Quote:
Webpage:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/35/text
__________________
I'm not a lawyer, but I can't believe that this bill was ever introduced, let alone that it has already passed the House of Representatives.
If I were going to draft an antilynching bill, I would start with murder and other bodily harm and conspiracy to pepetrate those crimes. I would then consider whether or not severe forms of harassment by two or more people that specify threats of murder and other bodily harm should be included in the bill or introduced in a separate bill. Included in that consideration would be whether and how the harassment incites violence against the target.
For example, two people who gang up to harass someone together privately are committing a lesser offense than if they are communicating their intent to encourage others to join the harassment.
As far as lynching is concerned, all considerations should be directly related to bodily harm and threats of bodily harm.
The scope attempted by H.R. 35 seems to me to have been written by people who have no idea how the law works. That's my impression.
Mobbing and lynching are mobbing and lynching. Housing discrimination is housing discrimination. These are separate crimes.
Having been homeless, I know that it's dangerous to be homeless, but it's not an imminent or even an intentional threat of bodily harm in the way that hitting someone or threatening to hit someone is. The rest of 22 seems to me to be just as ill-considered.
