Questions That Don’t Get Asked – Enough?
The set-up: Current day from down south: Bill would punish attacks on military, disabled vets
Jim Craig, of Monroe, told legislators Wednesday that he received a cruel homecoming upon his return from the Vietnam War roughly 40 years ago.
“I had several people take a swing at me. I was spit on,” Craig said to the Louisiana House Committee on the Administration of Criminal Justice, in support of legislation to toughen penalties against people who physically attack servicemen and disabled veterans.
The panel advanced House Bill 18 by state Rep. Jay Morris, R-Monroe, to subject the attackers to at least a year behind bars.
Morris said whether a victim is a member of the military or a disabled veteran should be a factor in determining sentences, just as it is when the victim is a police officer. “Members of the armed forces are equally deserving of some form of a little extra benefit,” he said.
Seems to me an attempt to define a sort of ‘hate’ crime?
And from a few years ago at a place I used to blog: Veterans as an Ethnic Minority.
Read it if you like; it does set up a premise, but I’ll cut to the final bit.
Then I observe the hedonistic slackers around me, those who do not, and will not serve. Those with no self-discipline or any willingness even to wipe their own lardbutts. Who demand, but do not give, who seek to cash in on the colors of their hides or their choice of sexual oddity, who worship only the Eternal ME. I say to myself, these are NOT my people.
I do not care what the color of your skin, or of your uniform. If you served honorably, you are my brother or sister. By the Grace of God and the US Congress, I am a Veteran-American. And proud. And you WILL NOT make me hide in the closet.
I think Rurik hit the nail on the head… Most annoying is that it fits now maybe more than it did in ’06? OWS anyone?
However, my exit question is: As true as this notion might be; is it the way YOU view your service?
Personally, even though I agree mostly… I don’t exactly feel like a victim?
Category: Geezer Alert!
I don’t see myself as a victim. No one made me serve. I did it because I enjoyed it and would do it again. I don’t really liked being thanked for my service. I don’t feel as if I did anything special. It was the life and work I choose to do.
I also don’t look down on anyone that didn’t serve. That was their choice. Now if the country asked then to and they didn’t or if they enlisted but failed to do their duty then that is different. I do look down on those people.
Here’s my take:
I understand where all these emotions are coming from. In a way, you hit the nail on the head with the “Hate Crime” analogy.
However, what we’ve been seeing since the days of FDR is the dividing of all Americans into one or more “victim classes”. It’s a way that the left can divide the populace and then seek to control it, while gaining much more power for themselves.
When you are a victim, it means, in the eyes of the left, that you need “support” and what better way to provide it, while lining their own pockets, than to form “support groups” and set up another government agency and/or program to “support” those “victims”.
Well, I refuse to be labeled a victim. I refuse to accept being labeled by anyone. If I feel the need for a label, I’ll generate my own.
However, all of that being said, what I propose is this: We eliminate ALL hate crime laws. We eliminate all “special circumstances” laws. No domestic violence laws, no “special” laws period. Murder, assault, robbery, etc all stand on their own definitions and should be prosecuted as such.
Same thing with Stolen Valor laws. If someone claims to be something they are not, then prosecute them for fraud. Period.
Otherwise, then I would urge that we start to incorporate Robert Heinlein’s idea of a dual-level society. If you want to vote, hold elected office, have a government job, etc, then you need to serve at least one enlistment in the military, and get an other-than-dishonorable discharge. EVERYONE starts as an enlisted man, and no one gets NOC or a Commissioned rank without having served at least one enlistment in the ranks.
That’s my 2-cent’s on the subject.
V/R
AW1 Tim #2: The Starship Trooper analogy works well until it runs into reality.
Had it been in our Constitution it might have worked (I have my doubts – the whole revolution was about egalitarian issues).
Shucks we’re STILL dealing with the fallout from when blacks were allowed to vote. More victims!
So much for our guiding principle of “all men are created equal” As much as I hate that there are people out there that want to and will attack veterans, I don’t need it to be a special crime, just give me the “stand your ground law” and I will be fine. Aw1 Tim is correct, victim hood has now unfortunately become an irriversable(?)industry. What happens when everyone can said to be victim, whether they consider themselves to be one or not.
RLTW
By “Balkanizing” the people, you make it easier to control them. This is one of the ways politicians on both sides of the aisle have managed to create groups on which they can depend, and only have to seek the “mushy middle” just long enough to pull the lever for them.
Do I think there needs to be special circumstances if a veteran is attacked solely on the basis of their service? No, but then again, I’m pretty much against any and all form of so-called “hate crime” legislation.
I don’t mind other’s attempts at labeling me, I don’t see myself as a victim, and that’s all that really matters to me in the long run.
Like @1 above, I voluntarily served and mostly enjoyed my time in uniform. Do I think I possess a larger percentage of investment in the nation than non-veterans based on that service? Yes, but I don’t really feel I need any special legal protection.
And frankly Tim, I have zero problem with Heinlein’s concept of the dual level society. I don’t think it’s a ‘cure-all’, but I do believe I would prefer it to what we have at the moment. ?
Any thug who victimizes another human being should be punished. Period.
But first, the thug must be found guilty of something. Either they did or did not commit a crime. The age-ethnicity-gender-whatever of either the victim or the thug makes no never mind. Either the crime was committed or it was not.
Motive might have something to do with sentancing, but certainly not before a guilty verdict. “Hate” must be involved in every crime – but the way things currently stand, some folks are hated more than others?
#7 – Well, the “hate crimes” laws I have read never establish new crimes. They only affect sentencing – by increasing the sentence (or adding a mandatory minimum sentence) when the crime is motivated by hatred of a designated victim group. So, even with laws like that in place, it only comes out after a guilty verdict.
I don’t like mandatory minimum sentences in general – and think that evil, discriminatory motives should be just one of those things the judge can consider in deciding how much punishment to deal out. Which is how it is in military court.
believe it or not, Calif actually has a law like that already…yes, the fuc–ng hippie state has a law like that. Problem is, most cops and DA’s are not even aware of it. I like the new bumber sticker: “I’m an Iraq war vet, and I spit back.”
I’m all for the Starship Troopers model – IMO, it makes a whole lot of sense wrt an individuals vested interest that his society lives long and prospers. Generally speaking, someone who has served, is NOT a parasite, which IMO, exactly describes the “Entitlement” mentality that so pervades American society. They live by sucking the life out of the body politic and contribute nothing – other than more babies, all the while squalling about “my rights, my rights!”
And never a word about my right to the fruit of my labors or personal responsibility on their part.
And don’t even get me started on the political whores who pander to this for the sole purpose of staying in power where they can become wealthier by robbing the public treasury. “Social Justice” says it all.
We won’t be seeing the Starship Trooper model implemented any time soon, though … alas …
My feelngs run along the lines of Cakmakil, NHSparky and Jacobite, with the exception of the Heinlein’s concept of what makes a person a citizen. For some reason, thoughts of the worst parts of the history of the Roman Empire just creep into my head.
I refuse to be a hyphenated American of any kind.
I flatly reject the idea of having the victim’s veteran status being considered when determining sentence length.
I don’t feel that being a veteran in any way makes me a victim. Yes there are issues that can come along with it and if I do need help…well I am most likely going to turn to another veteran or to myself because that is who I have been trained to rely on, myself and my team.
As for the Heinlein model….YES…if you want the priveleges of being a citizen well you should earn them. However I do think that military service shouldn’t be mandatory, because 1) not everyone is cut out to be a grunt, and @) while there are some dirty smelly hippies who are opposed to the military because they are lazy dirty smelly hippies, there are those whose religion does prohibit them from serving. Therefore I think that any sort of federal service for a prescribed period of time would allow for citizenship.
If the Heinlein “Starship Trooper” model ever had a chance at success in this country, it would have had to been implemented when most of the people who lived here still believed you should work if you want to eat, much less do any kind of military service.
Someone else can split hairs on when the cut off for that timeline would have been.
I don’t need “special victim status” from the government. I already have a special status, one I earned myself.
As long as there is military service, there will always be those who resent those of us who serve. I do not worry about their motives, but it reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”
John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 – 1873
I’m no victim. On the contrary, my service to our great nation has only empowered me. I’ve sworn an oath to The Constitution. That oath doesn’t stop once I’ve ETS’d, nor does it only go as far as picking up a rifle. It’s because of my service that I’m involved in politics. It’s because of my service that I’m going to school for an MBA. It’s because of my service that my goal is to start companies which focus on hiring vets. We’re not vitcims. We’re the only patriots our nation has left.
I’m damned proud to be an American who is a veteran. Not even close to being ashamed. If anyone doesn’t like that I’ve served, all I can do is laugh, and think about all the times American Servicemembers have provided freedom one way or another for that person. These people are only the left’s useful idiots and cannot be convinced otherwise. Oh well…
Yeah, I believe that, outside of some biblical catastrophe type event, military service ought to be purely voluntary.
My comment, which I seem to have mangled earlier, should read along the lines that, should you choose to join the military, and thus receive citizenship status upon your discharge, you don’t get to be considered for commissioned or non-commissioned status without having served at least one full term as an enlisted man.
I agree with much of what was said above. And I add this:
I AM the ULTIMATE minority-a minority of ONE, based on the uniqueness of my birth, my ancestry, my life experiences, my education, my thoughts, and my goals.
Hence when/if I am attacked, I am the ultimate victim.
Write THAT into a “hate crime” law.
I consider myself an Army American. I select “other” and write “green” in the blank.
jhstuart: There is a companion quote that’s apropos as well, though I don’t know it’s origin (I’ve never found a good attribution): “Poor is the Nation that has no Heroes, but beggared is the Nation that has, and forgets them.”
On my more cynical days I fear we are marching down that path, led by the leftists and the MSM.
Hell no to “protected status” or any such nonsense. We who served wear our big boy or girl pants and do not need to be identified as another freaking class of people everyone else has to worry about “offending”… Most veterans I know, if you offend them they will let you know. If you hurt them, they will exact punishment or just wait patiently for karma to bite you in your 4th point.
This victim mentality has no place within our community. While I agree that those of us who served, of all others would be most deserving of something “extra”…. We did not serve for something extra though.
I for one am no victim. Not even when one of my own family called me a baby killer when I came home from OSUT.. I kid you not.
Comes with the territory (right or not)
#16 WhiteOneAlpha – I feel the same way. I was never released of my oath when I ETSed. In my mind, I am still bound by it. Does that make me dangerous? No, except in the mind of the government who would take that to mean militia-ism.
I am not a victim, though. Nor am I a -American. I am just an American. My father, grandfather, great grandfather, and more added their blood to the red stripes of the flag, so to call myself differently would be a disservice to my ancestors.
As for the Heinlein model… I like it! I would like it more to see drunk drivers given 10 lashes in the public square rather than put back on the street until they finally kill someone. I would like to see politicians who are actually servants of the people, rather than the current lot who feel as if they are the aristocracy. Finally, I would like to have some franchise for my service, rather than having to take a crappy janitor job because VA screwed up on my GIBill paperwork and I no longer qualify for schooling money.
The full John Mill quote, as it appeared in “The Contest in America.” Harper’s New Monthly Magazine, Volume 24, Issue 143, page 683-684. Harper & Bros., New York, April 1862
“But war, in a good cause, is not the greatest evil which a nation can suffer. War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice – a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice – is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”
Written in support of the Union North during the American Civil War.
#23 Jacobite:
Yep.