Have you ever been surprised to read about the widespread human rights violations going on in America? The news usually comes from organizations like Amnesty International, or Human Rights Watch, but various countries around the world usually pick up the chant. China counters accusations of human rights violations within its own borders with charges that similar violations occur in the United States. America is characterized as being seriously flawed in many ways, including its judicial system and foreign policy.

It may not be possible to set up our foreign policy so as to avoid criticism from other countries, but we can do something about our court system.

The Democrat Party finds an obvious example of a flawed justice system in the high proportion of people in our prisons who have dark skin color. The argument is made that a higher proportion of people with dark skin color means there is clear discrimination in the way we adjudicate those accused of crimes. Luckily there is a solution to this problem.

A straightforward way of dealing with an excess number of people with dark skin color in our prisons is to change the way the court system works. We currently have laws that grant stiffer penalties to individuals if the crime committed was intended as a statement of racial or social hatred. This becomes a bit tricky on occasion, because it is difficult to conclusively determine an individual’s state of mind during the commitment of a crime. It lends itself to emotional outcomes rather than objective outcomes in the judicial process, and sometimes justice is not served. Wouldn’t it be more straightforward if justice were simply adjudicated based on skin color?

Let’s take the guilt or innocence part of a trial. If the defendant has dark skin color, the rules would stay the same: a unanimous jury verdict to convict. However, if the defendant’s skin color were white, a simple majority of the members of the jury would be sufficient to convict. That is a simple change, and it would go a long way toward tilting the scales of justice in favor of those with dark skin color. In short, it becomes easier to convict a white person.

Here’s an interesting twist on the concept. There could be standard gradations in skin color, so that the people adjudicated under the simple majority system would have to have very white skin color, with darker skin tones being tried under more strict conviction requirements.

Can you imagine the acclamation of support we would get from the international community? It would clearly differentiate between those who feel we should follow the Constitution in interpreting our laws versus those who think we should follow a more international standard.

We could even make sentencing and the death penalty itself dependent on skin color, with only those having white skin color being subject to capital punishment, while those with darker skin color would have a maximum sentence of life in prison. We could start by cutting by half the maximum sentence for crimes committed by people with dark skin color, and changing the sentencing guidelines as we get more experience with what becomes the acceptable mix of skin color within our prisons.

The criminal justice system in the United States would become a model for a tolerant society with a strong regard for human rights. The international community might also convince us to change sentencing guidelines for women and perhaps make changes in the standards for guilt and innocence. All we have to do is modify the concept of equal protection under the law, and give preferences to those who should have them.

You are probably beginning to doubt my sanity at this point, but stay with me for just a moment longer. The idea that skin color is an important consideration when meting out justice is a basic principle of the Democrat Party. It follows the natural inclination of the Democrat Party to classify human beings by gender, race, and wealth. While there are other classifications that are in play, these are “The Big Three”.

You have seen news stories that classify people in this manner. A headline might appear in this format: “Hurricane Hits Florida – Low Income People Suffer Most”. Another headline might be, “Flooding in New Mexico Disproportionately Hurts Hispanics”. The news reports we read on a daily basis often relate human suffering to one of the major classifications of human beings used by the Democrat Party.

While we’ve got a long-standing policy in America of “equal justice for all”, the Democrat Party holds to the belief that its classifications of human beings require the application of special treatment. Here’s where the Hate Crimes Initiative comes into play. In our legal system, the Democrat Party thinks the concept of “equal justice” needs a slanted playing field.

I’ve shown how we could change the rules for adjudication and punishment of crimes to take into account skin tones. That would handle the problems related to those people with lighter skin tones who might have “hate in their hearts”. It would also take care of the people with darker skin tones who might be suffering the indignities of disenfranchisement. Rather than forcing a defense counsel to plead the extenuating circumstances to a jury, a judge could immediately set the rules for adjudication and punishment based on the appearance of the accused. The playing field would be tilted to achieve the philosophical goals of the Democrat Party.

The formula could also be extended to gender and wealth. Rules for trying rape cases could be modified based upon whether the accused rapist is male or female. You could then integrate skin tone into the decision, and perhaps throw in a differential of some type for wealth differences between the accused and the victim. Over time the bugs could be worked out, and the Democrat Party sense of fairness based on appearance standards could become the law of the land.

Consider the Hate Crimes Initiative just a beginning.

Back to Home Page