions.

    As far as not restricting free speech… Look what just happened to Ms. California in the Miss USA contest! If she is expected to not give her opinion with no law in place, what do you think will happen if the hate crimes law pass?

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    BVal 06/27/2009 5:37pm

    I agree!

  • Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • smitherines 04/23/2009 1:34pm
    Link Reply
    + -3

    I don’t support this bill either!! I am concerned it will take away freedom of speech from the Christ’s Church to be able to speak out about abortion, homosexuality, same sex marriage etc. I would encourage everyone to call their Representative and encourage them to vote no on this bill. It’s will be on Pres. Obama’s desk by Memorial Day Weekend. They are trying to push this through. Has been passed in the Senate and is moving forward to the house without a hearing or discussion. Call today. Help keep our Freedom to be able to stand and speak up for what is right without fear.

  • Freshmanwave 04/23/2009 4:50pm

    This act, as I read it, only covers acts of violence, so there is no “freedom of speech restrained” issue.


Vote on This Bill

18% Users Support Bill

301 in favor / 1375 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments