Hate Crimes against Whites
Different types of crimes can be perpetrated against individuals. Among these is the crime that is considered hateful. Hate crimes are criminal offenses against a person that is motivated by a bias against the victim. These crimes are often motivated by biases levelled against perpetrator because of their differences in race, skin colour, sexual orientation, disabilities, or gender. There is limited coverage of hate crimes against whites, both in the media and in literature. The paper that follows contributes some information on the subject of hate crimes against whites.
Theoretical Survey of Hate Crimes
Bias motivated or hate crimes are often personal in nature. Determination and classification of crimes as hate crimes continues to illicit controversy. These crimes are thought to motivate behaviour and shape deviant behaviour and social norms that correlates to the occurrence of hate crimes. For a crime to qualify as a hate crime, it must have been motivated by prejudice, that is, assumed belief or opinion that informs one’s action (Krohn, Lizotte, & Hall, 2009). Hate crimes based on sexual orientation is one of the most prevalent type of hate crime against whites. This crime is often not reported because of the degradation that accompanies such a crime (Jacobs & Porter, 1998).
Bias motivated crimes or hate crimes are criminalized by The Hate Crime Statistics Act (1990). This Act gives a detailed listing of crimes that fall under the category of hate crimes and includes prejudice based on religion, race, sexual orientation, and ethnicity, and may include crimes of forcible rape, murder, aggravated assault, intimidation, simple assault, and vandalism or damage of property. A clarification on the definition of hate crimes is presented by The National Education Association (NEA). According to the NEA, hate crimes are violent acts that are motivated by hate against a person based on his or her mental or physical characteristics. Incidences of hate crimes cause members of the offended group to feel a sense of intimidation and trepidation (Ryan, & Leeson, 2011).
Media Attention on Hate Crimes against Whites
The media has gained notoriety in reporting hate crimes in a subjective manner. This means that some incidences of hate crimes receive proper media coverage while others are ignored altogether. This type of news reporting is termed media bias and as far as war against hate crimes is concerned, media bias is counterproductive. It has been argued that hate crimes perpetuated by non-whites against whites causes some form of discomfort and it might not be wise to air such stories on the national airwaves (Witt, 2007). The society in this case appears to have some predetermined criteria that they use to measure hate crimes. When the crime committed fails to measure up to the criteria, there is some hesitation to divulge details of such a crime to the public. Glenn Reynolds, a professor of Law at the University of Tennessee, asserts that white on black crime receives more publicity compared to black on white offenses (Witt, 2007).
The media is considered as the “fourth estate” and as thus, it should play its role of informing the public of all matters of public interest. The bias levelled by the media on the subject of hate crimes against whites betrays their duty to the public. This biasness creates a false impression that the whites do not suffer from incidences of hate crimes directed towards them. Additionally, these underreported hate crimes can be taken to mean that there is an unfair conviction of hate crimes against whites (Witt, 2007). The Anti-Defamation League supports the legislation and enforcement of hate crimes laws. The League argues that hate crimes spread a feeling of intimidation and trepidation to the wider community in which the victim of a hate crime belongs (Witt, 2007).
Theoretical Perspectives
The section that follows presents an analysis of different theories that tend to explain the relationship between social interactions and hate crimes. The theories include the labelling theory and constructionist theory. The labelling theory looks at deviant behaviour as a social process. Under this theory, an individual is labelled “deviant” if he or she is different either in physical or mental characteristics. This labelling is considered a form of stigmatization that is associated with different identities and characteristics of deviant behaviour. Labelling theory asserts that the perpetration of hate crimes affirms the superiority of the offender while at the same time reiterating the inferiority of the victim who is devalued to a subordinate position (Perry, 2003).
On the other hand, Social constructionists analyze the developmental process of hate crimes by considering the community that is likely to be affected by a particular type of hate crime. Accordingly, this theory asserts that hate crime is a social problem, which transcends the boundaries of culture and religion (Lyons, 2008). This perspective supports the assertion that individuals are socially constructed by the social causality and social reality that emanates from these acting in a certain manner. Certain occurrences of hate crimes go unreported while others are underreported and as thus, these crimes remain underrepresented (Perry, 2003).
Hate Crime Statistics
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is mandated compile data on hate crimes reported to it by various police departments. These data are then compiled in the Uniform Crime Report Statistics. This report is compiled annually and it gives a breakdown of the criminal offense, locality, and the frequency of the offenses in the US. States that include Wyoming, South Carolina, Hawaii, Alaska, Kansas, Indiana, and New Mexico lack hate crime laws and therefore, they do not participate in reporting incidences of hate crime to the FBI (Ryan, & Leeson, 2011).
According to the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) report, about 13.240 agencies participated in the Uniform Crime Report program in 2007. The agencies that actually submitted their hate crimes report to the FBI totalled to slightly .over 2,000. About 3,870 racial crimes were reported and out of these, only 749 incidences related to hate crime against whites. Eighty-five agencies that participated in the Hate Crime Program report zero hate crime in their jurisdictions. Additionally, the report shows that most of the hate crimes occur in close proximity to the victim’s residence (Ryan, & Leeson, 2011).
Strategic Interventions for Hate Crime Incidences
This section outlines certain measures that can be adopted to prevent the occurrence of hate crimes in the near future. The first step recommended for dealing with hate crimes against whites is the improvement of relationships between different members of the community (Lyons, 2007). These improved relations can be tailored in such a way that the victims and perpetrators are taught on how to co-exist without one party prejudicing against the other. The study had revealed that law enforcement agencies mask hate crimes against whites for fear that members of the community might identify with the victim or perpetrator of such crimes. This biasness and restriction of information denies the public an opportunity of knowing the existence and prevalence of hate crimes within their communities. The camouflaged and classified nature of hate crimes against whites is damaging to the victims. These tend to prohibit accurate reporting of hate crimes for fear of action, attention, and respect from the law enforcement agents.
Another recommendation proposes that law enforcement agents be trained on how to handle hate crimes both at the federal and state levels. Such training will equip the officers with the requisite knowledge needed for crime categorization. They will be trained on how to handle hate crime reports submitted to them by the victims of such crimes. This training and awareness can be created through the hate crime training and awareness program. Additionally, the State authorities can legislate and enact hate crime laws, which will permit the FBI to take part in the investigation and prosecution of these crimes (Swigonski, 2006).
In conclusion, hate crime is dehumanizing and its prevention can only be achieved by joint effort from all stakeholders. Media bias on some types of hate crimes needs to be lifted to allow for the creation of awareness on the prevalence of the incidences of these hate crimes. Both the labelling and social constructionist theories look at the social interactions between individuals in a society and their actions against each other.
References
- Lyons (2007). Community (Dis) Organization and Racially Motivated Crimes. The American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 815-863
- Lyons. (2008). Defending Turf: Racial Demographics and Hate Crime against Blacks and Whites. Social Forces, The American Journal of Sociology, 87(1), 357-385.
Jacobs, J. B., & Potter, K. (1998). Hate crimes: Criminal law & identity politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., & Hall, G. P. (2009). Handbook on crime and deviance. Dordrecht: Springer.
Perry, B (2003). Hate and Bias Crime: A reader, New York, NY: Routledge.
Ryan, M. E., & Leeson, P. T. (2011). Hate Groups and Hate Crime. International Review of Law and Economics, 31(4), 256-262.
Swigonski, M. E. (2006). Violence, Hate Crimes, and Hate Language. Morrow, Deana F [Ed], 364-383.
Witt, H. (2007). What is a hate crime? Some are asking why no media outcry over murders in which victims were white and defendants were black, Chicago Tribune. Retrieved on December 6, 2008, from http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2007/jun/10/business/chi-murders10jun10.
