So a noose was found hanging outside a black cultural center of the University of Maryland and a hate crime probe has been launched. I've written much about hate crime laws, and I won't restate here the arguments I've made against them; suffice it to say, though, that they're an effort at thought control.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with schools punishing such pranksters (and call it a vile prank if you will, but it is a prank), but bringing in the law and turning every politically incorrect act into a federal case is Orwellian. And that's just what is done nowadays when the "wrong" kind of people engage in the wrong kind of behavior. It's what happened in Maine when two middle school boys threw a bag containing a ham steak on a table at which some Moslem students were eating, and it's what is happening here.
But something occurs to me. The courts have ruled that flag burning is protected "speech"; yet, the idea here is that hanging a noose is not? Why? Sure, maybe the perpetrators of this act hate blacks, but some who burn the American flag hate America, Americans or both. And, sure, burning the flag can be a political message, but so can hanging a noose (or is it just that political messages the majority agrees with are protected nowadays?). After all, maybe the rope-hangers don't like the multiculturalism or double standard represented by a black cultural center (it's name is the"Nyumburu Cultural Center") and this was their clumsy way of protesting such things.
The truth is that hate crime laws don't really punish hate, but the things leftists hate. If leftists were honest, they would just call them "things-we-can't-stand-because-they're-contrary-to-our-agenda laws."
Anyway, I guess that all that can be said by the "wrong" people who run afoul of these laws is something Yogi Berra might say: I think I felt the wrong hate.