Hate Crime Law Seen Today

Hate Crime

Response to Bias-Motivated Violence

In the last three decades or so, nearly all American states have adopted a minimum of one statute, regarding a regulation for "hate crime." Such laws have assumed numerous forms, which include (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ):

• Laws prescribing criminal punishment for violation of civil rights;

• Specific "malicious harassment" and "ethnic intimidation" laws; and • Provisions of greater penalties in related laws already enacted for commission of an extant offense for prejudicial or bias reasons.

Several state statutes forbid organizational vandalism, religious objects' disfigurement or sacrilege, disturbance of or interference with religious worship, wearing masks or hoods, cross burning, distribution of ads and publications aimed at harassing specific groups in society, and secret society establishment (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ).

Social Control of Hate Crimes

Law enforcers at local, state, and federal levels have declared plans for increasing efforts to enforce laws pertaining to hate crime. This, probably, is most prominently evident in the development of specialized bias crime teams across the U.S. As per a 1997 LEMAS (Law Enforcement Management Administrative Statistics) survey of sheriff and police department operations, about 4 out of 10 cities inhabited by more than 0.5 million individuals and 3 out of 10 cities inhabited by more than 0.25 million citizens have a dedicated bias crime team with full-time staff (LEMAS 1997). The bias crime division of Los Angeles has 90 full-time officials, New York's division has 23, and Chicago has 16 full-time officials. The institution of similar special divisions within prosecutors' offices is observed throughout the nation (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ). In 1998, for instance, Gil Garcetti, District Attorney of the county of Los Angeles, declared plans to extend the hate-crime prosecution division within his office. He sought more specialized and qualified hate crime prosecuting attorneys for dealing with such cases. These prosecutors would work in tandem with all county law enforcers and communities, as well, for encouraging hate crime awareness and reporting (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ).

Social Control Efforts Undertaken

The categorization and understanding of any occurrence as being a hate crime is primarily important for front-line detectives and police officers. As has been explained by Martin (1996:459) in her article titled "Investigating Hate Crimes: Case Characteristics and Law Enforcement Responses," the preliminary identification of any incident as being potentially motivated by bias, perhaps, rests with patrol officials, in every police department. Police commonly use discretion on a routine basis, even if they clearly understand a given crime's definitions. However, in case of hate crimes, discretion is accompanied by rules and definitions which are not exactly clear to them, owing to the fact that this crime category is relatively new (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ). Martin claims that this scenario places unique responsibilities on officials tasked with ascertaining if an ordinary offence (arson, vandalism, assault, etc.) has taken place and assert if it is a "hate crime." Firstly, there are some officers who simply work on a case as though one can conveniently incorporate hate crimes into current police practices, failing to understand that enforcing hate crime statutes is different and challenging. On the other hand, there are some officers who register numerous complaints concerning hate crime law enforcement. For instance, some are of the opinion that laws in connection with hate crime are terribly ambiguous and vague, and hence, hard to enforce. Furthermore, law enforcers have more critical issues with which to deal with. In the year 1994, Congress passed a couple of hate crime statutes stipulating penalties as well as offering a legal solution (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ). VAWA (Violence against Women Act) stipulates that every individual in the U.S. will enjoy the right of being free from gender-motivated violent acts. Besides allocating more than $1.6 billion for educating society, justice personnel training, rape issue hotlines, victim services (particularly shelters for abused victims), and special prosecutor and police teams for addressing crimes against females, the VAWA offers a civil resolution for "gender-based crimes."

Future