Jump to content

‘Hate Crime Reporting Act’ a “Dangerous” Threat to Free Speech


Recommended Posts

‘Hate Crime Reporting Act’ a “Dangerous” Threat to Free Speech

 

Boston Herald editorial labels bill a “frankly chilling proposition”

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
April 24, 2014

 

240414hate.jpg

Image: Senator Ed Markey (Wiki Commons).

Critics of the newly proposed ‘Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014′ have slammed the bill as a “dangerous” threat to free speech, warning that the legislation would hand an obscure federal agency “chilling” powers to restrict the First Amendment.

Introduced earlier this week by Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), the ‘Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014′ (S.2219), along with its companion bill in the House, H.R. 3878, would task the National Telecommunications and Information Administration with filing reports on Internet, radio and television content that seeks “to advocate and encourage violent acts and the commission of crimes of hate”.

According to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), chief sponsor of the House version, the bill will target “hateful activity on the Internet that occurs outside of the zone of First Amendment protection”. Apparently Jeffries is unaware of the fact that the First Amendment exists to protect unpopular speech and that free speech cannot be defined by arbitrary ‘zones’ decided on by politicians.

A Boston Herald editorial warns that the bill will encourage the federal agency to, “begin scouring the Internet, TV and radio for speech it finds threatening,” labeling the initiative a “frankly chilling proposition”.

“Prosecutors already have the authority to prosecute threats. And for the life of us we can’t fathom any further government limit on Internet postings or talk radio callers that could be structured to protect an American’s right to free expression,” states the editorial.

The legislation arrives four months after Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson’s comments about homosexuality, which were labeled “hate speech” by many on the left and sparked a national debate, ending in a victory for the First Amendment after Robertson’s suspension was lifted by TV network A&E.

Meanwhile, Civil liberties lawyer Harvey A. Silverglate told the Herald, “This proposed legislation is worse than merely silly. It is dangerous,” adding, “It is not up to Sen. Markey, nor to the federal government, to define for a free people what speech is, and is not, acceptable.”

Writer Pamela Geller goes even further, asserting that if passed the legislation “will finish the United States” and introduce de-facto “Islamic blasphemy laws” that will make criticizing Islam a hate crime.

One conservative website also notes how the bill was welcomed by Alex Nogales, President & CEO of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, prompting concerns that the legislation could lead to harsh criticism of illegal immigration also being categorized as a “hate crime”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

‘Hate Crime Reporting Act’ a “Dangerous” Threat to Free Speech

 

Boston Herald editorial labels bill a “frankly chilling proposition”

Paul Joseph Watson

Infowars.com

April 24, 2014

 

240414hate.jpg

Image: Senator Ed Markey (Wiki Commons).

Critics of the newly proposed ‘Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014′ have slammed the bill as a “dangerous” threat to free speech, warning that the legislation would hand an obscure federal agency “chilling” powers to restrict the First Amendment.

Introduced earlier this week by Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), the ‘Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014′ (S.2219), along with its companion bill in the House, H.R. 3878, would task the National Telecommunications and Information Administration with filing reports on Internet, radio and television content that seeks “to advocate and encourage violent acts and the commission of crimes of hate”.

According to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), chief sponsor of the House version, the bill will target “hateful activity on the Internet that occurs outside of the zone of First Amendment protection”. Apparently Jeffries is unaware of the fact that the First Amendment exists to protect unpopular speech and that free speech cannot be defined by arbitrary ‘zones’ decided on by politicians.

A Boston Herald editorial warns that the bill will encourage the federal agency to, “begin scouring the Internet, TV and radio for speech it finds threatening,” labeling the initiative a “frankly chilling proposition”.

“Prosecutors already have the authority to prosecute threats. And for the life of us we can’t fathom any further government limit on Internet postings or talk radio callers that could be structured to protect an American’s right to free expression,” states the editorial.

The legislation arrives four months after Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson’s comments about homosexuality, which were labeled “hate speech” by many on the left and sparked a national debate, ending in a victory for the First Amendment after Robertson’s suspension was lifted by TV network A&E.

Meanwhile, Civil liberties lawyer Harvey A. Silverglate told the Herald, “This proposed legislation is worse than merely silly. It is dangerous,” adding, “It is not up to Sen. Markey, nor to the federal government, to define for a free people what speech is, and is not, acceptable.”

Writer Pamela Geller goes even further, asserting that if passed the legislation “will finish the United States” and introduce de-facto “Islamic blasphemy laws” that will make criticizing Islam a hate crime.

One conservative website also notes how the bill was welcomed by Alex Nogales, President & CEO of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, prompting concerns that the legislation could lead to harsh criticism of illegal immigration also being categorized as a “hate crime”.

 

who defines what is hateful? this is shot full of problems. as bad...very bad piece of legislation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only Whites would ever be prosecuted. Currently blacks are excluded from ever being prosecuted for hate crimes.

That's not true, but crime is crime. Who makes the law? Look at the situation in Michigan. This about more than just that motion. This is the suppression of free speech, an end run around the constitution. that's the point of this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not true, but crime is crime. Who makes the law? Look at the situation in Michigan. This about more than just that motion. This is the suppression of free speech, an end run around the constitution. that's the point of this thread.

Some examples: No blacks have been prosecuted for the hate crimes they committed against whites in the Knockout Game....the hate crime charges against the black panthers were quashed by the racists eric holder and barry hussein sotero..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some examples: No blacks have been prosecuted for the hate crimes they committed against whites in the Knockout Game....the hate crime charges against the black panthers were quashed by the racists eric holder and barry hussein sotero..

Well they should be. I don't think there ought to be a "hate crimes" law. Criminal is criminal. The real issue is the shut down of free speech. Hate crimes law leads to this.

 

How "Hate Speech" Will End Free Speech

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...