Hate Crimes in American Society in the Twentieth and Twenty-first Centuries
Sample Student
Research Paper
Project of Sociology
Table of Contents I. Thesis Statement…………………………………………….………….....Page 4
II. Introduction and Summary………………………………….………….....Page 4
III. Literature Review………………………………………………………....Page 6
IV. Methods………………………………………………………….......….. Page 16
V. Socio-Historical Analysis………………………………………………. .Page 18
A. 20th Century
1. Lynching
2. Ku Klux Klan
3. Rodney King and the Los Angeles Riots
4. Matthew Shepard
B. 21st Century
1. Post 9/11
2. Jena Six
VI. Cause and Effect Analysis…………………………………………… ....Page 24
A. Causes
1. Prejudice
a. Stereotypes
b. Scapegoats
c. Presence of Hate in American Culture
d. Need for Status and Power
2. Reasons for Crime
a. Sending a Message
b. Thrill Seeking
c. Defensive
B. Effects
1. Psychological Trauma
2. Undo Social Progress
3. Community Unrest
4. Threat of Retaliation
VII. Descriptive Analysis……………………………………………….........Page 30
A. Description of Victims
1. Bias against a Particular Race
2. Bias against a Particular Religion
3. Bias against a Particular Sexual Orientation
4. Bias against a Particular Ethnicity/National Origin
5. Bias against a Disability
B. Description of Offenses and Offenders This must be your new section?
VIII. Comparative Analysis…………………………………………………. Page 36
A. United States Justice Department Definition of Hate Crime
B. International Justice Systems Definition of Hate Crime
IX. Expectations for the Future……………………………………………. .Page 38
X. Recommendations of Social Policy……………………………………. Page 38
XI. Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………… Page 403
Appendix H1: HIC Protocol Form………………………… Page 42
Appendix H2: HIC Informed Consent Form…………….........Page 45
Appendix S: Survey…………………………………………Page 47
XII. Bibliography……………………………………………………………Page 50
Excellent!4
Thesis Statement
This paper will examine the nature of hate crimes in America in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. A socio-historical analysis will provide examples of hate crimes in
American history. Hate crimes will also be analyzed using a cause and effect analysis. A descriptive analysis will offer statistics of hate crimes in the United States based on category of victims and will look at each category. This paper will explore the reasons why hate crimes will most likely continue to exist in our society and will look at possible social policies that could be implemented to prevent hate crimes, assist the victims, and deal with the issues that make perpetrators commit the crimes.
Introduction and Summary
Hate crimes have long been a problem in American society. This paper will look at some incidences of hate crimes in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. In the early twentieth century, lynching was a common form of hate crime in America, especially in the South. Such hate was further advanced by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan. Later in the twentieth century, the brutal arrest of Rodney King, an African American, and the riots that followed in Los Angeles, California in 1992 brought the problem of hate crimes back into public eye. Good—you added in the date. The 1998 murder of Matthew
Shepard, who was gay, also increased awareness and concern about hate crimes. Hate crimes in the twenty-first century include attacks on Middle Easterners following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The recent trials of young black men in Jena,
Louisiana in 2006 have also served to prove that racial tensions still exist, as do hate and, thus, hate crimes.5
Prejudice causes the extreme bias that is sometimes demonstrated by hate crimes.
Prejudices may be created by stereotypes, the process of scapegoating, one’s need for status and power, or the presence of bias in much of American culture. Hate crimes themselves may be for the thrill of the offender, to send a message to members of a particular group, or in defense of one’s own well-being which they believe is threatened by ―outsiders‖.
Hate crimes have many effects. Victims often suffer psychological trauma from the attacks. The affected community as a whole may feel unsafe after a hate crime occurs and the social progress that has taken place in brining groups together may be undone.
There is also sometimes a threat of retaliation following a hate crime occurrence.
Many groups are affected by hate crimes. The definition of hate crimes given by the United States Department of Justice states that these crimes are motivated by a bias towards a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity or national origin.
Statistics from 2006 show that racially motivated crimes account for the most hate crimes committed. The remainder of crimes are committed by bias against a religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity or national origin, and disability, in that order.
Hate crimes will continue in the future. Prejudice, unfortunately, will always exist. Therefore, it stands to reason that some people will act on these prejudices, as the past has shown us. However, the public will likely act even more negatively to hate crimes in the future.
Many steps have been taken to prevent hate crimes and impose harsher punishments for offenders but much more could be done. Police need more training and consistent processes in dealing with hate crimes. Victims also need more assistance. The 6 definition of hate crimes has already grown to increase more groups, but, officials should look into the possibility of adding more groups. Laws should also be made clearer in order to gain more support from the public as well as government leaders.
All of the information given will be addressed in this paper. To thoroughly examine hate crimes, the researcher used many scholastic sources. Ten of the books have used have been further analyzed in a literature review. Good you added in a transition.
Literature Review
Hate Crimes
Donald Altschiller
ABC-CLIO, 1999
Summary
Donald Altschiller’s Hate Crimes is a reference handbook that takes an in depth look at hate crimes in the United States. The book looks into four major targeted groups:
African Americans, Jewish Americans, gays and lesbians, and Asian Americans. Hate
Crimes gives a chronology of crimes against the four major targeted groups from 1955-
1999. Altschiller also writes of the history of legislation against hate crimes in America, the earliest of which is enacted in 1990. The book presents in-depth statistics from the
FBI’s Hate Crime Report from 1996. The statistics focus on the types of offenses, victims, offenders, and the locations of the crimes.
Hate Crimes also looks into government documents on hate crimes. The book specifically examines President Clinton’s actions against hate crimes. Altschiller commends the Clinton administration for actions, such as toughening up law enforcement, prosecuting hate crimes, working with communities to stop hate crimes, and simply trying to understand such crimes. The book also looks at non-government 7 agencies working to prevent hate crimes, particularly the Anti-Defamation League.
Additionally, Hate Crimes lists individual activists and organizations that deal with hate crimes and provides a detailed inventory of resources on the topic of hate crimes.
Evaluation
Hate Crimes provides many good examples of hate crimes in American history.
The book also details important documents dealing with hate crimes. However, because it is a reference handbook, it is difficult to find very interesting. The information, while important, is tedious and unexciting. Hate Crimes offers thorough data, but, is hard to read. Importance to Research
Hate Crimes offers a large amount of statistics, documents, and facts about hate crimes. However, this information will not be used in the research in this paper. The book does not offer much information related to history, causes and effects, or descriptions of categories of hate crimes victims.
Link to Other Sources
Obviously, Altschiller’s Hate Crimes will be easy to link to his Hate Crimes
Second Edition. He uses the same format in both; the latter is simply a more updated version. Because it is a reference handbook, it is full of facts and statistics, more than the other books. It will be useful to compare the statistics in Hate Crimes with the examples and opinions given in Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed, Hate
Crimes Revisited, Policing Hatred, and In the Name of Hate.8
Hate Crimes: Second Edition
Donald Altschiller
ABC-CLIO, 2005
Summary
Hate Crimes Second Edition is Donald Altschiller’s follow-up to Hate Crimes.
This book was not released until 2005 and, therefore, gives more recent information. The most significant change Altschiller notes are two additional targeted groups. Because of events like the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the War on Terror, Altschiller adds Arab Americans and Muslim Americans. Transgender people are also added to gays and lesbians as a targeted group. Hate Crimes Second Edition includes, as the first book did, African Americans, Asian Americans, and Jewish Americans as well as gays, lesbians, and transgendered people, and Muslim and Arab Americans.
This book offers hate crimes statistics from 2003. Statistics focus on the incidents and offenses, victims, offenders, and location. Altschiller also writes of the training law enforcement is receiving to fight hate crimes. The issue of hate crimes on college campuses is also addressed. Additionally, Hate Crimes Second Edition notes the problem of hate on the Internet. The book also includes several resources available on the subject of hate crimes.
Evaluation
Hate Crimes Second Edition is full of good information; however, it is difficult to read. While examples of hate crimes are important, the book offers too many.
Alstchiller’s addition of Arab and Muslim Americans to the list of targeted groups, as well as his attention to the internet and crimes on college campuses, were fitting in keeping up with hate crimes in the present time. 9
Importance to Research
The information in Hate Crimes Second Edition will not be used in the research of this paper. The book’s data is not useful in the information this paper is trying to provide. Hate Crimes Second Edition does not offer information to a socio-historical, cause and effect, or descriptive analysis. Nor does it help in making future predictions or social policy recommendations.
Link to Other Sources
Because Altschiller uses the same format in Hate Crimes and Hate Crimes Second
Edition, the books can be easily compared by how much has changed over the years. The introduction of Arab and Muslim Americans as a targeted group is present in both Hate
Crimes Second Edition and Hate Crimes Revisited. The prevalence of hate crimes on college campuses is present in this book as well as in Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of
Bigotry and Bloodshed. As in Policing Hatred, this work touches on law enforcement and hate crimes. Both Hate Crimes Second Edition and In the Name of Hate deal with gays and lesbians as targets of hate crimes.
Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed
Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt
Plenum Press, 1993
Summary
In their book Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed, Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt aim to inform the reader of the seriousness of hate crimes and that each crime differs in cruelty and further effects on members of the community. The book gives several examples of hate crimes in order to provide the reader a glimpse into the 10 severity of these crimes. Levin and McDevitt also address the underlying cause of hate crimes, stereotypes that pervade our society. The authors suggest that feelings of hatred are becoming popular in America.
This book presents different types of hate crimes such as offenses motivated by thrill or excitement, reactive hate crimes, and crimes where individuals may believe that they are ridding the world of evil. Organized hate groups are also examined.
Additionally, the topic of hate crimes on college campuses is addressed. The authors also note the problem of minority groups acting against other minority groups. Levin and
McDevitt believe that it is important for minorities to work together but feel that society has made it difficult for them to do so.
Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed also deals with hate crimes around the world. The book offers statistics and addresses legal actions and police response to hate crimes. The authors close with their opinions on the future of hate and hate crimes in America. They point out that society seems to making some efforts to help minorities but caution that stereotypes and prejudices still exist and will continue to be problems.
Evaluation
The authors do an excellent job in providing information and opinions on the topic of hate crimes. However, some of their ideas seem somewhat implausible. For instance, their proposal that hate is popular in society is questionable. While the argument provides interesting debate, the authors mistakenly claim that a few entertainers and politicians ideals reflect all of society. On the other hand, they offer interesting views on minority group interactions and the future of hate crimes.11
Importance to Research
The authors’ presentation of different motivations behind hate crimes provides more modern, innovative ideas. Their focus on minority groups acting against one another is an idea that is interesting. While the authors’ opinion of hate being considered acceptable and an integral part of American society, even today, is debatable, the topic of hate in American culture is important to hate crimes research.
Link to Other Sources
The statistics in both Hate Crimes and Hate Crimes Second Edition could easily be used to examine the proposals in Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and
Bloodshed. This book can be contrasted with Hate Crimes Revisited because both books deal with the same topics, only at different times (Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of
Bigotry and Bloodshed was published in 1993, Hate Crimes Revisited was published in
2002). The authors believe that hate is common in society, meaning they feel prejudices exist in most people. This is along the same lines as Bell’s opinion that hate, or prejudice and racism, is rampant among law enforcement, which she discusses in Policing Hatred.
Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed touches on minorities attacking one another, as does In the Name of Hate.
Hate Crimes Revisited
Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt
Westview Press, 2002
Summary
In the same format as their 1993 book Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed, Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt look at the progress of hate crimes in their 12
2002 work Hate Crimes Revisited. The authors give examples of hate crimes that occurred in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Like the previous work, Hate Crimes
Revisited points to stereotypes and prejudices as the underlying causes for hate crimes.
Claiming that hatred is popular in society, Levin and McDevitt point to American pop culture, specifying certain entertainers and politicians, as influencing Americans toward hate. This work mentions different motivations for hate crimes such as for thrill, in defense against a personal threat, or to rid the world of evil. The book also looks at organized hate groups and hate crimes’ continuing existence on college campuses. Levin and McDevitt again stress the importance of minority groups coming together in support of one another. Police response, public policy, acts of prevention, and public response are also touched on. The most significant addition to Hate Crimes Revisited is the addition of Middle Easterners as a threatened group and the authors’ repeated mention of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Evaluation
The updated information that Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt give in their book
Hate Crimes Revisited is very informative. The addition of Middle Easterners as a threatened group was a necessary addition and the authors provide good insight into this more recent trend. Pointing out the problem of hate on college campuses is very insightful and provides a fresh idea. The views on motivations for committing hate crimes and minority groups’ support for one another are also interesting.
Importance to Research13
The authors’ additional comments on the motivations for hate crimes that they had mentioned in their previous work will provide more insight for research. Their emphasis on stereotypes and prejudices as the cause for the hate that brings about such crimes is in step with the research and will be quite helpful.
Link to Other Sources
The information in Hate Crimes Revisited can be challenged with the statistics in
Hate Crimes and Hate Crimes Second Edition. It will also be interesting to compare the work with Hate Crimes Second Edition since both books were written as follow-ups after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Because this is an updated version of Hate Crimes:
The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed, the two can provide insight as to the changes in hate crimes over a short period of time. This work mentions police and public policy, which will be primarily compared to what Bell illustrates in her book Policing Hatred.
Also mentioned are ways to prevent hate crimes and public response, issues that are discussed in In the Name of Hate.
Policing Hatred
Jeannine Bell
New York University Press, 2002
Summary
In her book Policing Hatred, Jeannine Bell discusses what she feels to be an important, but often overlooked, issue-the power police have to decide what is or is not a hate crime. Bell believes that hate crimes come from the criminal justice system and her book evaluates this system.14
The first issue Bell addresses is that of integration, implying that forcing groups to interact causes tension that can, and did, lead to violence. Next, the book notes the difficulty of investigating and proving a hate crime. The author suggests that it is extremely complicated to establish a motive, understand the victim’s situation, talk to witnesses, and find suspects in hate offenses.
Bell also sees police culture as a problem. She argues that not enough attention is paid to hate crimes and that sometimes officers did not care about the offenses. The book also deals with the issues of deciding whether or not the crime is worth pressing charges and if the case should be taken to court.
Evaluation
Bell’s focus on the police as a problem is troubling. This book takes very few examples of white supremacists and racist law enforcement officials and applies them to an entire group. The author takes on a new concept of hate crimes and deals with the difficult topic of policing hatred, both of which are interesting. Overall, Bell’s opinions are controversial, but, the work provides readers a lot to think about.
Importance to Research
Policing Hatred deals with an interesting topic that includes what Bell sees as a lack of importance placed on hate crimes. This work will assist primarily in the recommendations of social policy. The past and present acts of law enforcement agencies when dealing with hate crimes will be used to determine what more needs to be done. Public opinion about the significance of such crimes will also be addressed.
Link to Other Sources15
Policing Hatred focuses solely on law enforcement and the system in relation to hate crimes. This is briefly discussed in Hate Crimes Second Edition. Hate Crimes
Revisited mentions police and public policy as well. Also, Bell’s mention of integration causing hate crimes can be compared to Perry’s belief that the state is responsible for creating an environment that allows hate to exist, which can be found in Perry’s work In the Name of Hate.
In the Name of Hate
Barbara Perry
Routledge, 2001
Summary
To begin her book In the Name of Hate, Barbara Perry challenges the legal definition of a hate crime. Perry offers her own working definition of a hate crime as ―a mechanism of power intended to sustain somewhat precarious hierarchies, through violence and threats of violence (verbal or physical). It is generally directed toward those whom our society has traditionally stigmatized and marginalized.‖ (p. 3) Perry also questions the measurement of hate crimes, arguing that they are likely more prevalent than statistics show. She then challenges different theories on hate crimes, focusing on strain theory, labeling theories, and different contemporary criminological theories.
The author touches on many different groups in her discussion of hate crimes.
She first writes of whites longing to maintain dominance over people of different racial or ethnic groups. Victims such as women, gays, and lesbians are mentioned. The book also touches on minority groups attacking other minority groups. 16
The book also looks into organized hate groups, both their ideals and actions.
Perry also writes of the state holding responsibility for providing an environment that enables hate to exist. She believes that the most promising means for change in regards to hate in American society are social movements and coalitions.
Evaluation
It is interesting that Perry begins with her own definition of a hate crime. Her challenge of the actual numbers of hate crimes is also worth mentioning. It is hard to keep exact figures for such an offense and the author’s note of this is important. Perry’s introduction of women as victims of hate crimes is unique, but, could be debatable.
Perry’s offering a solution in social movements and coalitions is interesting.
Importance to Research
As Perry challenged the definition of hate crimes, the research will look at the public’s definition of and understanding of hate crimes. It will also be beneficial to look into the number of recorded hate crimes and how many cases go unreported. Perry’s suggestions for raising awareness in order to prevent hate crimes in the future is also interesting and will be looked into.
Link to Other Sources
Since Perry challenges the actual reported numbers of hate crimes, it will be interesting to compare to the statistics provided in Hate Crimes and Hate Crimes Second
Edition. In the Name of Hate also writes about minority groups attacking other minority groups, which is mentioned in both Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and
Bloodshed and Hate Crimes Revisited. 17
Methods
The method of research includes what is being researched, how the research will be conducted, and also how the results will be analyzed.
In relation to this paper, the topic to be researched is Hate Crimes in American
Society in the Twentieth and Twenty-first Centuries. The author will research different accounts of hate crimes in American history for informational purposes. The author will also analyze hate crimes, their causes and effects and a description of types of hate crimes according to category.
In order to gather information about experiences with hate crimes, surveys will be handed out to students on the campus of the University of Virginia’ College at Wise as well as the researcher’s neighbors, friends, and family. These surveys will serve to provide the researcher a means to examine the occurrences of hate crimes in a smaller area. When compiling the survey, the researcher carefully selected questions that could be easily understood by all potential survey takers. The questions include gathering selected background information of the survey taker. Because hate crimes are offenses against certain groups – by race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin – it is important to know the survey taker’s own race, religion, any disabilities, sexual orientation, and ethnicity/national origin. This will allow the researcher an idea of any possibilities that the survey taker may be a potential victim of a hate crime.
The survey questions also involve researching the survey takers knowledge of hate crimes. The survey provides a definition of a hate crime in order to educate the 18 survey taker. The survey also asks the survey taker’s opinion of the problem of hate crimes in American society, both past and present. The survey also tests the survey taker’s knowledge of which biases result in the most hate crime offenses. This information will allow the researcher to understand how much the survey taker understands the topic of hate crimes.
The survey’s primary goal is to research the survey taker’s experience with hate crimes. Questions will be asked to determine whether the survey taker has ever said or done anything that others may have considered prejudiced or racist and, if so, how often.
Questions will also be asked to find out if the survey taker has ever been the victim of prejudiced or racist comments or actions. The survey will also seek to learn if the survey taker has ever felt threatened because of someone’s reaction to his or her race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin.
Fifty surveys will be handed out to people on the University of Virginia’s College at Wise campus and also to the researcher’s neighbors, friends, and family. Surveys will be conducted using the protocol established by the Human Investigations Committee.
The researcher will keep a journal to record the field research process. This journal will be submitted to the research instructor on a weekly basis.
Once all surveys have been completed, the researcher will analyze the findings.
Data will be analyzed using the computer program SPSS. SPSS will allow the researcher to more easily and effectively compare the results of each survey. After all analyses have been completed, the researcher will compile the findings with the other research (other types of analysis based solely on the author’s research without surveys). 19
After compiling all research, the findings will be presented to a group of the researcher’s peers. The research will also be submitted to the research instructor for any possible future use the research instructor may deem necessary and appropriate.
Socio-Historical Analysis
For the purpose of this paper, hate crimes have been analyzed using a sociohistorical analysis. This provides a brief history of occurrences in hate crimes in
American society in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The analysis will also consider the context in which the crimes occurred. Good—you added in an intro.
Hate crimes against people of all different groups have existed throughout history and across the world. Hate crimes have existed in American society from the beginning.
After all, settlers forcibly acquired their land from a particular group, American Indians.
There are many accounts of hate crimes in the United States throughout the centuries.
However, this paper will focus only on select crimes in American Society that occurred in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. While the incidents reported in this sociohistorical analysis deal with African Americans, homosexuals, and Middle Easterners
(primarily Muslims) it is important to remember that hate crimes affect members of many different groups.
Many hate crimes occurred in the twentieth century. This paper will discuss early lynching crimes, Rodney King and the ensuing Los Angeles riots, and the murder of
Matthew Shepard. This paper will also look at the history of the most well known hate group, the Ku Klux Klan.20
Lynching is an all too frequent occurrence in American history. This act usually involves a mob, acting outside (though not always in disapproval of) the law, humiliating and killing a person. Lynching victims are most often members of a minority group.
The group that suffered most from lynching was African Americans. In fact, seventy-eight percent of lynching victims between 1889 and 1918 were black; others were convicted criminals and Italian immigrants. Good—you explained who the other lynching victims were. These incidents typically occurred in the southern states as an enforcement of Jim Crow laws. Most of the newspapers and other media channels of the time supported, even encouraged, that practice. Some lynchings were even photographed and displayed on postcards. Reporters wrote full, detailed accounts of the event in an almost victorious manner. Some newspapers, mainly run by African Americans, denounced the practice. President Roosevelt also publicly spoke out against the practice, encouraging other government leaders to do the same. Eventually, others began to see the practice as horrific and lynchings had become less common by around 1910.
(Perloff)
There was, however, a slight resurgence in the lynching of African Americans in the 1930s. In the year 1930 alone, twenty-one people were lynched. Of these victims, twenty were black. (Raper)
The lynchings of African Americans became much more infrequent after the early
1930s. With the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and the changes in society following the movement, lynchings became extremely rare. However, there are a small number of reports of lynchings up until the late twentieth century. 21
Despite many opponents to the act of lynching, many of whom were powerful government officials, even Presidents, an anti-lynching bill was never passed. The Dyer
Anti Lynching Bill was introduced in 1918. The bill had the support of President
Harding, as well as much public support, and passed by the House of Representatives in
1922. However, because of a filibuster, the bill was defeated in the Senate. Robert F.
Wagner and Edward Costigan drafted another bill and presented it in 1935. The Costigan
Wagner Bill never gained enough support (even then President Franklin D. Roosevelt would not speak in its favor) and was defeated. On June 13, 2005, the United States
Senate issued an official apology for failing to enact an anti-lynching bill. (AntiLynching Bill)
One of the most well known hate groups in American society in the Ku Klux
Klan. Established to counter the progress that began to occur after the Civil War, the
KKK has targeted several minority groups in their quest for white supremacy. Groups targeted by the KKK include African Americans, Jews, homosexuals, immigrants, and many others.
The Ku Klux Klan, after being shut down under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, formed again in 1915, this time as the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. What I meant when
I questioned suspended was: was the KKK forced to shut down or did they just fade away. I seem to think it was the latter, but I don’t know the exact circumstances. The resurgence of the Klan was due in part to the movie The Birth of a Nation, released in early 1915. The movie depicted the story of the South immediately before and after the
Civil War. The commentary was quite racist and supported the actions of Klan, crediting 22 them with helping to restore order and presenting it in a somewhat glorified form.
(Culture Shock: D.W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation)
The Klan was most successful during the 1920s. The KKK was more popular in the South than in other parts of the United States, but it had considerable influence all across the nation. After the Great Depression and World War II, membership in the Klan decreased greatly. (Mecklin)
The Knights of the Ku Klux Klan is still in existence today, although the group is now broken up into many small factions. Support for the group is still low but has grown recently with the arguments over immigration and homosexual marriage. While reports of attacks by Klansmen are relatively low, the Klan still preaches a message of hate. The group is considered an extremist hate group. (Ku Klux Klan)
Perhaps one of the most widely known cases involving racial hostility is that of
Rodney King. King, an African American from Los Angeles, California, was involved in a high speed chase with the Los Angeles Police Department in 1991. When the chase finally came to an end, King was shot with a stun gun and then beaten by several police officers, all of whom were white. This incident was caught on tape, which was then displayed on television networks around the United States.
The officers who beat Rodney King were taken to trial for police brutality. It was generally assumed that the officers would be found guilty, mostly because of the evidence provided in the video. However, the jury, ten of whom were white, found the defendants not guilty. The community immediately expressed their outrage.
(Rupesinghe)23
Thus began the largest riot in American history. Many people across California expressed their outrage at the verdict in Rodney King’s case. People began looting, burning buildings, and even beating other citizens. It did not take long to determine that these rioters were dangerous. They were acting extremely violently and were a threat to others, seeming to consider anyone a potential target of their rage.
The riot lasted for five days. The death toll was fifty-eight. Thousands of people were arrested and more than a billion dollars in property damage occurred. All of this occurred in reaction to a hate crime, white police officers brutally beating a black man and then getting away with it. A year later, in 1993, two of the four officers were found guilty of police brutality. The other two officers were acquitted. (Rupesinghe) Good— you addressed my comment.
Another well known hate crime is the case of Matthew Shepard. Matthew was a college student at the University of Wyoming and was also a homosexual. On October 7,
1998, Matthew met Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson in a bar in Laramie,
Wyoming. McKinney and Henderson led Matthew out to a secluded area outside of
Laramie and proceeded to kill him because of his homosexuality. They beat Matthew, tied him to a fence, and left him to die. Matthew was found hours later, but, his injuries were too severe and he died on October 12. Both McKinney and Henderson were convicted and are serving life sentences in prison. Matthew’s murder brought attention to the ongoing problem of hate crimes in American society. (Matthew’s Life)
Hate crimes continue to exist in the twenty-first century. This paper will first address the crimes committed following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The recent incident in Jena, Louisiana will also be covered.24
After the attacks of September 11, 2001, many Middle Easterners, or even perceived Middle Easterners, were the victims of hate crimes. Americans were very fearful of subsequent attacks and some saw all Middle Easterners as threats. Followers of
Islam were often seen as all being radical and, therefore, dangerous to American society.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report in 2001 shows that antiIslamic crimes rose by more than 1600 percent from the previous year. Followers of
Islam continue to be the second highest attacked religious group, after followers of
Judaism. Good—you addressed my comment. Before September 11, 2001, they were the second least attacked group. (Uniform Crime Report 2001)
Within the last year, another hate crime has gained much attention around the
United States. The events occurred in Jena, Louisiana, a town marked with racial tensions. Jena High School has what is commonly known as the ―white tree‖, a tree in the middle of the courtyard where many of the white students gather. One day in August
2006, some black students gathered at the tree. The following morning, nooses were found hanging from the tree. The nooses offended the black students, as they were intended to be a threat and suggest the past lynchings of African Americans. Following these incidents, six black students assaulted Justin Barker, a white student in Jena. The attackers, known as the Jena Six, were charged with attempted second degree murder and conspiracy. All but one of the Jena Six has been convicted of lesser charges. There has been much uproar surrounding the cases, with some complaining the young men were treated unfairly because they were black. (The Case of the Jena Six)
When examining hate crimes, one must look past the incidences themselves and determine the roots of the problem. Many factors could be considered causes of bias-25 motivated offenses. The serious effects of such offenses must also be carefully examined. This paper will examine these important issues in a cause and effect analysis.
Good transition.
Cause and Effect Analysis
Causes:
Hate crimes are caused by the prejudices some people hold against others who they consider to be different. Such biases, when found in people with extremist behavior or when occurring in intense situations, may result in violent offenses.
Prejudices are often caused by fear. People are generally afraid of things that they are not educated about and, therefore, do not understand. This lack of understanding allows for people to make assumptions, often incorrectly, about things that are different.
A lack of knowledge will also allow them to be easily influenced by others into believing things about something or someone that are completely untrue.
Such prejudices allow for the development of stereotypes. Most groups are unfairly labeled by outsiders with oversimplified images or ideas of the group as a whole.
Again, these stereotypes are the result of a lack of knowledge and understanding. The actions of a few members of a group, who are often outside the norm, affect outsiders’ perception of the group as a whole.
There are many examples of common stereotypes. Some people consider that the majority of African-American youth have violent tendencies and should not be trusted.
For years, Jewish people were thought to be dishonest in their business dealings.
Mexicans are sometimes thought to be lazy. After September 11, 2001, many people considered all Middle Easterners to be radical Muslims and dangerous to the American 26 way of life. Even today, some still consider all believers in Islam to be dangerous and threatening. Stereotypes are, unfortunately, very widespread and may lead people to act violently against members of the groups they have come to despise. (Perry)
Scapegoating is another cause of prejudice that could lead to bias motivated offenses, when it becomes extreme. Scapegoating is the practice of blaming an individual or group for the failure of others. The term comes from the Bible, when the sins of a community were placed on a goat, which was then released out into the wilderness. In modern society, scapegoats are often minority groups. Minorities may be blamed for social problems such as unemployment, inflation, or a rise in violence. When such blaming occurs, minority groups often become the target of violence, persecution, and, much less often, genocide.
The process of scapegoating has existed for hundreds of years against groups all over the world. There are widespread and well-known cases, like that of the Holocaust and the genocide of millions of Jews in Nazi Germany. Many less recognized examples exist, even today, all around the world. In the United States recent history, many people blamed all Middle Easterners for the terrorist acts in New York City on September 11,
2001. Also, some Americans blame unemployment on the number of illegal immigrants who provide cheaper labor. The scapegoats in this situation are commonly Mexicans, regardless of the legality of their residence in the United States or the nature of their work. Again, such frustrations and misconceptions could lead to violent acts against the targeted groups.
Levin and McDevitt, in Hate Crimes Revisited also suggest that hatred is considered trendy in American culture today. Many comics continue to tell jokes that put 27 down different racial groups, people with disabilities, homosexuals, and other groups.
Messages of hate can also be found in song lyrics. For example, the rapper Eminem has often sung about hatred of homosexuals.
In recent months, there have been several incidences of hate speech by public figures. Comedian Michael Richards yelled racial insults at an African American audience member. Radio talk show host Don Imus also made headlines for referring to the members of the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, who are primarily
African American, as ―nappy-headed hos‖ (Farsi). Also, Duane Chapman, better know as Dog the Bounty Hunter, was recorded repeatedly using the word ―nigger‖ in reference to his son’s girlfriend. Richards, Imus, and Chapman were all portrayed negatively for their racially offensive actions. Nevertheless, all three incidences are proof that prejudices still exist and can be seen all across American society, even in popular culture.
Another reason for prejudices is an individual’s needs for status and power.
These desires will lead people to search for someone who they feel they are superior to.
This need for dominance is most often found in people who are struggling, often financially. They have a need to keep someone, or some group, in an oppressed position in order to feel better about themselves. If they feel that these people, whom they consider beneath them, move up or are in positions that are above them, they may become angry and act out against them. (Baird and Rosenbaum)
All of the above mentioned prejudices exist in society. It is when they are found in an extreme person and/or a particularly stressful situation that they will most likely escalate to a hate crime.
Reasons for Crimes:28
Hate crimes are often message crimes. They serve to send a message to members of a certain group that they are not welcome in a neighborhood, school, community, etc.
This could be demonstrated in property damage or attacks on some members of the group. (Levin and McDevitt)
Some hate crimes are thrill seeking. This is more common among members of hate groups. These perpetrators gain pleasure from harassing those who are different from themselves. A precipitating event to spark the crime is not necessary. Not only do these perpetrators get a thrill from tormenting their victim, but they often also gain approval from other members of their hate group. (Levin and McDevitt)
Some hate crimes are considered defensive. These crimes are sparked by a particularly upsetting precipitating event. The perpetrators of defensive hate crimes feel that they are somehow protecting themselves or others against outsiders or intruders. The offenders feel that the presence of members of another group threatens their community or their way of life in general. Therefore, the perpetrators feel that it is their duty to do something and that the attacks are justified. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, examples of defensive hate crimes could be seen throughout the United States. Some people felt that the presence of Middle Easterners, regardless of their origin or affiliation with any possible terrorist groups, were a threat to the safety of America. Consequently, attackers rationalized that it was for the good of the nation to get rid of these so called intruders. (Levin and McDevitt)
Effects:
Hate crimes have numerous, serious effects. In June of 1993, in the United States
Supreme Court case Wisconsin vs. Mitchell, the Court ruled in favor of imposing harsher 29 penalties for hate motivated offenses. When delivering the opinion of the Court, Chief
Justice William Rehnquist quoted Wisconsin’s state amici, stating, ―Bias motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest.‖ (Wisconsin v. Mitchell (92-515), 508 U.S.
47 (1993))
The effects of hate crimes are long lasting. All victims of serious crimes suffer, but, studies show that the problems related to hate crimes appear to last longer than the problems related to random crimes. These problems often involve some sort of psychological trauma. Many victims develop a fear and anxiety about the possibility of being attacked again. Victims may also begin to suffer from depression after the attack.
Post traumatic stress may also begin to occur. Sometimes victims will also develop a strong sense of anger about being attacked out of hate. (Gerstenfeld and Grant)
Hate crimes also undo social progress. Diversification of communities, schools, churches and other organizations have become desired social changes. However, a hate crime could negate progress in such changes. The community or organization, out of fear or anger, may not integrate with much progress. Progress may also be halted completely and segregation may begin to occur instead.
When hate crimes occur within a community, members of the community often feel unsafe. This is most common with members of the same group (sharing a certain ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, or disability) who feel threatened and vulnerable when one of their own is attacked. But, fear is not limited to members of one group. All community members may feel anxious after a hate crime is committed.30
The threat of retaliation is the often the primary concern of community members and leaders following a bias motivated criminal offense. Retaliation would most likely be directed at the initial perpetrator or those believed to be directly involved in the initial incident. However, sometimes retaliation is more widespread. Members of the victim’s group may participate in retaliatory activities directed to no one in particular, but to the entire community instead. Such measures are often a build up of frustration at being victimized. (Gerstenfeld and Grant)
Sometimes, these effects are extremely widespread and may even affect an entire society. As seen in the aftermath of the Rodney King incident in 1991, if many members of a group become frustrated enough, riots could ensue. However, not all reactions and retaliations are violent. Some may, instead, push for some policy change or social movement to take place to help prevent future incidences.
In addition to analyzing the causes and effects of hate crimes, this paper examines recent hate crime statistics. By doing so, a more real and tangible understanding of hate crimes can be gained.
Descriptive Analysis
This descriptive analysis will provide the definition of a hate crime, providing statistics related to the specific categories listed in the definition as having the potential for members of that group to become victims of hate crimes. The specific categories will then be analyzed.31
The United States Department of Justice defines a hate crime as ―a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin‖ (Hate Crime-Crime in the United States).
Victims:
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report in
2006, the offender’s bias against a race was the cause of 52.1 percent of hate crimes committed. That is 5,020 crimes. The majority of the victims were attacked because of the offender’s bias against blacks. Whites were the second largest victim group. The third largest group had a multiple race background. These were followed by Asian or
Pacific Islanders, and finally American Indian or Alaskan native. (Victims)
Hate crimes because of bias against a particular race have long been a problem in
American society. African Americans in particular have been the victims of such crimes for centuries, since the days of slavery. Such crimes have unfortunately continued into the present age. Racially motivated crimes come in many forms. Burning crosses, a sign of the Ku Klux Klan, is still seen by African Americans today. Offenders may also physically attack the victim simply because they do not like their race.
The bias resulting in the second largest amount of hate crimes is a bias against a religion. This bias accounted for 18.1 percent of hate crimes reported in 2006, or 1,750 crimes. Over half of these crimes were due to the offender’s anti-Jewish bias. Around twelve percent were against followers of Islam. Catholics and Protestants were also victimized because of their religious preference. In addition, Atheists and Agnostics 32 were also victims, although crimes against them accounted for less than one percent of hate crimes last year. (Victims)
Religiously motivated hate crimes most often involve damage to property. Jews have been the most often attacked group for many years. Offenses against Muslims increased in 2001 after the terrorist attacks on September 11. (Hate Crimes Today: An
Age Old Foe in Modern Dress)
According to the Uniform Crime Report, 15.3 percent of hate crime victims were targeted because of the offender’s prejudice against a particular sexual orientation.
Crimes because of a sexual orientation accounted for 1,472 hate crimes in 2006. The majority of the victims were homosexual males. Homosexual females were the next largest victims group. Heterosexuals and bisexuals were also victimized. (Victims)
It is believed that hate crimes targeting homosexuals are the most common form of hate crimes among teenagers and young adults. Victims of hate crimes against their sexual orientation suffer serious psychological effects. Because their sexual orientation is so much a part of their self concept, the vulnerability that they associate with their sexual preference after a hate crime is quite traumatic. Research has also shown that it takes victims of hate crimes due to bias against sexual orientation longer to recover psychologically from being attacked. (Hate Crimes Today: An Age Old Foe in Modern
Dress)
Bias against an ethnic group or a specific national origin resulted in 13.5 percent of hate crimes reported in 2006. Victims of such crimes numbered 1,305. The only reported ethnicity or national origin reported in the Uniform Crime Report as being 33 victimized was Hispanic. Anti Hispanic bias resulted in 62.8 percent of hate crimes against a particular ethnic group. The other 37.2 percent of victims were listed as belonging to ―other‖ ethnic groups or national origins. (Victims)
Hate crimes motivated by a bias against an ethnicity or national origin are often motivated by an anti immigrant bias. This is a debate that has been brought back to the attention of the American public in recent years. Many of the crimes committed against
Hispanics are due to the victim’s real or perceived immigration status. Attacks on
Hispanics have quite a long history in the Southwest and throughout California. Arab
Americans also experienced a wave of resentment following the terrorist attacks on
September 11, 2001. This hostility still continues among some Americans today who still feel wary of Middle Easterners. (Hate Crimes Today: An Age Old Foe in Modern
Dress)
One percent of hate crime victims were attacked because of the offender’s bias against a disability. Ninety five disabled persons were victimized in 2006. Seventy four of these victims suffered from a mental disability. Twenty one had some type of physical disability. (Victims)
People with disabilities are sometimes seen as not equal or contributing members of society. They are also seen as easy targets to offenders. Discriminatory behavior towards disabled persons can manifest itself in many forms. There is often an increased risk for sexual and physical abuse against disabled persons. (Hate Crimes Today: An
Age Old Foe in Modern Dress)34
Offenses and Offenders:
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 2006 Uniform Crime Report recorded 9,080 reported hate crime offenses. Sixty percent of reported offenses were crimes against persons. Almost half of these offenses are threats or intimidation. Simple assaults account for slightly more than thirty percent and aggravated assaults for about twenty percent. Three of the reported crimes were murders and six were forcible rapes.
(Incidents)
The remaining forty percent of reported bias-motivated offenses were crimes against property. An overwhelming majority (81 percent) of these offenses were acts of destruction, damage, or vandalism. The remaining nineteen percent of crimes against 35 property consisted of robbery, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, and other crimes. (Incidents) Several different types of victims are targets of crimes against property. In 2006, the FBI reported that half of bias-motivated property crimes were directed at individuals.
Twelve percent were targeted against businesses or financial institutions. Nine percent of offenses were against the government and seven percent were against religious organizations. The remaining crimes were directed at other, multiple, or unknown victim types. (Incidents) Reporting agencies also often specify the locations of bias-motivated offenses. In
2006, it is reported that 31 percent of crimes occurred in or near residences or homes.
Eighteen percent occurred on highways, roads, alleys, or streets. Colleges or schools were the locations of 12.2 percent of the reported offenses. Parking lots or garages were the locations for 6.1 percent of crimes. Four percent of the crimes occurred in churches, synagogues, or temples. Commercial office buildings were the locations of 2.5 percent of crimes while bars and nightclubs were the locations for 2.1 percent. Slightly over thirteen percent of offenses occurred at public buildings, air/bus/train terminals, convenience stores or other specified locations. The remaining eleven percent of reported crimes occurred at unknown or unspecified locations. (Location Type) People often perceive hate crime perpetrators as radicals, such as neo-Nazis or
―skinheads‖ or Klansmen in white robes and hoods. However, relatively few hate crimes are committed by members of such groups. The perpetrators are most often people with a personal prejudice. They are normally law-abiding. What sets them apart from the general public is their discomfort with, or possibly fear of, social change. Such change 36 could seem threatening and cause a hate-filled reaction that the offender would not see as wrong. Extreme hate crimes tend to be committed by people with a history of antisocial behavior. Also, while they are ―seldom affluent or well-educated, hate crime offenders are not distinctive in their evaluations of their economic circumstances, current or prospective.‖ (Causes of Hate Crimes) Well at least you mention the economic causes. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Report identifies known hate crime offenders by race. In 2006, 58.6 percent of known hate crime offenders were white. Twenty percent of offenders were black. Almost six percent were groups made up of individuals of various races. One percent of offenders were Asian/Pacific Islanders and another one percent were American Indian or Alaskan native. Thirteen percent of known offenders were of unknown race. (Offenders) According to the organization Partners Against Hate, 29 percent of all known hate crime offenders are between the ages of 18 and 24. Thirty-three percent of all offenders are under age 18. Thirty-one percent of all violent crime offenders and 46 percent of property crime offenders are under 18 years of age. (Partners Against Hate)
In addition to analyzing hate crimes in the United States, this paper will look at hate crime laws internationally. It is important to examine such laws in order to observe both strengths and weaknesses in the United States hate crime laws.
Comparative Analysis The United States Department of Justice defines a hate crime as ―a criminal offense committed against a person, property or society that is motivated, in 37 whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin‖ (Hate Crime-Crime in the United States).
The American justice system gives a clear definition of what constitutes a hate crime. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s reported statistics for bias-motivated offenses reflect both the specific categories of prejudices and the types of offenses outlined in the federal definition. This paper will compare the United States’ definition of a hate crime with that of four other industrialized nations: Canada, Great Britain,
Australia, and Germany. This analysis will address both similarities and differences in the United States government’s concept of hate crime and that of the four other nations. The Canadian government also distinguishes hate crimes by categories of the victims. In the Criminal Code, ―identifiable groups‖ are recognized as ―any section of the public distinguished by race, religion, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation.‖ Sexual orientation was added in 2005. Unlike the United States, Canada’s government does not recognize the disabled as a group affected by hate crimes. The Criminal Code does, however, include genocide or advocating genocide as a form of hate crime. The Code also includes punishment for any who incite hatred against an identifiable group by speaking out in a public place. (Criminal Code)
The British government’s definition of a hate crime allows for much greater interpretation. The British government defines a hate crime as ―any incident, which constitutes a criminal offense, which is perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by prejudice or hate‖ The government recognizes that most victims can be categorized by race, color, ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. However, the definition allows for greater interpretation 38 based on the view of the victim or anyone else associated with the offense. (Crimes and
Victims)
The Australian government does not define hate crime nor does it have laws designed specifically for such crimes. Instead, it includes bias-motivated offenses in existing anti-discrimination laws. ―Vilification‖ is behavior that is considered offensive.
There are laws to prevent age, race, sex, and disability discrimination but only the Racial
Discrimination Act prohibits offense behavior based on race, or vilification. Offensive behavior based on other categories is not defined as vilification or as a crime by the
Attorney General’s Department. (Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination) The German government does not define hate crime. The Criminal Code does, however, contain laws to punish religious intolerance in society. Anyone who publicly insults another’s faith in any way that could disturb the peace is subject to a fine or possible imprisonment. Crimes are not distinguished by the victim group. Therefore, hate crimes are not recognized by the German government, they are only seen as crimes.
(Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB))
Expectations for the Future
It would be naïve to believe that hate crimes will disappear entirely. These bias motivated offenses are caused by prejudices. Unfortunately, prejudices will always exist in society. People will always have a fear of things that are different and that they do not understand. This includes other races, ethnicities, religions, sexual orientations, or disabilities. Hate crimes may continue to exist alongside the evolution of society. Interaction among different groups of people will increase. More people are professing to be 39 homosexual. Immigration is a hot button issue that will likely be much debated over the next few years. This progress will give hate crime offenders more reasons and opportunities to commit their crimes. Although prejudices will always exist, the likelihood that people will express them with violence will decrease. It is likely that hate crimes will be viewed with more contempt as society progresses.
Prejudices and stereotypes, which were once quite common and accepted, have become much less tolerable in modern culture. One could easily assume that such beliefs will become less tolerated in the near future. However, while these beliefs may not be socially acceptable and may not be flaunted by most, they will still exist. Communities will likely continue to make it known that hate will not be tolerated. Diversity is becoming more desired and even celebrated and such acceptance is also expected to continue to grow. Recommendations of Social Policy
As communities strive to make hate unacceptable, their beliefs will spread to politicians, government officials, and police agencies. Once police agencies realize how important the issue of hate is in their community, they may treat the crimes as being more meaningful. In the future, more effective policies will likely be developed to help police deal with hate crimes. Good—you moved this to Social Policy.
The next step would be state governments. State governments can be expected to pass more statutes relating to hate crimes and their prosecution. The federal government will also likely continue to work to prevent hate crimes in America. This will involve 40 preaching a message of acceptance, passing more laws against hate crimes, and continuing to impose harsh punishments for hate crime offenders.
It is important for victims of hate crimes to feel as though they can report these crimes and know that they will be treated with respect. Police should be trained to be sensitive to different cultures in order to better serve the members of their community.
Police agencies must also treat hate crimes seriously. Victims must know that their situation will be considered important.
Unfortunately, many American police agencies do not incorporate hate crime training as a standard part of their recruiting or in-service training programs, believing that hate crimes are not an issue in their community. Agencies around the country, regardless of how they believe hate crimes affect their area, should adopt programs to train officers on how to properly handle hate crimes. These procedures should include the most effective ways to investigate hate crimes, how to interview victims, how to make the community feel safe, and how to prevent more incidents of hate crimes. (Bell)
Police departments also need to develop specific policies for how to handle hate crimes. Officers should know whom to notify, which records to maintain, and what procedures should be followed with the victim. (Levin and McDevitt)
Policies should also be trained to assist individual groups affected by hate crimes.
Police should be instructed to report hate crimes based on group – gender, sexual orientation, type of disability, race, ethnic group or national origin, or religious preference. By identifying crimes according to group, better records can be maintained and researchers can better categorize the crimes.41
Although the definition of hate crimes, as defined by the United States
Department of Justice, has already been changed to include more groups, officials should consider further expanding the definition. Age and political affiliation could possibly be added to the groups that are considered victims of hate crimes.
Much has been done on the federal level to prevent hate crimes. Laws have been passed to collect official data about hate crimes, expand the definition, and enforce harsher penalties for hate crime offences. However, these acts to prevent hate crimes have been met with much opposition. Many feel that it is hard to distinguish between hate speech that could constitute a hate crime and free speech guaranteed in the First
Amendment. It is important for government leaders to differentiate between the two and to create laws in a way that citizens clearly understand what constitutes a hate crime. No discussion of reducing poverty – econ impact on hate crime.
Summary and Conclusion
Hate crimes are an ugly, unfortunate part of American society, in both past and present. Hate can be seen from the lynchings of the early twentieth century to the events surrounding the Jena Six just last year. These crimes are committed because prejudice still exists, for many different reasons. Hate crimes effects are far reaching, from the individual victim to the community as a whole.
Hate offenses are motivated by a bias toward a particular race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or ethnicity or national origin. Many people fear that which is different. Unfortunately, this will not go away in the future. Therefore, hate crimes will continue to be a part of our society.Much has been done to prevent hate crimes, but, much more needs to be done. Police agencies need more training and better policies. Victims need more assistance and communities need to be made safer. Laws need to be made in a clearer manner to be less controversial. There will always be a battle against hate in society and it must be fought with vigor and passion.43
Bibliography
Altschiller, Donald. Hate Crimes. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc., 1999.
Altschiller, Donald. Hate Crimes Second Edition. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc.,
2005.
―Anti-Lynching Bill." NAACP. National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People. http://www.naacp.org/about/history/anti_lynching_bill_background/.
Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum. Hatred, Bigotry, and Prejudice: Definitions,
Causes and Solutions. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1999.
Bell, Jeannine. Policing Hatred. New York, NY: New York University Press, 2002.
"The Case of the Jena Six." Democracy Now. 10 July 2007. Democracy Now. http://www.democracynow.org/2007/7/10/the_case_of_the_jena_six. "Causes of Hate Crimes." APA Online. APA. http://www.apa.org/ppo/issues/pgreen.html
"Crimes and Victims." Hate Crimes. Home Office. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crimevictims/reducing-crime/hate-crime/.
"Criminal Code." Department of Justice Canada. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C- 46/20080427/en?command=home&caller=SI&fragment=hate%20crime&search_t ype=all&day=27&month=4&year=2008&search_domain=cs&showall=L&statute year=all&lengthannual=50&length=50.
"Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB)." Federal Ministry of Justice. http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/StGB.htm#185. "Culture Shock: D.W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation." Culture Shock: Theater, Film, and Video. PBS. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/flashpoints/theater/birthofanation_a.html. Farhi, Paul, ―Don Imus is Fired by CBS Radio.‖ Washington Post 13 April 2007:A01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/04/12/AR2007041201007.html. Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B., and Diana Ruth Grant. Crimes of Hate: Selected Readings.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, 2004.
"Hate Crime-Crime in the United States." Crime in the United States. 2004. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/hate_crime/index.html.52 "Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe in Modern Dress." APA Online. American
Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/releases/hate.html.
"Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination." Attorney General's Department. Oct 2006.
Australian Government. http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Humanrightsandantidiscrimination_Agediscrimination. "Incidents." Hate Crimes Statistics 2006. 2006. U.S. Department of Justice Federal
Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/incidents.html.
"Ku Klux Klan." Extremism in America. Anti-Defamation League. http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/intro.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEAR N_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=4&item=kkk.
Levin, Jack and Jack McDevitt. Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and
Bloodshed. New York, NY: Plenum Press, 1993.
Levin, Jack and Jack McDevitt. Hate Crimes Revisited. Boulder, CO: Westview Press,
2002.
―Location Type.‖ Hate Crimes Statistics 2006. 2006. U.S. Department of Justice Federal
Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/location.html.
"Matthew's Life." Matthew Shepard Foundation. Matthew Shepard Foundation. http://www.matthewshepard.org/site/PageServer?pagename=mat_Matthews_Life. Mecklin, John. The Ku Klux Klan: A Study of the American Mind. New York, NY:
Russell & Russell, 1963.
―Offenders.‖ Hate Crimes Statistics 2006. 2006. U.S. Department of Justice Federal
Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/offenders.html.
Partners Against Hate. http://www.partnersagainsthate.org/.
Perloff, Richard M. "The Press and Lynching of African Americans." Cleveland State
University. 2000. Cleveland State University. http://academic.csuohio.edu/perloffr/lynching/. Perry, Barbara. In the Name of Hate. New York, NY: Routledge, 2001.
Raper, Arthur F. The Tragedy of Lynching. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc., 2003.
Rupesinghe, Kumar. The Culture of Violence. Tokyo: United Nations University Press,
1994.53
―Uniform Crime Report 2001.‖ 2001. Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/01hate.pdf. "Victims." Hate Crime Statistics 2006. 2006. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/victims.html.
"Wisconsin v. Mitchell (92-515), 508 U.S. 47 (1993)." Supreme Court Collection.
Cornell University Law School. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-
515.ZO.html.
Very strong writing. Well organized. Well researched.
My only recommendation was to analyze the economic side of this: econ oppression leads to social stress, including hate crimes. People like to blame someone, scapegoat them, when they are not doing as well as they might. I feel better if there is someone worse off than me.