[cowhead]

it still strikes me as a piece of legislation that is going to slowly erode our basic freedoms.. assumption of innocence and all that silliness. in the case of intent to commit a crime.. you better damn well have caught them in the car outside the bank.. there are a bazillion times i've tried to figure out how to do some grand illegal scheme.. just to figure out how it could be done.. not that I ever intended to do it. anywhoo! it depends too much on the circumstance as to whether or not it was a hate crime as such, and frankly I am of the opinion that the people who are elected as judges in our society really have very little contact or understanding of the society from which the persons accused of crimes come from(mostly). there is a whole different level of society and different rules to play by. and the imposition of polite' society upon that structure won't work. and yes, I know that there can't be a different set of rules for different segments of society.. although the idea of a jury of your peers? peers? I would be willing to bet, that if I were accused of a crime and a jury of ex-musician/chef/proto-artists/alcoholics would see my point, and why I did something... jimmy sunday school who is supposedly my peer.. yeah... notso much.. anyway.. enough babbling.. I don't think he's going to veto anything.. I mean he's got almost a perfect streak of not doing so.. why mess it up so close to the end of his run?