Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
In the case of an extreme situation, such as the death or near death of another, intentionality is a clear indicator of culpability and should be constitutionally supported. The constitution is a litmus of the culture and open violation of the intentions of the constitution, i.e. To protect the rights of all should be an allowable designation for increased sanctions against those who perpetrate such crime.
Pros and Cons of Hate Crime Legislation:
The constitutionality of hate crime laws has been challenged almost since their inception, as the idea that a crime perpetrated to racial intent should not be considered any more heinous than one perpetrated against another, say for monetary gain. If the act is one of violence then according to a purely legalistic approach the acts are equal and should be treated as such. Yet, intention is often an aspect of legislation and rulings, one example is the designation of manslaughter and first degree murder in the common law legal tradition. A human life was taken and yet when it was done with full intention and even planning it is considered worse than if it was perpetrated by accident (say as in an auto accident). The argument against hate crime legislation is a constitutional argument, in that if a crime is committed and equal damage is done then punishment should be equal. Yet, most people will agree that a crime becomes somehow worse, morally and ethically if it is perpetrated against what is considered a "weaker" individual, and is based on the perpetrators idea of the others lack of value. (Grattet & Jenness, 2001, p. 653) (Grattet, 2000, p. 567) Another argument against hate crime legislation is that of intention, few such crimes are openly clear cut, such as the case of Matthew Shepard where the perpetrators made it clear in their dogma and testimony that the motivation for their crime was their personal hatred for homosexuality, or the case of the vehicular dragging death of a black man. The argument is that intention is often an internal drive that cannot be clearly proven and therefore cannot be applied in cases where intention is foggy. These detractors fear that all crimes perpetrated against minorities will receive special attention and designation that is not necessarily provable, while other equally heinous crimes will receive less attention because they do not ring of hate crime. (Grattet, 2000, p. 567) These detractors say that all crime, and especially violent crime is to some degree a "hate crime" as in the act the perpetrator is enforcing an ideology of superiority or greater rights than an "other." Yet, intention has nearly always been an aspect of legal rulings, the determination of charges and an aspect of sentencing and will likely remain so. (Grattet, 2000, p. 567)
Another argument against the special legislation of hate crime is that gender, often considered an indicator of minority status already overburdens the legal system. The fear being that because a man killed or beat a woman that the individual man can be charged under the auspices of hate crime rulings. Yet, as the laws have played out in the past there is a clear sense that the scenarios for such applications would be limited. If a man kills his wife it is not because she is a woman, but because she is his wife. While if a man kills a woman who is just leaving a National Organization for Women (NOW) meeting and he makes clear that his intention to kill her was because she was a woman's rights activist then hate crime laws should apply. It is clear to most people that this the legal definitions of a hate crime are relatively clear, but offer an additional thought process and avenue for prosecutors to make sure that certain crimes, by degree, are punished in the same fashion, by degree. The same people that argue that all crimes are hate crimes, and therefore should be charged and prosecuted equally, and without special cause might also have to argue that archaic ideas of tit for tat should apply. In other words if a person takes another's life, even in an accident he or she should be prosecuted as a first degree murderer, regardless of intent. This is clearly not the historical sentiment of criminal law, as intention is a clear indicator of the need to more or less severely punish the perpetrator. (Brooks, 1994, pp. 703-742)
As intentionality and motivation have always been an aspect of crime legislation, charging and sentencing, they will likely remain so. There is a clear sense, by society that the definition of hate crimes is crucial to the allowance of the legal and criminal justice systems to publicly and fiercely challenge the seeds of hate. If such legislation did not exist the sense of community as a protector of the vulnerable would be lost. as, this culture has created a vulnerable population, in many ways it should also be aware of the consequences of further maltreatment of it. The fight to equalize our population, though it is often waylaid by practicality should continue in this line and exceptional tools should remain an aspect of hate crime legislation and rulings.
Brooks, T.D. (1994). First Amendment - Penalty Enhancement for Hate Crimes: Content Regulation, Questionable State Interests and Non-Traditional Sentencing. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 84(4), 703-742.
Grattet, R., & Jenness, V. (2001). Examining the Boundaries of Hate Crime Law: Disabilities and the "Dilemma of Difference." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 91(3), 653.
Grattet, S.P. (2000). Judicial Rhetoric, Meaning-Making, and the Institutionalization of Hate Crime Law. Law & Society Review, 34(3), 567-606.
Hamm, M.S. (1994). American Skinheads the Criminology and Control of Hate Crime. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Kelly, R.J. & Maghan, J. (Eds.). (1998). Hate Crime: The Global Politics of Polarization. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
"Hate Crimes Historical Origins Of" (2008, February 24) Retrieved October 22, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/hate-crimes-historical-origins-of-31987
"Hate Crimes Historical Origins Of" 24 February 2008. Web.22 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/hate-crimes-historical-origins-of-31987>
"Hate Crimes Historical Origins Of", 24 February 2008, Accessed.22 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/hate-crimes-historical-origins-of-31987
era through the great depression_ The economy of the United States was faced with fair share of challenges towards the close of the 19th century that had to be mitigated lets they got out of control. Other than the economic woes, there were also widespread social injustices. There was eminent war between capital and labor. Progressive era was realized in the very last years of the 19th century up to
(1990) Municipal Government Involvement in Crime Prevention in Canada. This work provides insight into the way that municipal government interacts with the police in the organization of crime prevention structures and the delivery of crime prevention services and activities. (Hastings, 1990, p. 108) The idea of municipal government interaction in crime prevention is shown to have been spurred on in Canada by "....the successes of locally organized and community-based initiatives
Based on the foregoing considerations, it is suggested that the DCMP restructure their existing training programs and administration so that a more unified and centralized plan is in place, as well as providing for better instructor qualifications, evaluation, learning retention and more efficient and effective use of resources which are by definition scarce. These broad general issues were refined for the purposes of this study into the research questions stated
Southern law enforcement agencies have been armed with so-called 287 (g) laws that systematically target undocumented aliens and allow them to enforce Federal immigration law using racial profiling. This has made Latino crime victims and witnesses reluctant to testify and more reluctant to cooperate with police. In effect, what it has created is a subclass of people who exist beyond the protection of the law. It is assumed that
The German suffering after the first world war and the humiliation of Germany with other nations gave the Nazis the opportunity to feed hatred of the Jews and at the same time promise that if the People gave in to the Nazi ideology, they would be in the land that would hold them a superior way of life. That the followers of Hitler followed the Ideals as true and that
This is also possibly the least well-documented phenomenon in the racializing of Arabs and Muslims leading to the widespread acceptance of profiling and related loss of civil liberties." (2002) The work of Nicole J. Henderson (2001) entitled: "Law Enforcement & Arab-American Community Relations After September 11, 2001" reports a study in which Arabs living in the United States were interviewed. Henderson reports that when asked about hate crimes "...community respondents
Figure 1. Demographic composition of the United States (2003 estimate). Source: Based on tabular data in World Factbook, 2007 (no separate listing is maintained for Hispanics). From a strictly percentage perspective, it would seem that Asian-Americans do not represent much of a threat at all to mainstream American society, but these mere numbers do not tell the whole story of course. For one thing, Asian-Americans are one of the most diverse and