Hate Crime: Harassment, Intimidation, & Violence Motivated by Bias - Research Paper

Introduction

Hate crime entails a form of harassment, intimidation, and physical violence, which are motivated by bias against characteristics of individuals considered integral to their social identities like race, ethnicity, and religion. The perpetrator always targets people due to their membership in a particular group. Other groups may be judged by their language, nationality, sexual orientation, as well as physical appearance. However, bias incidents when the actions motivated by social identities are non-criminal (Iganski, & Lagou, 2015). Hate crimes are criminal acts and may cause physical assault, verbal abuse, and insults, bullying, and damage to personal property. Hate crime laws were enforced to deter violence that is motivated by bias. They criminalize a given speech category. The paper will focus on the hate crime law in California. In the state of California, hate crimes that are against the law can be either criminally prosecuted as misdemeanour or felony offenses.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Hate Crime Law in California

Under the California hate crimes law, the motivation for committing a hate crime by an individual may matter significantly to their eventual sentence. The statutes begin with Penal Code 422.55 PC that imposes severe and additional punishment due to harm, threats, and harassment caused to others because of their disability, gender, nationality, race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation (Trout, 2015). In California, the hate crimes law has two main parts. One of these is stipulated in the Penal Code 422.6 PC that makes it a stand-alone crime for interfering with the civil rights of a person, damaging or destroying their property since they possess particular characteristics (Iganski, & Lagou, 2015). The statute is against people who wilfully injure and intimidate others as they freely exercise and enjoy their rights and privileges secured to them by the Constitution based on the perceived characteristics of the victims.

The second one is Penal Code 422.7 PC and Penal Code 422.75 PC, which provide that if an individual commits a crime such as assault and vandalism and are motivated by the fact that they belong to a given race, ethnicity, sexual identity, nationality, gender, or are disabled, then the criminal offense will be considered a hate crime that may lead to enhanced sentence (Gerstenfeld, 2017). In California, various crimes may be seen as those brought forth by hate against some social identities. For instance, during the election, a man may stand outside a polling place and pretend to be a volunteer. However, on arrival of Hispanic voters at the polling place, he may give them incorrect information about where they should cast their ballot.

Consequently, the man can be charged under the hate crime law of California for interfering with the civil rights of Hispanic voters based on their ethnicity. Another case would be a woman who threatens violence against homosexual male couples. The woman can be charged under the criminal threats law of California and may face additional years of imprisonment if the prosecutor proves that the threats were motivated by the sexual orientation of the couples (Meyer, 2014). At circumstances, teenagers may vandalize a Jewish temple. These teenagers could be charged with ordinary vandalism and face severe penalties if their acts were due to bias against the Jewish religion.

Ideally, some people may be wrongly accused of committing hate crimes. This comes about due to the rush judgment merely since the alleged victim comes from a different ethnic or social identity from that of the defendant (Iganski, & Lagou, 2015). Prosecutors may also make the case bigger than it would seem hence leading to longer sentences for defendants as the former argue that the crime committed was motivated by racial or gender bias. When one is accused of California hate crime, a criminal defense attorney with the relevant skills can help the accused reduce the severity of charges through the legal defense.

History of Hate Crime Laws and Recent Laws in Some States for New Protected Classes

The origin of laws on hate crime and bias-motivated acts as a specific criminal conduct category is shrouded in some aspect of uncertainty. However, it is evident that after the enactment of American Civil War laws, the regulations provided an avenue for status-based protection (Levin, 2015). Conversely, the federal rights that were passed at that period of American history were aimed at protecting vulnerable groups based on race and previous servitude conditions. The laws did not provide for enhanced and aggravated penalties. The modern laws on hate crime can be traced to the Civil Rights Movement period that culminated when the Civil Rights Act of 1968 was enacted (Trout, 2015). The law recognized that criminal conduct might be motivated by prejudice and bias towards others based on their nationality, race, color, and religion. The Act did not impose aggravated penalties on the perpetrators.

As such, the imposition of aggravated penalties reflects the denunciation of criminal conduct in modern society. Such criminal conducts are motivated by biases. Since the Hate Crimes Statistics Act was enforced in 1990, the U.S. has passed several federal hate crime laws (Trout, 2015). Contemporarily, these laws recognize a broad spectrum of the characteristics of victims that comprise of ethnicity, disability, religion, race, gender, as well as sexual orientation.

In 1994, the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act was enacted. By the 21st century, most of the U.S. states and the federal government had passed laws that mandate additional penalties for crimes motivated by bias (Meyer, 2014). As opposed to most of the broad state laws, federal law tends to allow for hate crime prosecution based on race, color, religion, and nationality of the victims. Based on the politics of this issue and the actual incidence of such criminal acts, many victims of hate crimes are seen as women, and religious minorities.

Concisely, homeless individuals are vulnerable to intimidation and victimization that may lead to fatalities. Public policy that tends to criminalize such a population may exacerbate the aspect of their victimization. In essence, various states have turned to law enforcement agencies to include crimes against the homeless as part of hate-crime laws so that they respond to those who live in public spaces (Levin, 2015). As such, the implementation of legislation to include homeless individuals as a protected group in the hate crime statutes is of great concern for different states. Maryland State has included the homeless in its hate crime statutes. In this state, hate crimes and related incidents have increased significantly since the presidential campaign of 2016. Between 2016 and 2017, the reported hate incidents and crimes in Maryland were 693 (Levin, 2015). The number was almost double the one between 2014 and 2016 (Iganski, & Lagou, 2015).

Precisely, the statute that covers the homeless in Maryland is Md. Code Ann. Crim. Law Sections 10-301. The statute defines hate crimes against the homeless and individuals with particular sexual orientations. It also expands to include the first responders. Other states that protect the rights of the homeless against hate crimes are Washington, D.C., Maine, Florida, and the District of Columbia (Meyer, 2014). The issue of violence against homeless individuals has increasingly gained national attention. The National Coalition for the Homeless has called attacks imposed on the homeless.

The Resources That Exist to Assist Victims of Hate Crimes on the Federal, State and Local Level

One of the resources is the Bureau of Justice Assistance: A Policymaker's Guide to Hate Crimes. The monograph examines the strides that the federal government has put in place as it creates a baseline of data regarding hate crimes, as well as the problems, which impede the reporting of incidents of hate crimes (Trout, 2015). It also shows the various state laws in the contemporary systems and the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court concerning hate crimes (Levin, 2015). Preventive measures to help deal with the offenders of hate crimes are established in this monograph; hence it educates and guides public officials to develop policies aimed at addressing the issue of hate crimes, which is considered as an insidious problem.

The resource is effective as it shows a range of factors that may create a climate where people engage in criminal actions motivated by their biases. These factors may consist of uncertain economic conditions, racial stereotyping in films and the media, talk shows filled with hate, and using racial code languages like the welfare mothers. It provides an example of the case of videotaped beating of Rodney King and depicts that such an incident may trigger various other hate crimes (Levin, 2015). Additionally, from the monograph, it is evident that most hate crimes are caused by individual citizens and not organized hate group members (Iganski, & Lagou, 2015). Some victims also fail to report hate crimes due to various reasons. For instance, homosexual victims may not report the crimes to police as they fear reprisals, which may consequently affect their family relationships. Immigrant victims may be undocumented, and non-proficient in English hence do not report the crimes for fear of deportation.

Another resource is the LACP Law Enforcement Policy Center: Investigation of Hate Crimes. The policy establishes guidelines for the identification and investigation of hate crimes and assists victimized persons and communities (Meyer, 2014). Through law enforcement, their strong response would help stabilize and calm communities while aiding the recovery of victims. The agency views any acts and threats of harassment, damage to property, violence, and intimidation that infringe the rights of individuals. It also employs the relevant personnel and resources to enhance the identification and arrest of perpetrators of hate crimes (Gerstenfeld, 2017). In essence, a system is developed for the collection, analysis, and reporting of criminal incidents that are directed against people due to religion, race, sexual and gender identities, ethnicity, and disability.

Conclusion

For future hate crime tides to be prevented, the public, law enforcement agencies, political leaders, as well as state, local and federal agencies should work together to identify and track any cases of hate crimes and incorporate efficient mitigation mechanisms through statutes and awareness creation. Through these, people will understand when they are exposed to such acts and the penalties imposed on the perpetrators. A range of states in the U.S. has enacted various laws to help combat hate crimes. The policymakers can also develop strategies and initiatives aimed at promoting the training of law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to ensure that they record and act upon hate crimes. Accurate reporting, proper investigation, and prosecution of these crimes would also be of great vitality in curbing the menace.

References

Gerstenfeld, P. B. (2017). Hate Crime. The Wiley Handbook of Violence and Aggression, 1-13. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781119057574.whbva013

Iganski, P., & Lagou, S. (2015). Hate crimes hurt some more than others: Implications for the just sentencing of offenders. Journal of interpersonal violence, 30(10), 1696-1718. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260514548584

Levin, B. (2015). Reassessing laws on hate violence against the homeless. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(13), 1715-1728. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002764215590604

Meyer, D. (2014). Resisting hate crime discourse: Queer and intersectional challenges to neoliberal hate crim...