OCR Text |
Show THE HATE CRIMES DEBATE IN UTAH Jennifer Lee Jones hate crime legislation maintain that the effect will be positive. Currently, vulnerable groups feel afraid to participate in society and segregate themselves out of the community because of a lack of trust in law enforcement and the judicial system. This belief stems from the perception that law enforcement authorities are apathetic to their needs and less likely to protect their interests. Enactment of legislation will have the effect of healing divisions between groups (Litvack, 2001). The counterpoint argument suggests that hate crimes legislation is more divisive to the community because the listing of specific protected classes of victims identifies them as different and therefore creates the perception they are unequally protected under the law. Thus, this effort to heal racial and other divisions within society succeeds only in accentuating and aggravating those divisions and pushing the protected classes further out of the mainstream. In a twist of logic, opponents assert that such laws lead to persecution of more minorities than non-minorities, consequently hurting the very people that the law was intended to protect (Reynolds, 2001). The existing level of cynicism would only be aggravated as minority groups come to perceive hate crimes laws as simply another tool for the "powers that be" to further oppress them. EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAMS Community leaders and law enforcement, such as city government, judges, police, and school officials, could take important steps to remedy the cynicism and distrust that minorities feel about the disparity in the judicial system. This change in perception can be brought about by improving public relations, and by implementing sensitivity training programs (Litvack, 2001). An example of this kind of training if offered by the Simon Wiesenthal Center's national Institutes against Hate Crimes at the Museum of Tolerance, brings together multidisciplinary teams of law enforcement professionals from cities, regions, and states, for four-day intensive courses that provides training seminars in diversity awareness and hate crime identification (BJA May, 2000 3-5). Another example is Stop The Hate Week that has been initiated in Massachusetts' middle and high schools as another method to increase the awareness of prejudice in the community and bias motivated crime. During the week, hate crimes curricula for students are distributed, and lists of bystander responsibilities for acting against bias, prejudice, and hate crimes are promoted. "Cultural and educational activities such as art exhibits on civil rights history; speaking events featuring survivors on the Holocaust; community forums, and a variety of programs are directed and sponsored by students themselves" (BJA May 2002 16). Other hate crime projects have been started by the Attorney General's Office in the states of Maine and Massachusetts (BJA, May 2000, 13-16). Initiatives have been implemented in Los Angeles County and the City of San Diego, California (BJA, 20007-11). CONCLUSION Hate-based crimes are a disturbing and complex problem in our society. However, the debate on hate crimes legislation seems to be based more on speculation than evidence. In the most recent statistical data, hate crime incidents rank very low in the percentage of all reported crime in the United States. This does not take into account though, that the data from the FBI concentrates on reported crimes, and there may be numerous instances of unreported crimes (Loven, 2001 Al). Camille Anthony presented "Shedding Light", a study of crime conducted by CCJJ, to the 2002 Utah State Legislature. She told them that "the most alarming [finding] was that victims don't report crime as a general rule" (Cantera, 2002. B2). Unreported crime does not allow law enforcement to fully understand the depth and scope of the real issue. Judy Kasten Bell, administrator with the Utah Domestic Violence Advisory Council, commented that social stigma prevents many victims from reporting crime committed against them. Therefore, it stands to reason that the distrust of law enforcement that minorities feel would keep them from reporting hate crimes, and would contribute to the lack of accurate statistical data. Moreover, the number of hate crimes may not coincide with the severity of such crimes. In an article entitled Hate Crimes, Worse by Definition, Bryan Leven wrote, "Hate crimes are more likely to involve excessive violence, multiple offenders, serial attacks, greater psychological trauma, a heightened risk of social disorder, and a greater expenditure of resources to resolve." Studies have shown that hate crimes are seven times more likely to involve attacks against persons, two times more likely to cause injury, and four times more likely to cause hospitalization when compared to crimes in general (Leven, 1999, 12). Routinely, hate crimes are more premeditated than other types of crimes because they are typically preceded first, by acts of intimidation, as in the case of the Jewish woman. Examples, such as the ones mentioned in this paper, illustrate the severity and heinous nature of these vicious acts, and shows a need for enhanced punishment because of the pre-selection of the victim, and the extra measures taken by the perpetrator (s) to plan and execute the crime. Fortunately the United States Supreme Court has overturned hate crimes statutes and ordinances that invoke the "thought police". In 1992, the Court was asked to determine the constitutionality of the St. Paul, Minnesota hate speech ordinance in the case of R.A.V. vSt. Paul. R.A.V. had burned a cross in an African- American family's front yard. He was found guilty of violating the hate speech ordinance. The St. Paul City Council believed the ordinance would be upheld because of the "fighting words doctrine" of unprotected speech under the First Amendment. However, the Court unanimously invalidated the ordinance that specifically prohibited certain the kinds of speech, symbols, and expressions that would arouse anger, alarm and resentment in others on the basis of their race, religion, creed or gender (R.A.V. v. St. Paul, 1992). With its decision in the R.A.V. case, the 54 |