Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: flatsville who wrote (46011)	10/13/2000 6:11:25 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I never said that cross- burning in someone's yard in order to intimidate them could not be criminalized. I tried to distinguish between elements that could be illegal and elements that could not, to clarify that cross- burning as such is invulnerable, as when the KKK burns a cross as part of a public rally. It is true that penalty enhancement is possible, but the tack which has been taken is to take preexisting crimes and mandate stiffer penalties on the basis of targeting as an aggravating factor. Perhaps I am wrong that this is the sole basis, but so far you have not shown that is true. In any event, the "fighting words" exception could not be used where there was no imminent danger of retaliation, such as vandalism to a synagogue. Thus, it is likely that most hate crimes legislation depends on the targeting rationale.........