KarMel Scholarship 2008

Essay

“Hate Crime Prevention”

By Sam Eastham

Desciption of Submission: “This essay discusses the new legislation on hate crimes, known as the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA).” - Sam

Most of us view violent crime born of passion, greed, and desperation as a terrible thing. Still, violence prompted by prejudice and bigotry seems even more heinous. Should this particular brand of violence, known as hate crime, be punished more severely by our legal system than comparable criminal behavior with a different motivation? Hate crimes are the only offenses for which the perpetrator’s motive is considered in legal sentencing. Although courts attempt to use this distinction to fight hate and prejudice, this decision may create more problems than it solves. The United States Constitution guarantees its citizens one single unlimited liberty: freedom of thought. Assigning additional punishment for a crime based on a perpetrator’s attitude toward their victim potentially infringes on this essential and limitless freedom. Additionally, hate crime legislation often relies upon things the perpetrator has said prior to committing the crime. Prosecution based on this type of evidence appears to violate the defendant’s freedom of speech.

Today, forty-five states currently employ statutes that are designed to protect various minorities from violent crimes motivated by hate. Federal protection includes provisions for race, color, religion, or national origin when engaging in federally protected activities. Recently, an amended version of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA) passed by the House of Representatives added sexual orientation to this list of protected minorities. This bill, titled the Matthew Shepard Act, was named for a student at the University of Wyoming who was fatally attacked because of his perceived sexual orientation. As a member of the gay community, I am tempted to view this bill as a positive step toward eliminating the hate and bigotry that threatens me and others. However, I believe that those committing these crimes are victims in another sense. They are victims of fear and ignorance. The United States should not punish this fear and ignorance, but strive to alleviate it.

The time has come to reconsider the root cause of hate crime. Looking back, the United State’s history seems to be repeating itself. Just as ignorance and fear fostered violence against racial minorities for generations, ignorance also lies at the core of violent crimes against the gay community. Repeating the pattern of the civil rights movement may solve the hate crime that currently plagues our nation. Americans spent decades fighting racial discrimination through education and diversity training, and in doing so made much progress. Our public school system carefully educates its students about the civil rights movement and its leaders, both political and cultural. Our students celebrate Black History Month, observe Martin Luther King Day, and read “Black Like Me”. The gay community, by contrast, is rarely referenced. Teaching students more about the gay rights movement, recognizing landmark events such as the Stonewall riots, and honoring gay leaders throughout history would be a great start toward positive change.

Perhaps proponents of the Matthew Shepard Act are ready for immediate change. This sentiment is certainly understandable. I believe, however, that the change we seek does not lie in the LLEHCPA. Congress created this act with the purpose of reducing hate crime in America by increasing the severity of the consequences. In reality, legal reprisal rarely deters perpetrators of violent crime. The United States should institute an effective plan that takes more time to accomplish than a constitutionally questionable “quick fix” that does little to improve the status quo. Hate crime legislation didn’t cause the gradual improvement we have seen in racially motivated crime. Rather, this improvement stems from the backlash such an act would now receive from a better-educated society.

Rather than amending hate crime law to include additional minority groups, Congress should eliminate this legislation altogether. Our country should resolve prejudice and bigotry by combating the fear and ignorance that sparks it: through education, time, and tolerance. We are responsible for preserving and defending the national treasure that is the United States Constitution. Adding injustices to the other side in an effort to balance the scale would not do justice to this democratic legacy left to us by our forefathers. While I applaud the motivation of hate crime legislation, I believe that this “silver bullet” may ultimately do more damage than good.

Back