A Philosopher's Blog

Philosophical Essays on Many Subjects

Archives for October 2009

More Hate Crimes

by 9 Comments

The United States senate recently passed a piece of legislation that would make assaulting a person because of his/her sexual orientation or gender identity a federal crime. There are already other hate crime laws, such as those relating to race.

Some conservatives are concerned that the law will infringe on their freedom of speech. After all, some conservative groups are strongly opposed to homosexuality, same-sex marriage and other such issues. Their concern is that their criticism of such things could be taken as hate speech and perhaps even as an assault under this new legislation. It has been claimed, however, that the legislation only covers violent actions rather than speech. However, it must be noted that the application of any law is subject to interpretation and hence it is possible that the legislation (or similar laws) could be taken to cover what is regarded as hateful speech.  Obviously, the concern this raises is that such laws can serve to add to the erosion of the freedom of expression and eventually lead to harmful restrictions in such matters. However, let it be assumed that the legislation will apply only to violent actions.

I suspect that the law is intended, in part, to send a message to those who will be protected by the legislation and those who it is intended to protect against. However, I do have concerns about using such a means to send a message.

However, my main concern is a moral one, namely that the legislation seems based on the assumption that an assault on someone because of his/her sexual orientation or gender identity is somehow worse or of greater concern than  an assault on someone for any other (non-hate) reason.

For example, let us suppose that I am running with a friend who is openly gay and cross-dresses. As we run along someone jumps out yells “take that, skinny!” and cuts me on the arm with a knife.  Realizing that the person in the skort (a running skirt) is a guy, the mugger yells “fag!” as he takes a slash at him, also cutting him on the arm. After we subdue the mugger and tie him up with my friend’s tasteful pink running scarf, the police haul him off. Because I’m a straight guy wearing shorts, my cut is a matter of assault and not a federal crime. But, since my gay friend was wearing a skort and the mugger yelled “fag”, the attack on him is now a federal crime-even though his injury is the same as mine. As such, it would seem to be unjust for the mugger to be regarded as having done something worse to my friend than to me.

Of course, it could be replied that my friend suffered more harm because the mugger hurt his feelings as well. But, calling me “skinny” might have hurt my feelings as much as being called “fag” hurt my friend. Also, I am sure that the slashing would hurt much more than the name calling.

It could be added that a while the individual injury was the same for the both of us, the attack on me was just an attack on me as an individual. In contrast, the attack on my friend was somehow an attack on a whole class of people. Thus, I would just be a person being stabbed while my friend would be a veritable Platonic form of gayness and cross-dressingness being stabbed. As such, the crime would be much worse-it would be an attack against many and not just against one.

It might be pointed out that every person is part of many classes and, as such, the same sort of logic would apply. If someone attacks me, they would be thus attacking all men, all people of French, English and Mohawk descent, all runners, all philosophers, all gamers, all people who own huskies, all human beings and so on. On this logic, the severity of the crime would be based on the number  (and perhaps the importance )of groups the person belongs to, which seems  rather odd.

In reply, someone might note that it is not so much group membership that makes the attack worse, it is the intent of the person making the attack. After all, the legislation is based on the intent-it is assaulting a person because of his/her orientation/gender identity that makes it a federal crime.

Going back to the example, if the person had attacked us for any non-hate reason (as defined by the relevant hate laws) then the crime would not be a federal crime. For example, if we were attacked because he wanted money, was angry at the world,  hated runners or hated fit people, then it would not have been a federal crime. But, as soon as the attacker said “fag”, then that would seem to make it a federal crime because it would be possible to ascribe to him a motivation of the right sort of hate.

Intent is, of course, a relevant factor. If, for example, we were attacked because the person mistook us for two people that had just killed his wife, then that would be a mitigating factor. However, if the person has a wrongful intent to inflict harm, then the differences between being motivated by greed, general rage, hatred of runners or hatred of homosexuals seem to be largely irrelevant. What matters the most is the actual harm done and not the distinctions between such wrongful motivations. As such, treating such assaults as federal crimes would add an unjustified level of possible punishment.

Of course, a case can be made as to why such intentions make a crime worse-and I invite someone to make that case.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The New Black Barbie Dolls

by 18 Comments

Mattel recently released a new line of black Barbie dolls. Not surprisingly, the reactions have been somewhat mixed. On the positive side, some people approve of the fact that Mattel is doing more to provide a greater ethnic diversity in the Barbie lineup. On the negative side, some people have been critical that the dolls fail to be “black enough.” Interestingly, this is a criticism that was once made against Obama.

While I do understand the concern that Barbies should reflect ethnic diversity, it is somewhat interesting to hear people complain that a specific ethnic Barbie of type X does not look properly X or X enough (for example, that a black Barbie does not look black enough). After all, these are Barbie dolls-plastic dolls whose measurements and plastic perfection cannot be matched by real woman and girls. Obviously, the Barbie doll has been subject to numerous feminist criticisms over the years and these still seem to generally apply. After all, are there overweight Barbies? Short, stocky Barbies? Weight lifter Barbies? I suspect not.

This is not to say that the fact that Barbie exemplifies a stereotype of female appearance excuses Mattel from not creating ethnically diverse Barbies. Rather, it is just an observation that it struck me as interesting that people would be concerned that black Barbies don’t look black enough when Barbies generally look more like sculpted androids (or fembots) than human beings.

Health Care Reform Behind Closed Doors

by 4 Comments

Max Baucus, U.S. Senator from Montana.
Image via Wikipedia

When Obama was running for office, he spoke about how he would handle health care reform: “I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table,” and it all would be “televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies.”

As they say, that was then and this is now. Now, Reid, Baucus and Dodd are meeting in private to hash out health care. It might be around a big table, but there will be no C-SPAN or any access allowed to the general public. Naturally, various excuses have been given as to why this will be handled in secrecy.

Naturally, there can be legitimate grounds for secret meetings. If , for example, matters of national security are being discussed by Senators and a leak could actually be harmful to the people of the United States, then such a meeting should be secret.

In the case of the health care reform, there is clearly no such justification of secrecy. In this case, I would infer that the folks choosing to take action in secret are doing so because what would be revealed to the people would be more damaging than the fact that the president is breaking his word.

While I can only speculate on what is happening behind the closed doors, I would suspect that it is the usual thing that politicians do behind closed doors. No, not cheat on their wives. Rather, it might be the case that they are working on various dirty deals that that would outrage many people.

Since Obama promised an open process and there seems to be no legitimate reason for such secrecy, what is being done is simply not acceptable. This process should be out in the open, with the full light of public scrutiny upon it.

Yes, I do know that politics is all about secret deals and back room machinations. But, obviously enough, this sort of behavior allows and encourages corruption and misdeeds. I was critical about the secrecy in the Bush administration and consistency requires that I apply the same criticism to what is happening under Obama. It is far past the time when we should demand proper openness in our government. The Bush administration made it quite clear what can happen in the darkness. While the Obama administration will probably commit different sins, keeping a light in things can help keep that sinning down to a minimum.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Illegal Alien Costume

by 2 Comments

Cover of "Illegal Aliens"
Cover of Illegal Aliens

In a flashback to political correctness, Target recently caved in to pressure and removed the illegal alien costume from its stores. Apparently some other costume shops did so as well. The costume consists of an alien (of the sci-fi sort) mask, an orange jumpsuit and (oddly enough) a green card.

On one hand, it does make some sense that certain folks would be offended by this costume. After all, it can be seen as a slight against human illegal aliens. Folks who see racism in all things will also no doubt see it as a statement that illegal aliens are inferior beings.

On the other hand, the costume does not seem to be hateful or racist in nature. This sort of illegal alien joke has been around for a rather long time and it is generally used without any malice or racism. For example, Nick Pollotta and Phil Foglio wrote a hilarious sci-fi book called Illegal Aliens back in 1989. The book cannot, in any way, be seen as attacking human illegal aliens or as racist. If you doubt this, read it. Naturally, it could be claimed that the title itself is a vehicle of hate-but I think that the burden of proof is clearly on those who make this claim. After all, as noted above, the book itself seems to be free of hate and racism.

Of course, there are cases in which illegal alien jokes do come with some racism and hatred attached. For example, I vaguely recall seeing a cartoon showing Aliens (from the Alien movie) dressed up in Mexican garb picking crops. While this was intended to be funny, it could also be seen as vaguely racist. Naturally, there are no doubt some attempts at humor in this vein that are overtly racist and hateful.

In the case of the costume, the key question is whether it falls into the mere joke category or into a more sinister category. My view is that since the mask is a stock “gray” alien and not a distorted “space Mexican” sort of thing, then it seems most reasonable to take it as a mere joke. Now, if the alien was a caricature of a Hispanic person, then the charge of racism would certainly stick.

It could be objected that this costume intentionally or unintentionally depicts human illegal aliens as non-humans and, as such, is a racist attack on such people.

My response is that while such an interpretation is possible, it seems to be quite a leap in the case of the specific costume in question. The specific costume seems to be merely a joke-a play on the ambiguity of “alien” and not a vehicle for racism. Once more, I think that the burden of proof rests on those who see such racism in this costume.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

A Quick Guide to Jury Duty

by 1 Comment

Leon County Courthouse, Tallahassee, Florida USA
Image via Wikipedia

Although I’ve long been interested in matters relating to the law, I did not know much about jury duty until I got my first summons on September 23. Since I found it useful to do a little checking on the web to see what I was in for, I thought I would contribute a bit to the available information.

I’ll begin with a couple disclaimers. First, I’m not a lawyer or a legal expert. What follows is based solely on my own experience and hence should not be considered any sort of legal advice. Second, my experience occurred in Leon County, Florida. Different parts of the United States might be different.

The first step in the process is the summons. I received mine via the normal mail and it was clearly recognizable as a summons (that is, it said “jury summons enclosed”). I received mine on September 23 and my summons was for October 16. This is typical-you will have a few weeks to plan (or not) for the duty.

In Leon County, juries are selected on Mondays and Fridays. Other places might have a different schedule.

When you open your summons (do not ignore it-doing so can lead to being charged with contempt of court) you will see a list of disqualifications, automatic excusals, discretionary excusals and the rules for postponements.

While the specifics vary from place to place, automatic disqualifications include being prosecuted for a crime yourself, having lost your civil rights due to a felony conviction, not being a resident of the county, not being a US citizen, or being a Governor, Lt. Governor, cabinet officer, clerk of court or judge.

Automatic exusals might also vary, but they include being 70 or older, being a sworn law enforcement officer, having reported to jury duty within 12 months, not being employed  full time and having a child under 6 to care for, or being responsible for a person with mental or physical infirmities.

A judge can, at her discretion, excuse someone for significant mental or physical infirmities. A judge can also excuse someone who is a doctor or lawyer.

Postponements can also be requested, if you have an adequate reason. The clerk can grant up to a 90 day postponement once while anything more require a judge’s approval. Usually reasons are medical, travel and similar such things. Be sure to request the postponement well in advance (15 days before your selection date).

If you do not have an excuse or postponement, then you are stuck with duty…maybe. Since cases often do not go to trial, you will need to call the provided number (577-4204 in Leon County) to see if you will be needed. When I was summoned, 135 people were called in while the other 200 or so people were released that night. Some courts have a web page you can check (www.clerk.leon.fl.us here in Leon)-most use the eResponse system.

If you are not released the night before, you will need to report to the courthouse. They usually provide a map with the summons. And, of course, there is also Google Maps. Parking varies. In Leon, there are pay garages ($5 a day) near the courthouse. They do provide tokens to park at the library for free. It is about a half mile walk to the courthouse. To get to the library lot for jurors, head down Tennessee street and turn south onto North Bronough street (it is a one way street). The lot is to the west of the library, across from the loading doors. There is a sign for the juror parking area. When you leave, turn onto West park to go west or continue on to East Park to go east (they are one way streets). The library is located at 200 West Park Avenue, 32301 if you want to Google Map it.

When reporting for jury duty, be sure that you have the form that was included in your summons. The one Leon County uses is very basic-you just fill in your employer and whether they will pay you during jury duty or not.

I also suggest bringing a lunch and something to do (like a book). You will spend most of your time waiting, so having something to do will help pass the time. Leon County does provide coffee but no snacks or lunch and I suspect that most courts are like that. Be sure to check what you are allowed to bring with you, since courts might vary.

Interestingly, the jury assembly room in Leon County does provide internet access, but you will need your own laptop as well as an ethernet cable to connect. There are only a limited number of connections. Other counties might have better access or even none at all.

When you get to the court, you will go through security-much like at the airport. Be sure to leave any knifes, pepper spray, or other weapons at home.

After you get past security, you will go to a waiting area and wait for the jury assembly area to open. Then you will go there to wait. After a while, a judge will come in and swear you in, tell you a bit about what will be going on and then you will wait some more.

What happens next depends on the trials that need juries. When I went, there were only three trials scheduled. In any case, people will be called for each trial (random selection of names, I suspect). When I was there, each jury only needed 7 people, so 21 people were selected for each panel.

If you are selected for a panel, you will be brought to a courtroom. First you will, of course, wait a while in a corridor. The judge, lawyers and defendant will be there and you will enter with the other potential jurors. There will be  a brief introduction and then you will answer a series of questions such as your occupation, marital status and so on. After that, the lawyers will ask questions. If there are matters that need to be discussed more privately, the judge will have a sidebar and the other jurors will be absent (but everyone else will be there).

During the selection process, the lawyers are supposed to simply stick to the selection process. However, they will typically already work at scoring points. During this time, objections can be raised by the lawyers against the other lawyers. The jurors also get a chance to ask questions and smart attorneys will use this to their advantage.

After the questioning, there will be a short break while the lawyers has out who will be on the jury. In some cases people will be disqualified as unfit. The defense and the prosecution each each get to dismiss a number of jurors. Naturally, each side tries to do its best to pick jurors that will decide in its favor. Some lawyers consider this to be critical part of the trial-literally holding that the trial can be won or lost during the selection process.

Since most people consider jury duty onerous and undesirable, most folks probably think about ways to get out of being selected. I did hear about people who tried to get out of service by not showing up or by leaving when they start getting bored annoyed. Both of these are very bad ideas since taking either option can result in being charged with contempt of court. I did also hear about people who tried to get out of service by claiming medical excuses when they really had none. They ended up having to serve anyway.

There are, of course, various guides to getting out of jury duty. However, I would suggest not using these methods, unless you really must.

If you are selected, you will informed of the date and the time of the trial. After that, you will be part of the actual trial process. I did not get selected for a jury, so I have no commentary on this (plus, jurors are not allowed to discuss their trial).

If you are not selected, then you will go back down to the assembly area. If there are more trials that need juries, you might go through the process again. If not, then you will probably be released, as I was.

Some folks end up sitting in the assembly area all day without being selected for any panels and are eventually released.

Naturally, your experience might be quite different-but I hope this helps a bit.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Almost on a Jury

by 2 Comments

This is Swampyank's copy of "The Jury&quo...
Image via Wikipedia

Friday started inauspiciously when my phone rang after midnight. The voice coming over the answer machine awakened me almost immediately and my first thought was that something terrible had happened. But no, it was my ex-wife calling to ask if I could find a drawing she had done years ago and mail it to her in California. I agreed and tried to go back to sleep. And tried. then tried some more. I recall seeing 2:35 on the clock and finally drifted off after that, only to be awakened around 5:00 am by a clap of thunder.

Yielding to the inevitable, I arose and started getting ready to face the day. I found the drawing, put it in a box and called the nearest Fedex location, guided by a dim memory that is was open 24 hours. The answering service said it opened at 7:00, so I figured I’d stop on the way. When I arrived, I saw the manager, Michael, leaving the store…which opened not at 7:00 but 7:30. To make a short story shorter, he was willing to help me out after he got his coffee at the nearby McDonalds. In these days of horrific service, that was a great experience and I know where I’ll go for my shipping needs from now on.

After that, I parked at the Leon County library (free parking for jurors) and ran into someone else heading for jury duty. Fortunately, he had been called up for jury duty before and knew the way-I had a map, but my sense of anti-direction always gets me lost.

While a guard at the security checkpoint was a bit gloomy, everyone else was surprisingly cheerful. I had expected it to be something of a grim and uncaring affair, but everyone was actually rather nice. The judges, clerks and bailiffs I dealt with actually made this a positive experience. Plus, I also got to meet several interesting people, including two other professors, a fellow runner, and a lawyer who had been a philosophy major (who also once worked with another friend of mine who is a runner).

While my experience may not have been typical, it was certainly vastly better than I expected. In fact, I found the process of jury selection fascinating and was impressed with how well everyone conducted themselves. While I still have concerns about the legal system, the folks around me seemed sincere, professional, empathetic and committed.

After going through the process, I was not selected. But, I had learned a great deal about how the system works and met some new and interesting folks. Overall, it was a very positive experience. Previously I had felt dread and dismay at being summoned, but I am actually glad that it happened. Of course, if I had been selected and had to spend days away from my regular life sitting in a courtroom, then perhaps I would have a different outlook.

Of course, courts would be different if this world was like the D&D world (if you are not a gamer, it is best to stop reading now…):

Prosecutor: “Blah, conditio sine qua non yadda blah de minimis blah.”

Defense Attorney: “Yadda, post factor blah mea culpa.”

Me: “Judge, this is taking way too long. As a paladin I can have this done in under six rounds.”

Defense: “I object ipso facto!”

Judge: “This is unusual, but I will allow it. Everyone roll for initiative.”

Me: “24”

Prosecutor: “What?”

Defense: “3, damn!”

Me: “Detect evil!”

Prosecutor: “What the hell, ex nihilo?”

Me: “Wait for it. Normally I’d have this done by now, but the evil spillover from the lawyers is really interfering.”

Prosecutor: “I object!”

Judge: “Overruled.”

Me: “Done. Bailiff, might I have your weapon?”

Baliff: “Of course.”

Me: “Guilty. Smite evil…pow!”

Fellow Juror: “Damn, you took his head clean off. Was he really guilty?”

Me: “Well, he was evil…so he was guilty of something. Best to just get him now, before he gains enough xp to level up.”

Fellow Juror: ‘Works for me. I’m heading to lunch, want to come?”

Me: “Sure. Let me loot the body first, though.”

Defense: “Hey, he hasn’t paid me yet!”

Me: “Okay, I’ll give you 20% of the loot.”

Defense: “I want 50%”

Me: “I’ve got more smite evils left…”

Defense: “20% is quite generous…”


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
%d bloggers like this: