1751-9020/asset/olbannerleft.jpg?v=1&s=3f0bd1a3e9a9c770e13d4bfcddf00d7789ec52bc)
1751-9020/asset/olbannerright.jpg?v=1&s=5d264195c4498041cf4d6a9aaee08d5b1016e5ae)
Isn’t Every Crime a Hate Crime?: The Case for Hate Crime Laws
Article first published online: 3 APR 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00364.x
© 2011 The Author. Sociology Compass © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Additional Information
How to Cite
Blazak, R. (2011), Isn’t Every Crime a Hate Crime?: The Case for Hate Crime Laws. Sociology Compass, 5: 244–255. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00364.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 3 APR 2011
- Article first published online: 3 APR 2011
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Abstract
The process to create hate crime laws in the United States has wrestled with the core issues of freedom of speech and greater harm. This article looks at the evolution of bias crime laws, culminating with President Obama’s signing of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act in 2009. The constitutionality of the laws is ‘discussed and suggestions for sociological research are made. Four elements of hate crime laws are discussed; criminality, intent, perception, and protected statuses. The logic of hate crime laws is based on the argument that hate crimes are a form of terrorism, designed to intimidate large groups of people. Readers should be familiar with the basic case for the existence of such laws.