Documented hate crimes based on sexual orientation are on the rise according to FBI statistics. Unfortunately, the FBI data does not report separately on crimes against those who are targeted for non-traditional gender expression. We know that anti-GLBT hate crimes are underreported.
State laws are inadequate to respond to these crimes. Only 27 states and the District of Columbia have hate crimes laws inclusive of sexual orientation, and only five of those and the District of Columbia are expressly transgender inclusive. A federal hate crimes law will strengthen existing laws by allowing the Department of Justice to assist local prosecutions, and where appropriate, investigate and prosecute cases.
Hate crimes are message crimes. Anti-LGBT hate violence, like all bias crimes, damages individuals, families, groups our communities. Perpetrators of anti-GLBT violence send a clear message to GLBT people, those perceived to be GLBT, or even their supporters, that they are unwelcome and unsafe in a particular community.
Most hate crimes are committed by “average people.” Perpetrators are typically not “psychos,” neo-nazis or skinheads, but are otherwise law-abiding people who disdain those who are different or fear those differences. Recent research suggests that anti-LGBT hate crime perpetrators perceive gay bashing to be socially sanctioned and therefore acceptable behavior.
Anti-GLBT hate crimes, like other bias crimes, are preventable. According to the American Psychological Association, “hate crimes are not necessarily random, uncontrollable, or inevitable occurrences,” and “there is overwhelming evidence that society can intervene to reduce or prevent many forms of violence, especially among young people, including the hate-induced violence that threatens and intimidates entire categories of people.”
Support for a federal hate crimes bill is widespread. Support from notable law enforcement agencies and state and local leaders includes 22 state attorneys general, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the Police Foundation and the National Sheriffs' Association. More than 175 law enforcement, civil rights and religious organizations that supported the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act.
Hope this helps. I am with you 100% on this.
2007-05-22 08:29:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by ROSE 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
"And before some bozo gets the chance to erroneously compare this with hate SPEECH legislation passed in other nations, allow me to say that we're talking about hate CRIMES legislation here. " You may be right about that. However, I think that those who oppose this legislation are doing so because they misunderstand the legislation to mean "Speech legislation" as you noted. So they are not Pro-hate crimes, they are just mis-informed about the legislation. That being said, I wonder if there is also some concern about non-speech activities that this would criminalize. For example, would it be a hate crime if a catholic church(or jewish synagogue...) refused to marry a gay couple or accept a Gay priest (Rabbi...) based on religious doctrine? Could the clergymen making these decisions be arrested under this bill? If so, this would force religious people to act against their faith in private religious settings. If not, again, this needs to be clarified for religious people to feel safe. By the way, I am fairly religious and conservative and I support this lesislation. I assume you really have stats to back up your claim!
2016-03-12 21:01:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Goldspider:
The law protects everyone!!! When you are protecting someone from crime against gender or sex that includes women AND men. When you are protecting someone from a crime motivated by hate of another race it doesn't just protect 'black' people... it protects all races of people! If you are a 'white' person and someone does something to you because they are motivated by hate of 'white' people then you will also be 'protected' under this law. What is your problem?!
2007-05-22 08:38:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by MorningStar 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hate crime legislation is bullsh*t on principle. Why should certain segments of our population be afforded additional "protection" against acts that are already illegal? How is assaulting a black man because you don't like black people worse than you assaulting that same person because you wanted to steal his wallet?
MorningStar
That's my whole point, ALL people are already protected against assault. What does the motive for that crime have to do with anything?
2007-05-22 08:28:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by goldspider79 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
All the NEW amendments are JUNK.
There is no need for legislation that says some people are "Special Cases".
All of us have EQUAL RIGHTS.
New amendments serve to say that SOME people must have SPECIAL rights .... and THAT'S NOT EQUAL.
ENFORCE THE LAW before adding NEW laws!
2007-05-22 08:25:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by Philip H 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
hopefully never
2007-05-22 08:28:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋