Gillette City Council members and many others in the community are divided over a proposed hate crime ordinance, evidenced by the turnout and comments made at a City Council meeting Tuesday night.

(5) comments

Waggin1327

How on earth will this give people “ more rights” Shay?? Obviously, those people who have had a hate motivated experience feel differently. This community cannot continue to have a blind eye to what is happening in today’s culture. Someone please explain how protecting ALL citizens is unconstitutional.

jackieboy

Uninformed, needless law that will only infringe on 1st amendment rights. WHO decides what hate speech is? That’s exactly why at least 22 states are trying to repeal this bogus legislation to begin with. This all driven by the WOKE City Council. Very unfortunate, unnecessary laws that will only yet again take away our rights. NOT ENHANCE THEM.

Very disappointed in the Gillette City Council as is most Gillette residents. Two things we absolutely don’t need more of is o e more bogus laws and more taxes.

STOP!!!

FactChecker

“Dean Vomhof, who wore a rainbow-colored wig and a blue dress, said this ordinance is trying to shut down freedom of expression.” Now that’s funny. I’m glad to see that someone in Gillette still has a sense of humor after the yearlong library dumpster fire.

So, how many attendees were titillated and how many children were sexualized by Dean’s solo drag show? Will ‘The Mothers Against Common Sense’ be picketing him now?

Waggin1327

Nobody is taking away your rights. Does your statement mean that it’s perfectly ok to bully someone? To commit a crime that is motivated by hate? So, at the end of the day, which freedoms do you think you lose? And, I don’t think there’s any unclear definitions of hate motivated speech, or crimes committed with that intention. Don’t think for one minute that it doesn’t happen here in good ole boy Gillette. It has nothing to do with your perception of “woke.”

What are you afraid of, really??

guardianavatar

Read the ordinance

1. It prohibits people from injuring (or threatening to injure) another person or the person's property based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, ethnicity, national origin, ancestry, or disability.

2. It prohibits people from inciting violence against another person(s) or property based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, ethnicity, national origin, ancestry, or disability.

Why in the world would anyone think this is violating their First Amendment Rights? The First Amendment does not protect advocating violence against another person.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.