Introduction
The world of crime has had numerous inventions of crime types cropping up each day in the society. These crimes range from the simple ones such as piracy to the complex ones such as murder. However, regardless of the weight of the crime committed, justice has to take place by having the criminal punished.
The hate crime is one such crime that happens to occur each day in almost all regions of the world (Levin and McDevitt). Common hate crimes that have been documented include those listed below. The case of “Admiral Duncan, a ‘gay pub’ in Soho, London in which three died, and scores were injured, is an example.
And the callous attack on the young gay man Matthew Shepard who was pistol-whipped and left lashed to a fence in freezing conditions to die later in hospital in Wyoming in October 1998” (Iganski 1).
Others include “the brutal murder by white supremacists of James Byrd, who was beaten unconscious, chained to the back of a pickup truck and dragged for miles along rural roads outside the town of Jasper, Texas in June 1998, as well as the racist murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence in South London in 1993” (Iganski 1).
These are just but some of the cases that attracted media attention. Others have taken place and left unmentioned because of the current laws regarding hate crimes. Hate crimes entail several criminal offences such as arson, assault, vandalism, injury, and murder.
They normally come about when one party is motivated by bias of issues such as religion, sex, class, ethnic group, political affiliation, gender, and age among other differences, to hurt the other party (Elmore 1). The aforementioned factors that arouse bias are difficult to change hence making the victim continue suffering if at all there is no intervention by the law.
When hate crimes are committed, they bring about damage to property, injury to the individual and psychological issues depending on the type of criminal act committed. In other words, hate crimes normally cause diversified impacts on the victim of the act, as well as the community (Elmore 1).
However, it should be known that all human beings have their rights and freedom, which protect them from being victimized. In case, an individual is victimized through the hate crimes the law should intervene to punish the criminals who violate the rights of other people.
This research paper will be an in-depth analysis of the punishments accorded to hate crime offenders. The reasons as to why these punishments should be made more severe because of the psychological impact they bring about to the victim and the community will also be discussed.
The psychological impact of hate crimes
Unlike other criminal offences, hate crimes not only have an impact on the victim but the community is also affected by the crime (Elmore 1). A victim of hate crime will undergo several physical and psychological problems because of the act.
For instance, when one is raped or assaulted, their physical body is normally injured especially the body parts that the victim gets hold of. Thereafter, the victim will be at risk of being in distress, depressed, stressed and anxious, which in most cases leads to posttraumatic disorder.
Posttraumatic disorder will occur in cases where the victim was threatened to death or severely injured like in the case of arson. In most of the cases, posttraumatic disorder is characterized by nightmares, disturbed sleep, and loud illusions that inflict much fear on the victim (Elmore 1). In other cases, the victim may have a low self-esteem thus refusing to interact with the other people as they did before.
The individual victim of hate crimes have also been noticed to develop the desire for revenge, which makes them angry at all times (Elmore 1). Hopelessness is also another character that comes about because of hate crimes. The victims could also suffer from shame and humiliation especially from people who witnessed the act.
Although, the crime may have seemed to be of minute effect in the first instance, the outcomes may have a significant effect on the life of the victim after the crime. The life of the individual may completely change from the outgoing persons they were before to the self-reserved persons who have no hope for the future.
The society also suffers from hate crimes committed, as the criminals of hate crimes pose a great threat to the people in the community. For instance, in a community where cases of rape are rampant, people especially of the female gender will have this fear of being late to their homes hence being forced to be home early because of security reasons (Elmore 1).
The same applies to cases where arsonists are rampant. The community members will be living in fear thus not having peace. In this case, they will not be sleeping comfortably during the night. In other cases, hate crimes that target specific groups of religion or political affiliations will create fear in these groups, thus hindering people from joining them.
Similarly, when people are part of a group targeted by the hate crime offenders they tend to feel insecure. In severe cases, this could lead to mental problems being experienced by the affected people. The reason behind this is the tension created by the hate crime offenders.
Other than psychological problems, hate crimes also bring about damage of public goods of the community. For instance, hate crime offenders could destroy churches, temples, and other places of worships, if they are against the religious sects.
This affects the development of the community as they are forced to reconstruct the destroyed properties all again (Elmore 1). Additionally, the community loses trust in criminal justice institutions, since they believe that the reason as to why the hate crime offenders exist is that the law is lenient on them.
If at all, the law was strict and put in place severe punishments for the hate crime offenders, cases of hate crimes would no longer exist.
The punishments accorded to hate crimes Offenders
Despite the increase of hate crime in the recent past especially in the United States of America, the best way of dealing with the hate crime offenders has not been arrived at. The controversy mainly lies on the weight of the crime in which the antagonists have classified issues of hate crime to be petty.
The protagonists, on the other hand, call for severe punishments for the hate crime offenders. In most cases, the hate crime offenders are normally punished through penalty enhancements (Reuter 33). In this case, the offender has to be found guilty of bias before being punished under the court of jurisdiction.
The motive of bias differs from country to country with some basing it on religious matters, political affiliations, or racial discriminations (Reuter 34). Nevertheless, the court is left to give a ruling on the case of hate crime. This is because most countries have not put in place legislation that guides the jurisdiction of hate crime offenders.
Why the punishments on hate crimes should be more severe
Having looked at the impacts that hate crimes cause to the individual victim and the society it is of the essence that severe punishments are accorded to the hate crime offenders. The fact that there is no clear jurisdiction of punishing the hate crime offenders, calls for the enactment of laws that will ensure substantial punishment of the hate crime offenders (Reuter 35).
As noted earlier, most countries rely on the presence of bias in the crime in order to pass judgment on the offender. This should not be the case as hate crimes hold serious matters just like other crimes. In this case, they should be treated with the same weight.
The debate on the punishment of hate crime offenders has been in the lime light for a long time now. There are the antagonists who criticize the severity of the punishments accorded to the hate crime offenders. Those critics argue that increasing the punishment of hate crime offenders is against the fundamental human rights.
They claim that the hate crime offenders should not be severely punished as people are debating about, since they are just human beings like the others. Furthermore, the hate crime offenders are in the same league as the other criminal offenders and should therefore not be ‘over-punished’ (Reuter 35).
The critics go on to claim that the hate crime offenders have families to take care of, as well as other responsibilities that human beings have.
On the other hand, those who advocate severe punishments on the offenders of hate crime argue that in executing the punishment, it is not the offender being punished but rather the mistake. In this, they argue that human rights are not violated in the execution of the punishment.
In addition, the fact that hate crimes bring about so much harm to the victims and the society, it is of the essence that the hate crime offenders are severely punished (Reuter 35).
For instance, the government of the United States of America has enacted laws that impose severe punishments to the criminals of hate crime. The punishment is more than the usual punishment that is accorded to offenders of other crimes.
Looking at the debate from the perspective of an individual or society that has suffered from hate crimes, one would definitely agree to it that the hate crime offenders deserve severe punishments. As discussed earlier, hate crimes could significantly affect the life of an individual by completely transforming them from the outgoing personality they had to the self-reserved and hopeless individuals.
Having this in mind, it is agreeable that hate crime offenders cause great harm to the people in the society and should therefore, be severely punished. Hate crimes also bring about fear of joining or being in certain differential groups as well as making the people in the society to live in fear.
This violates the rights and freedom of human beings, something that is against the laws. As such, the punishment of hate crime should incorporate the penalty of the act as well as the violation of human rights and freedom.
The Current debate on hate crimes punishments
The situation of hate crime has taken a different route in the recent past, with the legislative arms of governments of most nations enacting laws that advocate for severe punishments for the hate crime offenders.
In 1999, the parliament of the United States government passed a bill by 83-61 vote that advocated for tougher penalties on the hate crime offenders (Parker 1).
During the proceedings of the bill enactment, the author of the bill gave an example of an individual who had been killed by a track the previous year, whose death had caused much pain to the family members (Parker 1).
Although, there was no agreement during that sitting, subsequent campaigns have been put in place to ensure that hate crime offenders get tough and severe punishments (Shively and Mulford 1).
It is however, important that hate crime offenders are severely punished to not only prevent them from repeating the crime but also bar other potential offenders to commit hate crimes.
As such, the society will be safe and people will no longer be living in fear of hate crime offenders (Parker 1). At the same, people in the society will be able to enjoy their rights and freedom without interference.
Conclusion
From the above discussion, it is clear that hate crimes are just the common criminal offences that are committed on a day-to-day basis. These include acts such as rape, arson, vandalism, and murder just to mention a few.
The hate crimes have been seen to bring about many negative impacts on the life of the individual victim and the whole society (Parker 1). Given the fact that these hate crimes bring about much trauma in the life on the victim causing them to change from who they were initially, it is of the essence that the hate crime offenders get severe punishment.
Again, the community is affected when hate crime offenders are present in the society (Elmore 1). A society that is invaded by hate crime individuals faces the risk of being damaged thus demanding for reconstruction of the damaged property (Shively and Mulford 1).
Concisely, the society in whole fall victim of the hate crimes as human rights and freedom are violated. This is something that is against the law. The debate has however, been on whether the punishment of the hate crime offenders should be more severe (Levin and McDevitt).
The issue remains controversial, despite the several attempts to clarify and create some sense on the arguments. Those who are against the increase in punishment of hate crime offenders claim that it will be against the human rights to punish the hate crime offenders more than the other criminal offenders.
On the other hand, those advocating for the increase in punishment argue that it is not the individual being punished but rather the mistake committed, hence no violation of any human rights (Levin and McDevitt).
In conclusion, it is true to say that hate crimes cause psychological impact on the individual and the society. As such, the hate crime offenders should be severely punished given the effect they cause.
Works Cited
Elmore, Diane. The Psychology of Hate Crimes. American Psychological Association. Web.
Iganski, Paul. The Hate Debate. Institute for Jewish Policy Research. 2002. Web.
Levin, Charles., and McDevitt, Kevin. Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and Bloodshed. New York: Plenum Press, 1993. Print.
Parker, Philip. Hate crime offenders would face tougher punishment under bill approved by House. Morris News Service. 1999. Web.
Reuter, Nona. Hate Crime Laws: A Practical Guide. OSCE. 2009. Web.
Shively, Michael., and Mulford, Carrie. Hate Crime in America: The Debate Continues. National Institute of Justice Journal. 257, (2007): 1. Web.