About 1,700 Reasons Why We Needed Hate Crimes Legislation
Published November 24, 2009 @ 07:02AM PT
The FBI just released statistics documenting hate-motivated violence for last year, and their numbers show a rapid increase in the number of hate crimes committed based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
In all, the FBI notes that 1,706 victims of hate crimes in 2008 were targeted solely because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. And that right there provides at least 1,706 reasons why it was absolutely critical for President Obama to sign hate crimes legislation into law earlier this Fall. That figure is an eleven percent increase in the number of hate crimes committed based on sexual orientation and gender identity from the previous year, and caps off a three-year period where hate crimes committed toward LGBT folks have continued to rise.
The Matthew Shepard Foundation, which fought for more than ten years to pass expanded hate crimes laws, said that while statistics can be complicated, the increase in violent crime committed toward LGBT people can't be ignored.
"While it is important to respect the cautions voiced by statistical analysts, the continuing, steady emergence of extremely violent anti-LGBT hate crimes in recent weeks also argues in favor of taking the increase seriously and redoubling prevention efforts," said Jason Marsden, Executive Director of the Matthew Shepard Foundation.
Last week, an entry on Change.org's Criminal Justice blog suggested that hate crimes laws actually do more harm than good, and don't really prevent violent crime from happening. In the face of evidence that shows rapidly rising rates of violence committed toward LGBT people -- all during years where there were no federal hate crimes protections for sexual orientation or gender identity -- it just doesn't seem like that argument carries any water.
Twenty-six state Attorneys General endorsed hate crimes legislation, citing the importance of such laws to decrease rates of violent crime toward targeted groups. Popular support for passing hate crimes laws reached peaks of nearly 70 percent. And more than 300 organizations -- including the International Association of Chiefs of Police, National District Attorneys Association, Presbyterian Church, Episcopal Church, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Young Women’s Christian Association and National Disability Rights Network -- all supported efforts to expand federal hate crimes laws, believing that they were the best way to deal with rising rates of violent crime committed toward groups like LGBT people. That's an awful lot of legal expertise.
As the Human Rights Campaign notes, "Every hour, a crime motivated by the perpetrator’s bias against the victim occurs in the United States." In the time it takes you to commute to work, someone is targeted for a crime because of bias. That's nuts.
But it's also the reason why those that oppose hate crimes legislation need to pony up real evidence to show that they might not work. Doing nothing to address crimes motivated by bias is simply not an option.
Related Posts
-
Matthew Shepard Act Could be First LGBT Piece of Legislation Passed by President Obama
-
10 Years After Matthew Shepard's Death, and Still No Federal Hate Crimes Law
-
Judy Shepard's Statement on the 10th Anniversary of Matthew Shepard's Death
Comments (19)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Michael Jones is a Change.org Editor.
He is the former Communications Director for the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, as well as the former Director of Communications for Pax Christi USA, a national Catholic peace and justice organization. Mike is a graduate of Syracuse University's S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications and he is also a proud sketch comedy writer.

Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Email

You are right about us needing hate crimes legislation. The homophobes say we don't need them. The fundamentalist hysteria which which the Matthew Shepard Act was greeted makes it abundantly clear that we DO need hate crimes legislation. The ourcry is because homophobes realise that their hateful acts towards us will not go unpunished.
Posted by Ioan Lightoller on 11/24/2009 @ 07:39AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
We do not need hate crime laws. A crime is a crime. Period. And why do all the gays keep saying that anyone who does not like perverted gay activity are homophobes? i have friends who are gay, and they know I think what they do in the bedroom is wrong, but I also appreciate their other gifts they have to offer. My gay friends are not radicals running around demanding everything like so many gays do. They just live and let live.
Posted by Katie Hanson on 11/24/2009 @ 08:54PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
And what gifts might that be sweety ?
In any event, the more its argued that such hate crime bills aint needed...The more it will be proven that they ARE needed...Especially with such ill thought out statements like "A crime is a crime".
Not all crimes are alike and any crime committed based on prejudice is far worse than a crime based on greed and/or just violence.
Posted by Reverend Boony on 11/24/2009 @ 10:52PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Your cognitive processing must be as obsolete as third world computer systems. Oh wait such countries lack even that technology.
The term is not just homophobe but heterosexist, which you have just proven by your choice of said words.
Let me ask you something; why do you care only about what your so called friends do in the privacy of their own home? Its none of your fucking business! Second when you see a same sex relationship is that all your can think of. Is your mind so void of simple rationality that you fail to see the similarity of gay couples compared to straight couples? What about all the love, compassion, and precious moments gay couples have with each other that doesnt include sex?
Is sex the only thing that is important to people like yourself Katie?
If you were anything of a human being then you would not judge a person on who they love, but whether they love and how much they love. Gay people do in fact love each other and according to relationship psychologist Dr. John Gottmann of the APA, gay relationship are far more stable, supportive and nurturing than heterosexual relationships.
Posted by Chris Marshall on 11/24/2009 @ 10:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Katie, ANY gay that has you as a friend is just as bad as the self-loathing Log Cabin Republicans.
I honestly don't give a shit about your opinion as to what we do in our bedroom. That is exactly your problem. You are WAY too caught up in what we do in our bedrooms. I don't care what you do in yours despite the fact that it makes me want to vommit knowing that you are probably going to be handing down your bigotry to your offspring.
In regards to crimes, do you not think it appropriate to have first, second or third degree murder? How about voluntary and involuntary manslaughter? How about assault versus aggrevated assault? How about rape and aggrevated rape with special circumstances?
You see, as a breeder and a woman at that, YOU are the one receiving "special" treatment from the government. You are already considered "equal" in the eyes of the law. That is what we are seeking.........nothing more, nothing less!
Remember, you brought this upon yourself. You are on a site that advocates FOR the rights of the LGBT community. Most people on here know that I have absolutely no qualms telling things the way I see it.
With that I say fuck you and happy thanksgiving.
Posted by Dave Hershey on 11/26/2009 @ 11:36AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Keep on saying things the way you see it Dave and it helps me with what my brother will say to me today.
Posted by Martin Martinez on 11/26/2009 @ 11:53AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It was desperately needed to protect us.It is sad that people think we do not need protection.Happy Thanksgiving everyone,I love all of you and we can be thankful for this legislation passing.
Posted by Martin Martinez on 11/24/2009 @ 08:57AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
And a blessed harvest thanks to you mr. martinez. :)
Posted by Reverend Boony on 11/24/2009 @ 10:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Michael,
If hate crimes legislation makes things worse, then why is it that racially-motivated hate crimes go down?
Posted by Dave Hershey on 11/24/2009 @ 12:59PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Just in case anyone wanted the source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hmxKiiSIsM-k7nX2yECb7kGw1qhwD9C59TP00
Posted by Dave Hershey on 11/24/2009 @ 01:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Hey Dave -- totally agreed.
Posted by Michael Jones on 11/24/2009 @ 02:15PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
My theory would be that in the beginning, when any given hate crimes bill is legislated into law then thats when all the whackos first come out in droves in order to vent their anger and hate in a childish response to the passage of such laws then later, after a sufficient number of them get nailed by the law...The rest of the cowards slink back under their respective rocks untill they see an oppurtunity to attack in secret.
Posted by Reverend Boony on 11/24/2009 @ 10:57PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thomas,
Here is my take. If someone committed a racial-motivate crime, and were convicted of a hate crime, then the odds are that individual (who committed the crime) is still in prison. If it were just a "crime" the sentences are many times reduced under a plea deal. When they are charged with a hate crime, the sentence is automatic. Therefore, if convicted of a hate crime, those individuals are automatically serving a harsher sentence.
Posted by Dave Hershey on 11/26/2009 @ 11:40AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Good point mr. hershey...
The only reason that didnt occur to me was because of my assumption that all too often, criminals in general get off way more easily than they should in terms of sentencing and amount of time served.
Posted by Reverend Boony on 11/28/2009 @ 01:52PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
dave,
the link u posted is dead.
Posted by Jissai S on 01/07/2010 @ 01:22AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
President Obama and Congress did the correct thing by having passed the necessary bill which added sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of federal hate crimes. It's unjustified that so many LGBT people have been attacked because of their gender identity or sexual orientation and is why hate crimes against LGBT people must go decrease significantly this remaining year.
Posted by Edwin Bonilla on 11/24/2009 @ 03:43PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Brian Levin, director for the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University-San Bernardino, warned that the national numbers may be misleading because some states — like California, New Jersey, and Ohio — are good at reporting hate crimes while others — Georgia, Hawaii, Mississippi and Pennsylvania — are not.
"The quality of the data is so variable and in some instances so bad that it makes trend analysis extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible," said Levin. "Generally, states that have effective data collection also have effective training and procedures to address these crimes."
In 2008, 2,145 different agencies reported hate crimes incidents, while the year before 2,025 agencies did this reporting.
So, to actually claim a year over year increase hate crimes based on the FBI data is incorrect.
What these numbers actually say is, simply, that more agencies are reporting these statistics. Nothing more than that.
Posted by J S on 11/28/2009 @ 05:16AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Intresting but even just one hate crime is one too many.
Posted by Reverend Boony on 11/28/2009 @ 01:54PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Katie Hanson is correct. Murder is murder and hate crimes legislation is merely squeaky wheel pandering by government. I am constantly amazed by the vindictive braying of gays and transgenders when someone (like Ms. Hanson) dares to question the orthodoxy--the exact behavior they attribute to homophobes and (a brand new made up term) heterosexists. Meanwhile, no one on this site can forward a truly intellectual/logical reason why the killing of "this" person should be treated differently from the killing of "that" person.
Reverend Boony's comment sums it up (toward the top) when he says:
"Not all crimes are alike and any crime committed based on prejudice is far worse than a crime based on greed and/or just violence."
because he is WRONG. Not because we have a different opinion. If Billy Jack kills a white man for his car, and then steals his car, he should get the same good long prison term as his brother Billy Joe gets for killing a black man because he's black, and then stealing his car. One murder, one Grand Theft, same punishment. Legislators are such idiots.
Posted by Michael Anderson on 01/11/2010 @ 11:00AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.