HATE CRIMES

Hate crimes

Hate Crimes

Introduction Crimes of hate and crimes of violence cannot be tolerated in our country. David Cameron and many members of Congress who back hate-crime laws say that the laws send a clear message to the British public that violence motivated by personal prejudice against a particular group will not be tolerated (Schwartz 2006 :171). They say members of minority groups have a right to live without the fear that they will be attacked because of their identity. Hate-crime laws, they contend, help protect that right. By instituting a strict federal law against hate crimes, supporters say, the UK could reverse the rising tide of such crimes reported by law enforcement officials.

Discussion

On the other hand, some policy makers argue that all crimes are motivated by some form of hate, and that hate-crime laws are therefore redundant and unnecessary. They point out that there are already laws against murder, vandalism and assault and that those crimes are fully punishable regardless of why they were committed (Schwartz 2006 :171). For example, critics of hate-crime laws note that in the murder cases, the accused perpetrators could already face the ultimate penalty--death--if they are found guilty. Hate-crime laws could not possibly worsen their punishment, critics say.

Opponents of hate-crime laws say that the measures perpetuate inequality among UK citizens by singling out certain groups for special protection while excluding others. Why should it be any more a crime to attack a gay person, they ask, than a heterosexual person? Finally, opponents of hate-crime laws contend that the federal statute proposed by David Cameron would raise the possibility that a criminal could be tried for the same offense twice, something that is prohibited by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to the Constitution (Icke 2003:pp. 10).

Of concern to both liberals and conservatives, meanwhile, is the question of whether hate-crime laws violate UK citizens' constitutional right to free speech and expression. Hate-crime laws, say many observers, seek to punish some criminals more severely than others simply because of their beliefs. Critics contend that the laws therefore prohibit particular states of mind, in clear violation of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which protects freedom of speech. Other analysts, however, disagree. The laws, they say, punish crimes that result from bigoted beliefs, not the beliefs themselves. In addition, they point to the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in 1993 that upheld the constitutionality of state hate-crime laws (Smith 2007:pp.23).

Bias in the UK Society and the Rise of Hate-Crime Laws

Hate-crime laws are meant to prevent the occurrence of crimes motivated by bias against a particular group of people. Particularly in the form of racism--the belief that some races are by nature inferior to others--such bias figures prominently in the history of the UK and the rest of the world. The Ancient Greeks and Romans, for example, viewed most cultures outside their own as barbaric--a derogatory term of Greek origin that connotes moral inferiority and a lack of intelligence and sophistication (Kamine 2007:pp. 25).

All the groups in the UK whose members make up a minority of the population--such as blacks, Jews and Asians--have historically been viewed by many people with similar ...