Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Hate crime legislation effective
Essays on hate crime prevention act
Effects of hate crimes in america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A hate crime is a crime motivated by several reasons that include religion, sexual orientation, race, nationality, gender etc. It typically involves physical violence, intimidation, threats and other means against the individual that is being targeted. It is a crime against the person and it can have a devastating impact on the victim. Several argue that hate crimes should be punished more severely. However, it is not a crime to hate someone or something if it does not lead to some sort of criminal offense. There are many who believe hate crime should be punished more severely since it ‘’has the potential to cause greater harm.’’ (Hate Crime Laws, 2014) Hate crimes, like racial discrimination, have unfortunately been a part of this country
Hate crime is still being committed today and many believe that it would benefit victims and communities if hate crimes were punished more severely. However, hate crimes should not be punished more severely than other crimes that are motivated for other reasons; although the motivation (personal belief) and violence that constitute a hate crime are horrendous, criminals should be prosecuted for their wrongdoing, not for their beliefs. The idea that criminals should be punished more severely than crimes that are motivated by greed, anger, revenge is not acceptable. The potential motivations that were just given can constitute several crimes, like, murder. The issue (which, in my opinion, makes a good argument) is that it ‘’creates complicated moral problems by making it appear as if a murder is "worse" when committed because of the victim's race, religion, or sexual orientation.’’ (Hate crime laws, 2014) Murder is one the worst crimes that can be committed and it can have several motives and reasons behind it. Allowing hate crimes to be punished more severely or stating that hate crime is more ‘’aggressive’’ and ‘’brutal’’ is not fair to other victims and treats them
The punishment of a crime should not be determined by the motivation for the crime, yet that is exactly what hate crime legislation does. It places emphasis on a crime for the wrong reasons. Hate crimes victimize more than just the victims, and this is why the punishments are more severe, but Sullivan argues that any crime victimizes more than the victims. He suggests that random crimes with no prejudice in place can be perceived as something even more frightening, as the entire community feels threatened instead of just a group. Proven in Sullivan’s article is the worthlessness of the “hate” label. I would agree that it only serves to further discriminate, instead of achieving the peace and equality that it pretends to stand
Hate crimes are terrible things that are becoming more and more common in America because people don’t like the way they look or feel. The purpose of the “ Debate: What is a Hate Crime” is to teach people of a crime that is becoming quite important in the society.
Not only is violence and hate blatantly expressed in ways that hate crime laws are supposed to prevent and cease, but they are also expressed in these legal settings through physical and abusive mistreatment. This occurs when those incarcerated are denied medical and psychiatric care and resources, however, the system that does the punishing for hate crimes will never be punished for hate crimes, or crimes that it is delegated prevent. It is also extremely troublesome that police and the legal system that continuously and historically commits violent and hateful acts towards marginalized communities such as the trans community, are the ones who are delegated the role of preventing these offenses, and expected to uphold this duty, when history such as the Stonewall riots show that this is a dangerous course of action
Again, the actual crime should be punished not the reasoning behind it. Murder is murder, robbery is robbery, rape is rape, regardless of motive. For example, Person A and Person B both assault innocent people. But while beating the life out of his victim, Person B calls him a "Nigger." His crime is considered a hate crime. Consequently, his crime will receive harsher punishment. Despite why the crime took place, the point is that a crime took place. No matter why the victim is chosen, he or she was still harmed, the family is still going to grieve, and someone must be punished. Whether a person is killed for money or drugs or out of hate or prejudice, the fact still remains that he or she has been killed. With hate crime laws, the hate is being looked at, more so than the crime itself. Even though hate is a terrible thing to have in your heart, all Americans have the right to hate whatever or who ever they want. Besides, if officials start punishing hate or unholy thoughts, they might as well make a new category of crime— thought crime. If this line of thinking were acted upon, then half of America would be behind bars.
According to Petrosino (2003: 10) hate crimes can be defined as "..the victimisation of minorities due to their racial or ethnic identity by members of the majority. " (p. 4) Hate crimes are also known as bias-motivated crimes because the crimes are motivated by a bias towards a person or persons including but not limited to those of a different gender, ethnic background, religion, or sexual orientation. Hate crimes are quite serious and have severe and long lasting-effects for the targeted victims. Due to the severe nature of the crimes many countries have strict laws in place to punish offenders. Hate crime is not widely discussed in Canadian society because it has not been a prominent issue until now. “..The extent of the problem in Canada was limited to a small number of persons, such activity could create a climate of malice and destructiveness to the values of our society (Cohen Report, 1966:24). As a result of the committee’s efforts, Parliament amended the Criminal Code in 1970, thus rendering hate propaganda as a punishable offence (Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1986:7)
Hate speech directs people to commit hateful crimes. The difference between hate crimes and regular crimes is that hate crimes are committed to a person because of his/her differences. Some examples of differences would be their gender, race, hair color, body shape, intelligence, sexual orientation, etc. Hate speech doesn’t have to be direct talking. Hate speech can now be down on the Internet or through magazine; and more people are using the Internet to publicize their vile beliefs. In the last five years, the number of hate crimes that have been reported to the FBI has increased by 3,743 (FBI statistics). That means that 11,690 hate crimes were reported in 2000 in only 48 states and not all police forces released their data. Imagine how many other hate crimes were committed that weren’t even reported to the police. Ethnic and racial violence or tension has decreased in Europe due to newly implemented hate speech laws (ABC News).
The term hate crime first appeared in the late 1980’s as a way of understanding a racial incident in the Howard Beach section of New York City, in which a black man was killed while attempting to evade a violent mob of white teenagers, shouting racial epithets. Although widely used by the federal government of the United States, the media, and researchers in the field, the term is somewhat misleading because it suggests incorrectly that hatred is invariably a distinguishing characteristic of this type of crime. While it is true that many hate crimes involve intense animosity toward the victim, many others do not. Conversely, many crimes involving hatred between the offender and the victim are not ‘hate crimes’ in the sense intended here. For example an assault that arises out of a dispute between two white, male co-workers who compete for a promotion might involve intense hatred, even though it is not based on any racial or religious differences... ...
This is not to say that neo-Nazis or skinheads do not partake in criminal hate activities. By far the largest determinant of hate crimes is racial bias, with African Americans the group at greatest risk. In 1996, 60%, were promulgated because of race, with close to two-thirds (62%) targeting African Americans. Furthermore, the type of crime committed against this group has not changed much since the 19th century; it still includes bombing and vandalizing churches, burning crosses on home lawns, and murder. Ethnic minorities often become targets of hate crimes because they are perceived to be new to the country even if their families have been here for generations, or simply because they are seen as different from the mainstream population.
In conclusion, Heidi Hurd did a passable job in explaining both parts of the discussion. Based on her article I have come to the conclusion that this is a topic not easily solved. With every argument that the people in favor of hate crime legislation those against are able to oppose it with their own. It is simple not possible to generalize case because although they may be similar they are never the same. Discrimination, hate, and prejudice has always been and will continue to be a topic discussed for many years.
With the increase in hate crimes in America, minority groups are starting to become the prey of the beasts who commit these awful crimes. So the minority groups (Asians, African Americans, Jewish people, Homosexuals, and others) have been pushing to have hate crime laws passed to protect them from violence and ridicule. The laws that are in affect now are only slightly protective of the minorities in hate crimes. The laws that are in state right now say that a hate crime offender can only be prosocuted for their crimes if they are prohibiting the minority or victum of the hate crime from a “federally protected right”. Such as attending school, voting and etc. The victums of hate crimes do not think that these laws are very strict. The victoms are demanding newer stricter laws. The victoms or minorities want these newer stricter laws because basically they have no protection from violence. The old laws basically just state that if you are prohibiting the person from doing something you are at fault. Well the minorities want these stiffened and they want them to be harsher. An example of what the minorities want is any act done against anyone with intent to cause bodily harm or death because the person was part of a minority group will carry the fine of being federally prosecuted and with that there is the chance of the death penalty.
Hate crime can also be called a bias crime, which means that someone commits a crime against someone based solely on their particular characteristic that they cannot or do not want to change such as religion or gender (Hate Crimes, n.d.). Sadly, hate crimes occur often and can have a lasting effect on the victim. The definition of what constitutes a hate crime has broadened over the years, as the FBI has changed it to address those who are victimized by disability or gender identity as society has continued to grow more diverse and change substantially (Hate Crimes, n.d.). It is crucial that the United States understands how many people are victims of hate crimes and how often it occurs to better understand the scope of the problem. According to the FBI, the most frequent hate crimes are racially motivated at almost fifty percent (Latest Hate Crime Statistics, 2015). This means that there are many people that are victimized because of their race, which is unchangeable and pre-determined. Religious hate crime and sexual orientation hate crimes were tied for the second most prevalent in the United States (Latest Hate Crime Statistics, 2015). These people are victims because of who they are and how these offenders see
Hate crimes have been a problem even in the past. Maybe worst than it is today. Some examples are the Ku Klux Klan and Holocaust. The Ku Klux Klan was a organization of whites who primarily targeted african americans according to the Tanenbaum organization. Although they had a primary target, they also killed homosexuals, people who helped african americans, and recently catholics. This is a major example of hate groups extremist committing hate crimes. They target a group of people who are different, and treat them as if they were not equal. Hate crimes can vary from leaving a hateful message to kidnapping and murder. The holocaust in Europe is also considered as a hate crime. They targeted the jews due to their hatred of them. According to the human rights campaign, since 1968, federal laws made did not cover much areas of hate crimes. Things like voting improved from a result of these laws, but gay and lesbian hate crimes have not been helped. Another incident of hate crime rising in the U.S. is 9/11. During the bombing of the Twin Towers, it caused the Americans to unite, but the downfall of the incident caused a brewing of hatred for muslims. “The Americans had hatred growing on muslims even if they were believed not to be the attackers”(hrc.org). Hate crimes have been bad since the past 100 years.
There are both state and federal laws that prohibit hate crimes, but proving an assailant committed a crime in prejudice is very difficult. Any type of crime can call for some form of punishment, from fines and short prison stays for misdemeanors to long term imprisonment for felonies. Once it has been reviled that an accused willfully committed an offense, proof must be given that indicates the crime was influenced by prejudice against a specific characteristic in order to show that it was also a hate crime. When this can be proven, the harshness of the crime automatically increases. People often wonder why hate crime punishment is harsher than for crimes that are not motivated by any type of bias. The basic reason for this is that most crimes are directed at an individual, but hate crimes are against an entire community. A burglar who breaks into a random home does so for personal gain, and usually doesn’t even know who lives in the home they are invading. Conversely, a person who chooses a victim based on a particular bias is singling out a ch...
Like I’ve said before, those with similarities of people victimized by hate crime are also affected, showing us that these crimes are an issue in our world. Hate crimes are violent actions motivated by a bias. They have almost always been apart of history, but that doesn’t make them okay. Hate crime rates have risen and lowered, but it doesn’t guarantee that it’s going away. Hate crimes don’t just affect one person- they can affect anyone with similar qualities of the victim. So please, don’t go setting your neighbor’s house on fire because you don’t like their skin color or religion, you could affect more people than you think.
The current laws in effect regarding hate crimes are limited. Additionally, victims who experience a hate crime suffer much more traumatically than victims of other crimes do. Hate Crimes not only affect the individual, but their entire community as well.