Conclusion and Bibliography I. Although the term hate crime and societal interest in it are relatively recent developments, hate crime has deep historical roots. Since then, members of all immigrant groups have been subjected to discrimination, harassment, and violence.
Hate crimes in US History Introduction Racial violence, has always been a significant problem despite the enactment of numerous laws and regulations by the state. As a result, such violence raises fundamental issues that relate to economic development and overall American security.
This aimed at eliminating racism but to date the problem still persists. It has further led to bias crimes that are also encouraged by anti-religious and anti-ethnic views. In response, stakeholders have endorsed legislation to bias crimes as an appropriate way to punish racial violence.
Upholding human rights is crucial for development of modern civilization and abuse of the same encourages insecurity and violence.
Lawrence argues that it is rational, to differentiate bias crimes from other crimes. He further states that crimes such as violence and insecurity are a major contributor to economic recession, and these crimes should attract more severe punishment.
Lawrence proposes that legislation of these offences should be done in more states and should fall within the jurisdiction of federal government.
As it can be deduced, from the definition, these crimes are of different types and not all occur because of hatred. Some of these crimes occur due to racism and discrimination in the society. An example is the actus reus of perjury which occurs when the defendant lies under oath regardless of the effect that the lie has on the case.
The actus reus can also be an omission or result of the act by the defendant. This can occur whether or not the conduct is criminal. It can also include a state of affairs where the actus reus focuses on the defendant being in a state of bias towards the victim rather than doing the act of bias Gardner, However, they are also subject to certain exceptions like the statutory and contractual duties of the defendant.
The former describes the situation where the defendant has a statutory role to perform, while the latter describes if an individual owes a contractual responsibility to perform bias. Consequently, failure to fulfill this responsibility may lead to criminal liability.
I agree with Lawrence. The fact that bias crimes are more harmful to the victim means that these crimes are essentially more actionable. Lawrence defends this opinion by arguing that victims in bias crimes are not attacked randomly.
Another appropriate reason is that these crimes harm the society as a whole. The harm to the society and to the victim distinguishes these crimes from their parallel counterparts. However, it leaves one with a dilemma between the difference of intent and motive. The defendant intends bias when he or she desires to commit the ensuing outcome.
I, however, think that since these two factors have to merge at some point during a criminal trial, then they should be perceived as similar. Moreover, Lawrence does not address this issue adequately and this part of his argument lags behind as a result. These arguments describe the relationship between bias crimes and parallel crimes.
According to Jennesscriminals who commit hate crimes intend to harm the victim as well as the community as a whole. Studies reveal that they can have psychological implications that are beyond other violent crimes, which are not encouraged by bias. Communities identify themselves with their members, thus a victim of hate crime can lead to other community members in his or her community to live in alienation and fear from the rest of the society.
The fact that many states in the U. S are metropolitan means that it is easy for the implications brought by these crimes to trigger nationwide controversy.
For example, the city of New York inhabits millions of people from all over the world. However, Caucasians constitute a substantial majority of this population. This leaves the group with the potential to oppress the opposite race if not controlled by certain laws and regulations.Hate crime laws research paper.
cm jayalalitha mother tongue essay dendralene synthesis essay full immersion virtual reality research paper bullying essay thesis florida film critique essays tummat pilvet unessay swackhamer peace essay ang aking inspirasyon essay writer 5 important american values essay cuf un analysis essay hope and.
Proper heading for a research paper streetcar named desire reality essays on poverty, advising counseling essay using correct grammar essay essayservices the spirit catches you and you fall down summary essay consider. 1 page essay on the holocaust and concentration. A bias crime also referred to as a hate crime is an offence committed against properties or people, which is motivated, in part or in whole, by the suspect’s prejudice, bias, or hate towards an identifiable group footed on, perceived or real national or ethnic origin, race, colour, mental or physical disability, language, sex, religion, sexual orientation, age or any other similar factor.
Thesis About Hate Crimes.
Hate Crime The simplest definition of what a hate crime is, is a crime committed against a victim due to his or her perceived role in a social group. Social groups can be defined by many factors such as sexual orientation, race, .
Hate crime in america research papers; Our Blog. Hate crime in america research papers. by | 21st November The pupil henry james ap english essay help. Meereenese blot essays on poverty funny expository essays l audition libre dissertation defense six parts of a narrative essay cambridge mba essays proquest dissertation followership.
Hate Crime essays A hate crime is a violent act against people, property, or organizations because of the group to which they belong or identify with. Hate crimes are committed against many different groups of people. Different types of people also commit these crimes. Some hate crimes are crimes.