The term “hate crime” is a misnomer because one does not commit crimes for love. The idea of a “hate crime” is a political thing, because one is able to emphasize certain crimes or in some cases, “crimes” more than other ones, leading to the creation of legal favoritism. Likewise, the concept of “potential crime” is very dangerous because it assumes a criminal act does not have to be committed, but based on some subjective formula, be a subjective thing instead of something with real proof. This places the situation of law into a precarious position because people can be convicted for things of which they never did or even intended to do.
For this reason, it should be of great concern to put the phrases together to form “potential hate crimes”, since this could be used to justify any number of abuses, for while hate is real, crimes are real, and people do conspire to commit crimes, without solid proof of a crime than one is only setting up the precedents for a practical surveillance state with fake trials and political arrests just like what happened in the Soviet Union and continues to happen in nations with surveillance states such as China, North Korea, and Turkmenistan. Yet this is what the Democrat Party in Connecticut is proposing to do according to new plans unveiled from their upcoming political agenda.
Connecticut Democrats in the state’s Senate have proposed creating a new state police department that would be tasked with specifically combating “far-right” extremism.
The proposal, which was unveiled Wednesday as part of the state Senate Democrats’ “A Just Connecticut” agenda, would publicly fund a new state police department that specializes in investigating “far-right extremist groups and individuals,” according to a news release.
Senate President Pro Tem Martin Looney said the proposal is aimed at combating “potential” hate crimes but stressed that his caucus has no intention of persecuting people for their political beliefs, the Hartford Courant reported.
“Unfortunately, people who entertain hateful beliefs … are protected as long as [those beliefs] don’t result in hate-crime actions. That’s what we’re talking about,” Mr. Looney told reporters Wednesday. “We want to be more aggressive in enforcing our laws and identifying likely sources of potential domestic terrorism acts against religious institutions and ethnic institutions.”
Senate Minority Leader Len Fasano, a Republican, said there is “strong bipartisan support against any type of terrorism” but he took issue with the proposal only mentioning right-wing extremism.
“When they put a right-wing label on extremism, they do that to elicit a political response,” he said, the Hartford Courant reported. (source)