I was going to write a post on this anyhow, but it came up on a recent video in the comments and I wanted to explain my position in a way that’s really not amenable to YouTube commentary debates.

There was a recent news story that “hate crimes” are on the rise and, of course, the left-leaning media is blaming it all on Trump. What else is new?

The problem is, they can’t actually back that up in any real way. So let’s have a chat.

Now, up front, I will admit that I have a problem with the very concept of a “hate crime”. If it’s already a crime on the books, what difference does it make why it’s done? If I beat you over the head with a baseball bat, is it made worse for you if I did it because I didn’t like you, or if I didn’t like the color of your skin? You’ve still got a concussion. You should put me away for assault. This gets dangerously close to mind-crimes and I don’t think that should ever be allowed to happen.

However, since we are talking about “hate crimes”, we need to define what they are and what ought to be demonstrated in order for it to have any realistic validity. It’s really a two-part process.

First, you have to have a legitimate crime. It has to be something that would put you away, even without the “hate” component.  This is not anything new either. In fact, one if, if not the very first videos I did on YouTube was about exactly this, some girl claiming she’d been repeatedly “raped” because she didn’t like how people looked at her. She got roasted, she wound up demanding that everyone who had made fun of her take down our videos and then, I think, she deleted her account and ran away.

Anyhow, here’s that video. It’s 7 years old, so be kind.

That’s hardly the only time that I’ve seen people on the left pushing a similar narrative, using emotionally charged words for their agenda and pretending it makes it a crime. That’s kind of the basis for the #meetoo nonsense, any woman who makes an allegation ought to be believed, even if there is no evidence to corroborate the claim, just because she’s a woman. That kind of thing is complete bullshit. If it’s not a crime, it can’t be a hate crime.

The second part is the worst though. You actually have to prove intent. You have to show that the intent of the criminal, now that you’ve established that it is, in fact, a crime, was based on racism or whatever. Good luck on that.

Certainly there are cases where you can, where the criminal comes right out and says it, but I still don’t think they ought to be punished more harshly, just because their reason was socially unacceptable. What this comes down to is “the left doesn’t like it!” That’s not how the criminal law system works. Ideology shouldn’t have anything to do with it. Laws need to be equal across the board.

Granted, that doesn’t happen these days and hasn’t for a long time. Women tend to get lighter sentences for identical crimes compared to men. Women get better outcomes in divorces, compared to men. Juries are terrified to pass harsh sentences against black criminals, compared to whites, because they don’t want rioting in the streets. Apparently, white people don’t riot. Wonder why?

It’s legal discrimination, stamped with a big OK by the left, because… well, they say so. Equality doesn’t exist because they don’t want it. It’s how they get votes, pushing fake outrage. Why do we put up with it?

Anyhow, as I said, there was a discussion over on the YouTube channel where someone insisted that this was true. I asked them to prove it. I wasn’t denying it was possible, I was asking for the corroboratory evidence. Just like religious claims, I don’t believe anything the religious say without verifiable support. I asked both for evidence of an increase in crimes, which would be interesting as crimes across the board have been heading downward for years. I wanted to know that these were actual crimes, on the books, entirely separate from the “hate” component. Secondly though, I wanted a demonstration that these were actual hate crimes. I don’t care what the left claims, I want to know how they objectively determined what caused these crimes. How do they do that for all crimes in their statistic?

Of course… that didn’t fly, did it? The person got flustered, frustrated and eventually fled when I wouldn’t just buy into the “official word”. I don’t trust anyone, especially the left. You’re going to have to trot out the evidence. I want the raw data. They’re so used to people just “listening and believing” that they’ve forgotten how to back up their claims. You need to put up or shut up and they don’t know how to do either of them.

Sadly, that’s the state of the left-leaning world these days. I write about it a lot, how they just expect people to exercise blind faith in their ideological claims because… fee-fees. It’s the exact same thing that the religious do and I think it’s obvious that I don’t let that fly. I’m not letting the left get away with it either.

Maybe it’s time people started caring about the truth again. These days, I’m just not seeing many that do.