Crimes Against Law Enforcement To Be Prosecutable As "Hate Crimes"

This is what happens when you have special laws for special people, everyone is going to find out how to be one of the special people.

Now Police want to be able to additionally charge someone with a "hate crime" if someone actually has (or they decide to accuse you of) "assault to a police officer".

m.startribune.com...

When the police chief approached the city for a show of support, the City Council’s response was swift and unanimous.

The Red Wing City Council passed a resolution last week calling for crimes against law enforcement to be prosecutable as hate crimes.

The picturesque town on the banks of the Mississippi River is believed to be the second place in the nation — and the first city — to pass such a resolution.

“It seems that anyone wearing a blue uniform has become a target in the minds of a lot of people — a target not because of what they’re doing, but a target because of who they are, which for me really kind of moves it into the hate crimes area,” said Council Vice President Peggy Rehder. “In this case, it’s not the color of their skin, but the color of their uniform.”

The National Fraternal Order of Police early this year urged Congress to expand the federal law that makes it a crime to injure someone based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, disability and other protected groups.

Well. That's pretty stupid.

Potential for abuse: astronomical.

a reply to: infolurker

Yes, this has been a subject of great interest to me as the push to make law enforcement a protected class has been growing stronger and stronger.

This would presumably cover former law enforcement as well since it would essentially treat them as a 'race'.

This isn't new.

Hate Crime Experts Skeptical of Call for Cops to be Covered by Federal Law (Jan. 8, 2015)

a reply to: infolurker

They are already protected, they want to be more protected?

You can get extra charges for assaulting an off duty cop if it is made known he is a peace officer IIRC.

Don't take much issue with the principle, more so that they already have what they are asking for.

a reply to: infolurker

If law enforcement want to regain the respect of the civilian populations they are sworn to protect and serve, their Union will lobby aggressively for the immediate implementation of 24/7 live stream body cameras.

Then they can have all the "protected species" laws they desire because...you know...actions speak louder than words ...and...if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.

Even blind Freddy knows that 24/7 live stream body cameras will protect the innocent from the guilty.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Lovely idea and all, probably won't happen. Privacy laws would make that a rather large ball of hair.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

If they want to gain the respect of citizens, they will immediately disband all of their unions.

Instead, the police unions are trying to get local forces nationalized (not all LEOs want this but, it is the threat).

a reply to: Sremmos80

Depends on the state laws. Many states have language that stipulates the officer has to be acting in an official capacity (i.e. Breaking up a fight) and identify themselves as law enforcement. Picking a fight and then pulling a badge when you get your ass kicked isn't typically enough.

Not where I'm at anyway.

It's whacko double whammy stuff, charges for an assault to a officer, which it must be said, is much abused by police anyway to justify an arrest, then be charged with a police hate crime.
What's going to happen if you say to an individual policeman, "I hate you"?

a reply to: smurfy

You'll be sent to a FEMA camp.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: smurfy

You'll be sent to a FEMA camp.

"management gets the union it deserves, if you don't treat the members well, they become more militant"

-Chuck Wexler
President's Task Force on Policing

I submit that public sector unions must all be disbanded, especially when their leadership is on record threatening violence against civilians.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Many states have language that stipulates the officer has to be acting in an official capacity (i.e. Breaking up a fight) and identify themselves as law enforcement.

Ya, should have added that.

Think it extends to if it is unprovoked on the officer and it is known he is a peace officer to no?

Like if he is just minding his own business and is assaulted.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: smurfy

You'll be sent to a FEMA camp.

what happens if the policeman's name is Broccoli...feck I hate Broccoli! Ooops! thing is though, I actually like Sprouts.

Hurting police isn't a hate crime, it could be in self-defense, for example, or resisting arrest. It just doesn't make sense to have assaulting an officer be a hate crime.

originally posted by: darkbake
Hurting police isn't a hate crime, it could be in self-defense, for example, or resisting arrest. It just doesn't make sense to have assaulting an officer be a hate crime.

The Assault charge appears to be a separate item.

I find it astonishing that when the garbage men, FAA workers or teachers in a locality want to unionize; the right wing starts with the socialism, commie rant but will in turn support the firemen and LEOs as fighting for their rights as free men to form a union to protect their brotherhood.

If it's ok for the LEOs, It's ok for everybody that works for any branch of government.

originally posted by: olaru12
I find it astonishing that when the garbage men, FAA workers or teachers in a locality want to unionize; the right wing starts with the socialism, commie rant but will in turn support the firemen and LEOs as fighting for their rights as free men to form a union to protect their brotherhood.

If it's ok for the LEOs, It's ok for everybody that works for any branch of government.

That's just it though, it's not OK for any public employee to unionize against the American public.

The whole apparatus is a taxpayer funded political lobbying machine.

We also have taxpayer funded full-time lobbyists in many federal departments.

That's right, we are directly paying full-time lobbyists with taxpayer funds (in addition to union dues) to lobby for departmental expansion.

a reply to: infolurker

"Assault a Police Officer" is already a trumped up charge they lay on just about everyone so long as there is physical engagement, including when the person did absolutely nothing to provoke them, or the police go outside the law and just beat the snot out of people.


Brutal, absolutely brutal.

Its not enough [protection] that someone is already looking at high or max penalties with any crime against police, they have to add this?

a reply to: infolurker

My qualm witth this idea (push), is that in every regard police are subservient to the public. They have only delegated authority, from a non sovereign local (municipal) government, that has received a charter from a sovereign state government, that only derives said sovereignty from the men and women who consent to surrender some of said sovereignty for the state to have 'authority'. No one's station in life, makes them better than another, or worth more or less. Murder, is murder, is murder.

Rather than make it applicable to the Police force, it should be made universal, those who hate can share a cell block and spew all the hate they want until they release, hate doesn't do anyone any good for themselves.

Peace