By Selwyn Duke

The Senate has just passed the greatest expansion of federal
hate-crime "protections" since the legislation's inception in 1968.
While the original law was limited to crimes motivated by race,
religion, and ethnicity, the current measure will increase federal
scope to cover "sexual orientation," "gender," "gender identity," and
disability.

With even some conservatives accepting the concept of hate crime,
such an expansion is not unexpected. But it also should be lamented.
I've pointed out in the past that, as it is generally used, "hate
crime" is a misnomer. And the Senate bill is a good example as to why.
If the goal is to eliminate crimes motivated by hate (most crime?), why
specify categories of people at all? Why not just say that if hate is
the motivating factor in a crime, the perpetrator will be punished more
harshly?

Read the rest here.