Town Square

Post a New Topic

Jolted by recent hate incidents, Palo Alto may ask FBI for help

Original post made on Mar 14, 2022

Concerned about recent hate incidents around town targeting Black, Jewish and Asian residents, members of Palo Alto's Human Relations Commission recommended asking the Federal Bureau of Investigation for help in fighting the trend.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, March 14, 2022, 9:52 AM

Comments (8)

Posted by NA
a resident of Menlo Park
on Mar 14, 2022 at 11:44 am

NA is a registered user.

The most common hate/bias crimes in the South Bay Area are exercised against people who have the appearance of being homeless, with the implication that most people who discriminate in this way believe homeless people are either mentally ill, drug addicted, or engaged in criminal activity.

There are multiple parties of people in the South Bay Area who engage in a practice of investigating or reporting hate crimes where they premeditate staged interactions with a suspected racist in public, then wait for the suspect to express their hate in a moment of embarrassment or frustration. These tactics amount to jumping out of the bushes and scaring someone, then reporting the fearful reaction as being irrational. [Portion removed.]

Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 14, 2022 at 12:06 pm

Online Name is a registered user.

It was just reported today that there's a bill in the works to up the penalties for hate speech and hate symbols. Web Link

Maybe Palo Alto can do something similar now.

"Under the bill, AB 2282, using the symbols to terrorize a person would be a felony offense punishable by a fine of up to $15,000 and up to one year in county jail or up to three years in state prison. The bill would also limit the symbols from being used for terrorizing purposes on private property; at primary, junior and high schools; at public parks; at public facilities; in public spaces; at places of worship; at cemeteries; and at places of employment.

“They are equally repulsive and hateful and so this bill aligns those penalties and how they’re applied,” said Levine, a Democrat who lives in Greenbrae.

Existing law considers using nooses as a misdemeanor, using swastikas as a felony only on a third offense and burning crosses as a felony. The law also varies on where these symbols are allowed to be used, with swastikas being the least regulated."

Posted by Laramie Johnson
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 15, 2022 at 10:24 am

Laramie Johnson is a registered user.

How will this proposed bill affect minors who are engaged in graffiti as there is a difference between a prank and a bonafide hate crime.

Posted by Banes
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 15, 2022 at 1:00 pm

Banes is a registered user.

The other side of the coin is: words without action are just words. Does this mean we are going to make certain words illegal to use? There should be Legal publication put out by Biden of illegal words, also known as censorship words never-to-use-or-you-will pay-a-price $$$, Along with her prices perhaps. Then suppose you have a group of LGBGT’s (or Asians, Jews, whatever) who have their own jargon they don’t like, and their primary life purpose is to promote their sexuality -/ so everything they hear sounds like a threat, and who’s to say somebody actually says something intentionally negative or they just “hear” or interpret it that way, thereafter they collectively (gang up w their pals) & claim so-and-so said something “hateful” to us because you might’ve looked at them crosseyed or something (at least in their mind) Or perhaps ignored them all together and they desire attention or acknowledgment from you. Now somebody who is just minding their own business has a problem because collectively a group of one type or another “minorities” for lack of better term, declare together that you said some thing which you never did.
Words are pretty minor, actions speak louder than words so are we going to be instituting a censorship on words that incur financial or imprisonment penalties on potentially innocent non-acting persons?
Sounds more like greater bi-polarization brought about by extreme politics or entities looking for not justice, but some kind of exemplary status.
Also Sounds fairly Incongruous that a pastor would be getting anti-Semitic verbiage, Perhaps a rabbi?

Finally if words are going to be illegal carrying financial or imprisonment penalties they need to be published On every level so every person understands which words cannot be used, or which words cannot be used in their “languages” or against a type, Or be used as adjectives, e.g. she’s behaving very “queerly” for someone who just graduated with honors. (Queer is an ancient term non

Posted by MIdtown resident
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 15, 2022 at 1:55 pm

MIdtown resident is a registered user.

I think a jury can figure out when words are used in a hateful way and when they're benign. There's no way to create a list of words that are hateful. It's all in the context - My wife and my daughter were separately subjected to hateful speech soon after Trump was elected even after making it clear what a low, disgusting bigot he was, sending a message to other bigots that it was OK to harass people for no good reason. My wife was asked if she intended paying for the groceries she was buying at TJs and when she asked the bigot to come and check, he said "go back to where you came from". My daughter was called "N-----, muslim". No such thing ever happened to us in the last 32 years we've lived in the U.S. BTW, please read the article correctly. The pastor was NOT subject to Anti-semitic speech.

Posted by Hinrich
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 15, 2022 at 7:21 pm

Hinrich is a registered user.

One little step towards monitoring speech is a big step towards thought police routinely controlling your thoughts and ideas. It’s bad enough that activists are pushing acceptance of 68 flavors of gender and trying to keep you from thinking about ‘illegal’ (law breaker) when referring to people who sneak across our borders. It’s bad enough that people are trying to control language. It’s bad enough that an idea or conviction conflicts with whatever Woke has decide is proper thought for everyone. How did THEY take control of free speech? Now, some want to punish impure or alt thought. Where is this going? What kind of society will that be?
“Hate” has always been far too vague as a legal concept. Those who want to expand it’s laws and punishments should not be trusted. It’s a waste of the FBI’s time to enlist them as consultants or active thought police.

Posted by John
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 16, 2022 at 6:24 am

John is a registered user.

[Post removed.]

Posted by Jamie Johnson
a resident of another community
on Mar 16, 2022 at 10:04 am

Jamie Johnson is a registered user.

"The other side of the coin is: words without action are just words. "

This is a key consideration as actual actions speak far louder than words.

Verbal insults should not be taken seriously unless physical violence is also involved.

Just consider the source and move on.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Palo Alto Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

New sushi restaurant and steakhouse coming to Palo Alto in 2023
By The Peninsula Foodist | 5 comments | 2,753 views

Local Flavor– Highland Noodles and Aurum
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 2,194 views

What Do You Get Out of Being Stubborn?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,167 views