Friday, September 4, 2009
How Hate Crime Laws Affect Prejudice
Hate crime laws were created with intentions to decrease racism. However, in my generation, discrimination seems to steadily diminish every year. Only about fifty-five years ago, public schools were still segregated. Just under a decade before that, the Holocaust was still in effect. Many people claim that the amount of crimes, based on race especially, is rising. But, when you take a look back in our history, a great deal has changed in very little time. It's absurd to think that racism could possibly be getting any worse. So why, then, are these laws necessary now? In many ways, this could make prejudice more of an issue. Some wrongdoings are not based on race, religion, or ethnicity, but if these laws are in effect, the case must be looked at as a possible hate crime. Therefore, if racism does almost completely disappear, the law will still be looking into it as one of discrimination. Does this not encourage segregated beliefs?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Even if racism is not, as you say, getting any worse, there is still the contention that it does exist. And if racism exists then we must do all that we can to stop it. This may include using hate crime legislation to halt would-be criminals before they perpetrate their crimes. I do not want to use the terms hate crime and hate speech interchangeably. I believe wholeheartedly in the first ammendment of the Constitution and the free speech that it upholds. However, I want to be clear that I think that crimes cross the line between speech and action and that once a person crosses that line their punishment should also increase exponentially. In the case of murder, their should be a federal exception that allows for capital punishment regardless of the state in which the crime was committed. The argument is whether people are more likely to commit a crime if the victim is of a certain subgroup and whether the threat of extra punishments would deter in any way the comission of the crime or if it is only a token, feel-good move on legislators part. I think that there is some merit to hate crimes legislation when it comes to misdemeanors and some lesser felonies, but that the law may create more problems than it solves in terms of other felonies.
ReplyDeleteI agree that prejudice is a problem, I just do not think adding any extra punishment is going to solve anything. Actually, statistics show that the laws haven't really made a difference at all. If a criminal is intent on making a point, an extra law will most likely not stop it. All criminals know they are breaking the law, and there is a possibility of getting in trouble. Yet, laws are still broken every day. Congress has wasted over twenty years trying to pass the useless laws that are in effect now. Maybe instead, the government should come up with some ideas that might actually work. To successfully prevent crimes in the future, you must aim to change the views of children. Although this may create some controversy, I believe once the parents are well-educated on exactly what the plan will consist of, most of the population would agree to let their children participate. Speakers or famous athletes and singers could attend schools and speak with the children, much like the drug program D.A.R.E. However, if it is too difficult to get parents to agree, then simply have influential commercials. I just believe that, in order to successfully stop prejudice beliefs, a well thought-out plan is necessary.
ReplyDelete