Discrimination and prejudice based on sexual orientation is the most recent addition to the civil rights movement, but it has not yet been fully accepted as an equal. Since the 1970’s, gay men and lesbians have demanded the same protection against discrimination as blacks, Jews, women, and other groups; they have demanded recognition as a victimized minority. Although some states have enacted laws prohibiting discrimination against homosexuals, many other states and the federal government do not have any laws extending civil rights protection to homosexuals. The Supreme Court has held that states can even make it a crime for adult homosexuals to engage in voluntary sexual relations. The president of the United States has also ordered that military personnel who are open about their homosexuality be dismissed from the armed forces for that reason alone. So how should criminal law react to the conflict of ideas or attitudes of American political institutions? How should criminal law regard crime by prejudiced heterosexuals against homosexuals? If that is a hate crime, then is it also a hate crime whenever one person attacks another because he or she dislikes that person’s sexual practices? Whatever arguments might be made to deny gays and lesbians protection against discrimination in housing and employment, it is hard to imagine any coherent argument in favor of their exclusion from the hate crime umbrella. Indeed, such exclusion would rightly be perceived by gays and lesbians as a case of deliberate governmental discrimination.
Considering all the different contexts where discrimination against gays and lesbians occurs, none is more convincing than the criminal context, with its bloody legacy of “gay bashing.” Part of the reason for high rates of antigay hate crimes in June, when many cities traditionally celebrate gay pride, is that summer months draw more people outside, increasing the potential of crime targets and perpetrators. Hate crimes attack a basic part of the victims’ identity-our sense of who we are and of the community in which we belong. Most lesbians and gay men have gone through a coming-out process that includes having to overcome their own sense that being gay is a bad thing. From the perspective of a victim, a hate crime can feel like an instance of being punished directly and in a very dramatic way for being gay. “Victims of antigay hate crimes suffer deeper and longer periods of depression, stress, and anger than victims of non-bias related crimes” (Siegel, 2006). The damage from hate crimes extends far beyond targeted individuals; realizing it could have been any of them, victimizes an entire community.
Determining the true motivation for a crime is often difficult, delaying prosecution. “The intent of penalty-enhancement hate-crimes laws is not only to reassure targeted groups by imposing serious punishment on hate-crime perpetrators but also to deter these crimes by demonstrating that they will be dealt with seriously and swiftly” (Winters, 1996). The recent murder case of a transgender teenager victim from the vicinity area of Hayward, Gwen Araujo, shows us that when criminals are committing these kinds of crimes they are not thinking on the punishment they will suffer if they get caught. They are simply being driven by prejudice and personal attitudes. “When prejudice prompts an individual to engage in criminal conduct, a prosecutor may seek a more severe sentence but must prove, beyond doubt, that the victim intentionally was selected because of personal characteristics” (Winters, 1996).
The law has important benefits. For one thing, they help keep at least some of the gay bashers off the streets. An important goal since research shows that criminals are often repeat offenders. Those who are prosecuted and convicted of these crimes spend more time in jail or have severe sentences given to them as it was in the Gwen Araujo case murderers. I believe that is a very important message for possible hate crime perpetrators.
To confront these hate crimes, first we must gain a better understanding of the problem. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in 2003, the last year for which we have complete statistics, 11,909 law enforcement agencies participated in the data-collection program and reported just over 7,489 hate crime incidents. But we know that even this disturbing number significantly underestimates the true level of hate crimes. Many victims do not report these crimes, and police departments do not always recognize, categorize or report hate crimes. Second, we must learn to teach tolerance in our communities so that we can prevent hate crimes by addressing bias before it manifests itself in violent criminal activity. We should implement understanding and instill in children the respect for each other’s differences and the ability to resolve conflicts without violence. Finally, we should never forget that law enforcement has an indispensable role to play in eradicating hate crimes. We must ensure that potential hate crimes are investigated thoroughly, prosecuted quickly and punished strictly.
Conclusion
There are many of us who are at risk of being victimized because of who we are and not all that ‘us’ are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. Hate-crimes legislation is important because it is a message from society and the legislature that bias crime will not be tolerated. To date, 40 states and the District of Columbia have enacted hate-crimes statutes, as has the federal government. While federal law protects Americans from hate crimes in voting booths and schools, it does not protect many of us from similar crimes in our own homes or on the streets. Presently, it is left to the discretion of the local officials whether to prosecute the crime as a hate crime. In these increasingly violent times, hate-crime legislation is a strong and necessary response to combat criminal acts of prejudice and bias. The statutes guarantee that perpetrators of bias crimes will be punished in proportion to the seriousness of crimes they have committed. The laws protect all Americans, allowing them to walk the streets safe in the knowledge that their community will not tolerate violent bigotry.
Bibliography
Bender, David. Hate Crimes, San Diego: Greenhaven Press Inc., 1996
U.S. Department of Justice. “Hate Crime Statistics 2003” [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03hc.pdf] (2003)
Siegel, Larry J. Criminology. Belmont: Thomson Higher Education, 2006
