What goes around

Hate crime isn’t limited to only some

“Will the hate crime laws be completely separate from the old dull ones? And if a body is set free after accused of the latter, could a prosecutor file the former? And what does this do to the Double Jeopardy Clause? This is going to take meticulous legal writing, and even more attentive thought. The time might be right for change, but it’s hardly ever time for unguarded legislation.

“The good news is that, among these 50 laboratories of democracy, 47 have a record on this particular matter. The leaders of the 48th state planning to take this step have examples — call them case studies — that can provide as guides. Let’s not ignore them.” — Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

editorial, Aug. 26, 2020

ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE

In this current debate about hate crime legislation — and we’re deep into the debate in Arkansas

— perhaps most progressives and more than one conservative think such laws will often be aimed starboard. Like a cannon on a ship. Those things can do a lot of damage if their targets are in range. But it takes a whole lot of effort to get the things pointed the other way.

Thankfully the law isn’t like a cannon on a ship. Or even a more nimble piece of artillery on wheels. The law isn’t a respecter of persons, not in this country. In that, it has something in common with the Almighty.

When it comes to hate crimes, and whether Arkansas should join the majority of other states in putting them on the books, most folks doubtless think of this as some sort of cudgel to use against right-wingers, and only them.

After all, only dastardly Republican conservative capitalist types are capable of hate, right? So these laws would be used only against racist, homophobic, misogynistic, xenophobic right-wing types. Surely.

Then this from the Associated Press last week:

“Two women are facing hate crime charges after confronting a 7-year-old boy and his mother outside the Democratic National Convention in Delaware over their support of President Donald Trump and seizing a Make America Great Again hat. A grand jury on Tuesday indicted Olivia Winslow and Camryn Amy, both 21, on felony charges of robbery, conspiracy and hate crimes and a misdemeanor charge of endangering the welfare of a child.”

The women were also charged with something called Offensive Touching, which is a thing, apparently, in Delaware. We probably have the same law on the books in Arkansas,

but it must be called something else. Perhaps “assault.”

The video of the women confronting the small group has gone viral, as the kids say. One of the women grabbed a MAGA hat off the ground while a young boy told them the hat wasn’t theirs. The women also appeared to be tearing up posters or signs.

Later in the video, one of the suspects throws a punch at a man who was attempting to get the hat again. The most offensive thing appeared to be all the cursing in the video. Maybe Delaware ought to look into a law against offensive yelling. (But let’s not give them any more bad ideas.)

According to dispatches from several news sources, three of the charges the women face are felonies. They could be looking at 15 years in prison. Mainly because of Delaware’s hate crimes laws.

Those laws say, in part, that a person is guilty of a hate crime when they do something “for the purpose of interfering with the victim’s free exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege or immunity protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, or commits said crime because the victim has exercised or enjoyed said rights.”

Folks, that is wide open. What we saw in the video looked pitiful, but it didn’t look like something for which anyone should get 15 years of hard labor. Even the one semi-punch thrown at the man didn’t land. (Offensive boxing, anyone?) F orgive us if we repeat something from the previous paragraph: What we saw in the video looked pitiful, but it didn’t look like something for which anyone should get 15 years of hard labor. Because the women involved weren’t the stereotypical thugs?

Hmmm.

What if, instead of a MAGA hat, one of the women had taken a rainbow flag, and tossed it over a fence? What if, instead of women, these were two beefy balding men with Confederate flags on their T-shirts? Would the image of some ruffian tearing up a BLM sign give rise to another, more visceral reaction?

If a couple of guys in windbreakers and shades, with NASCAR hats and Southern accents, had upset a 7-year-old and were caught on video cursing his mother over a political matter, how many would grumble about their facing 15-year sentences?

Hate crime legislation cuts both ways. Or it should.

Let’s think this through, Arkansas. As always.