I’d like to post some concerns I have about hate crimes and Caboodle Ranch. I’m not a professional writer, so please forgive any errors I make as I’m writing this out of concern due to the increase in hate crimes in this country. Thank you in advance for allowing me to voice my opinion.
Back in 2009, the U.S. Senate passed the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act that would allow the death penalty as a possible sentence to certain hate crimes. As a native Washingtonian (Washington, D.C.), I had the opportunity to speak with those senators involved in passing this act.
Until the passing of this act, hate crimes were defined as crimes against not only race, color, religion and national origin, but also certain bias-motivated crimes based on the victim’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. This definition has been expanded to include many additional circumstances, all circulating around hate for an individual or group.
The Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act also gives the U.S. federal government jurisdiction over prosecuting hate crimes in areas where the current law is lax or the local police refuse to protect an individual or group.
The first conviction under this new law occurred when a federal jury convicted an Arkansas man back in May of 2011 for hate crimes committed against five Hispanic men who were verbally abused at a service station. The abuse spilled over into road rage which ended with all five of the Hispanic men being injured after being forced off of the road. Although this was a different kind of motivation, it all stems from hate.
This is the type of hate now being directed at Caboodle Ranch in Lee, Florida by people who don’t want to wait on the courts to do their job. Hate crimes, as defined by wikipedia, include lynching and witch hunts. I’ve read information from both sides of the case against Caboodle Ranch. Actions being taken by an individual or group of individuals could easily be seen as a hate crime as threats of death are involved. It’s also alleged people who wish to support the ranch and have publicly announced their support are also receiving threats.
According to the Nizkor project, one of the most common reasons people commit hate crimes is “the primal emotions aroused by the love of one’s own group. These deep feelings of group identity are particularly vivid in times of economical and political uncertainty and among people who suffered emotional neglect as children.”1
As a retired psychiatrist, I agree with the Nizkor project findings.
It may be difficult proving a hate crime has been committed unless extreme violence has taken place. It is, however, illegal in the U.S. to send threatening mail using the U.S. Postal Service. Federal Law makes it a crime to hurt someone if the threat is sent by “interstate commerce.” This includes the U.S. Postal Service, email, or otherwise over the internet2. They are punishable by fines, jail or both, depending on severity.
The U.S. Secret Service takes cyber threats seriously and acts alongside the Internet Crime Prevention Center in finding those guilty and prosecuting them.
I hope I don’t upset your readers at this fine cat site. If I do then I apologize. As a new subscriber I found it necessary to warn your readers that not everyone who loves cats love people. In fact, I find the opposite to be true in the Caboodle Ranch case. I’ve been watching the case these past few weeks and find myself sickened on some of the goings-on taking place outside of the courtroom.
Caboodle Ranch is a popular topic these days. Their Facebook page at Caboodle Ranch, Inc. as well as their opponents at Caboodle’s Angels, Caboodle Ranch Cruelty Case Info and www.caboodleranch.net have both sides of the issue covered quite well. I find myself amazed at the hate people feel for this one man. Now I’ve read Craig Grant and his supporters are receiving death threats. Our country, based on the legal belief “innocent until proven guilty” has gotten out of control, thanks to the internet.
Is this the work of only a few enraged members of one or another of these sites, or are there hundreds out there who wish him death. Never mind this is a decision for the courts to decide in a few weeks. Do those making threats against Caboodle Ranch in the form of letters and other internet activity realize they could face a fine and/or face jail time. Is this a game to them? Do these persecutors have nothing better to do with their time? I find this all very sickening to think these haters could be my friends or neighbor’s.
In this day of modern science, fingerprints as well as DNA evidence can be lifted from envelopes. IP addresses and internet sites can also easily be traced back to their creator. Those found guilty should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I believe this not as a supporter of either side, but because many tend to think of the internet as a make believe world where anything is legal. Threatening someone harm through any means is wrong and those doing it must be stopped.
I feel the Caboodle Ranch case will go down in history due to the controversy it’s created by pitting one cat lover against another. It may also become famous as those against the ranch who threaten to physically harm Craig Grant, his staff and his followers could be prosecuted under the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Especially since several hate crimes have made headlines this year.
Regardless, it’s up to the legal system to inflict punishment. Individuals on a hate mission have no right to claim they love cats. When such a group acts on their own as judge, jury and prosecutor, it shows they are of lesser intelligence than those they are out to harm. It also shows serious disrespect of our legal system, which I admit is far from perfect. We, as American citizens, have the legal obligation to allow the courts to punish those found guilty of a crime based on the decision of a judge and jury. Anything else is barbaric. And illegal.
Sincerely,
Victoria
Washington, D.C., United States
Reference:
1. (www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/canadian/Canada/justice/hate-motivated-violence/hmv-002-02.html).
2. http://criminal.lawyers.com/Criminal-Law-Basics/Cyber-Threats-Like-Obama-Facebook-Poll-are-Crimes.html
Look like Elise and her little Army of TROLLS are at it again. I love how they drop Links all over ever posting that they make. Gotta sneak those links in there somewhere. And for disappearing my vote is for the TROLL ARMY… You all have a nice day now ya hear!!!
Sticks and stones, sticks and stones.
Thank you see kindness does Help
Wow, Natasha, how venomous your comments are. You meed to get a life. This issue is consuming you.
Yes, what is it that is making her so angry? There is something going on that might have nothing to do with CR. I think we have to be careful we don’t use CR as a conduit for anger. But I don’t know.
And why does she seem to always attack Dale Swisher?
Once again the brain dead are out in full force with more failed stratagies. You CR supporters and your stinking lying, Dale Swisher, now psychotically calling herself a retired shrink really do need to disappear off the face of the planet. Ooooo, did I just commit a “hate crime???” I have never seen such scum in my life all come together in one place to support more scum. It is a tradgedy th of a most gigantic proportion. I can’t wait, because I hate them, to see them in jail!
Please explain why you hate them. Is it simply because they support Caboodle Ranch? Do you have personal experience of dealing with CR? Did you have cats at CR? I would be pleased to hear.
Do you have cats at Caboodle Ranch, Michael? Do you have personal experience dealing with Caboodle Ranch? We would all be please to hear about your personal experience with them.
One important aspect of the Caboodle Ranch story is the obvious impossibility of resolving the unwanted cat, abandoned cat problem under the current law and attitudes of cat owners in the USA. The Caboodle Ranch story is a symptom of a deeper malaise.
All energies should be directed at stopping the deliberate killing of millions of healthy cats every year in the USA. This has come to be acceptable by the majority of people because it goes on year in and year out. Nothing changes. It is shocking.
The Caboodle mess is due to the underlying generally incorrect attitudes of the citizens of America with respect to cat caretaking which is also demonstrated in declawing. It is a throwaway society and cats are treated as ‘objects’ by too many people. This is why the law treats them as chattels as well. It is time for fundamental change. This can happen through a change in the law.
Note: there are millions of great cat caretakers too in the USA. They are angry at the killing.
Comparing fabricated and contrived threats against the defendants in the Caboodle Ranch cases to true hate crimes as defined in the Matthew Shepard Act is absurd and offensive.
It is probably best that you are a retired psychologist.
I think you are being harsh. Thinking about the principles of a ‘hate crime’ – bias, bigotry, irrational anger and hate directed at a type of person or group and manifested in harassment to actual violence, there are similarities in this case.
There is a lot of polarisation of opinion and there is anger. It seems to me that there is hardened opinion on both sides. Was PETA involved? As I recall they were. A lot of people have an irrational hatred of PETA. It isn’t all bad.
It seems that a mental process that is similar to a person who commits a hate crime is behind the opinion and actions of some people in the Caboodle Ranch fiasco.
Michael, I can’t believe that you are defending this sloppy writing. This blog is clearly biased and “Victoria” provides zero proof to back up her claims. There are no similarities between a hate crime and Craig Grant and his supporters being harassed by ONE person who is unstable.
A hate crime is directed to a whole protected class and I don’t recall seeing animal abuser in there. People hate Craig for what he did to the cats, not because he’s white, old, wears a cowboy hat, is missing teeth, etc.
You are allowing flat out lies to be written and posted on your site. “Victoria” obviously is lazy and does not know how to research a topic. POC has lost all credibility with me. It’s just another junk site.
I like free speech. Everything written need not necessarily be correct for it to be useful and interesting. The comments will always allow corrections and additions so as a whole this page is a success. And in any case it has provided a good forum for discussion. On that basis I deem it a success from my standpoint. I am sorry that PoC has lost credibility for you but am very surprised that you say that on the basis that you dislike one page amongst 7,000! I think you are being a bit unfair, aren’t you?
I am not defending the article, just putting a balance to the responses, to make them fairer.
Things do need to be correct to be useful. But it doesn’t need to be factual to be entertaining. And that is all this has been. This “Victoria” is not a retired psychologist. Perhaps you could at least require your writers to be truthful about their experience and education. This was written solely for the purpose to deceive people and stir up trouble.
You almost had me believing that the writer could be a retired professional, except for one fatal flaw. Its a biggie. No one referring to themselves as a professional would ever use Wikipedia as a reference in a written article. I have an idea about the writer’s identity, and yes, its someone who writes blogs without bothering to fact check information. I’ve called her on it before and will continue to do so.
I disagree that Wikipedia is not a good source. Firstly it has developed into a reliable source over time. Your opinion may be a bit outdated. You can also use Wikipedia in a way that makes it very reliable. The authors always refer to sources. Few others do that. You can therefore go to the source for the information and if it is not good enough for your standards then you can ignore it. The only work more certain to be reliable is a scientific study or sites that quote the law. You can also use it for information and then cross check it on another site or book. My preference is to use books as they are less likely to be a regurgitation of another website.
This is certainly not a professional article. Facts and details have not been researched and are incorrect. Wikipedia is NEVER an acceptable source of researched information.