Hate Crime Speech

The topic of hate crime is so controversial because there can be different perspectives on the whole issue, which can eventually cause a massive huge debate on the entire matter. In Ben Gillis article called Understanding Hate Crime Statutes and Building Towards a Better System in Texas, the author separates his points in a way that can give the reader a better way of understanding the Hate Crime laws and the effects of it. Gillis’s way of dissecting the article is extremely effective due to the fact that not only he explains what exactly a hate crime is in its basic form but he also explains hate crime in its entirety, and he also shows how some states adapt to the whole issue. People may ask in what way does it make it in a sense “illegal”

When asking people what they think about the word “Baptists” they immediately think about people who go to church or judgmental/hypocritical people, but those labels are false (Zhein Survey). However, according to the Westboro Baptist Church website, they do judge people who are not only of the LGBT group, they also judge Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Jews, politicians and even American Soldiers. Because this church has a large amount of “success” they are able to get their hate speech out around the United States (and maybe even other countries) to offend those who were listed or those who believe those listed are okay in what they are doing.

<br>As hate crimes have risen in number during the past five years; many state governments have attempted to prevent such crimes by passing laws called bias laws. These laws make a crime that is motivated by hatred based on the victim's race, religion, ethnic background, or sexual orientation a more serious crime than such an act would ordinarily be. Many people believe that these laws violate the criminal's freedom of speech. Many hate group members say that freedom of speech is the right to say or write or publish one's

This speech grew to action, which led Nazi leaders to implement the “Final Solution,” and the massacre of six million Jews.  But what about hate crimes today in the United States, how are hate-based murders different from a murder of a random individual.  The answer to that question is in the brutality of the crime.  Hate crimes are, for the most part, inherently more brutal because of deeply rooted ideals between two opposing groups.  This brutality has led many, including former president Bill Clinton to call for legislation against hate crimes (Hellwege).

As hate crimes have risen in number during the past five years; many state governments have attempted to prevent such crimes by passing laws called bias laws. These laws make a crime that is motivated by hatred based on the victim’s race, religion, ethnic background, or sexual orientation a more serious crime than such an act would ordinarily be. Many people believe that these laws violate the criminal’s freedom of speech. Many hate group members say that freedom of speech is the right to say or write or publish one’s thoughts, or to express one’s self, they also say that this right is guaranteed to all Americans. But people and organizations who are against these hate groups ask themselves if the first amendment include and protect all form of expression, even those that ugly or hurtful like the burning crosses. The Supreme Court Justices have decided that some kinds of speech are not protected by the Constitution,

The hate crime legislations in the United States need to clearly define and identify hate crimes. Title 18 of the United States Code allows prosecutors to prosecute anyone who intentionally injures, intimidate, interferes with someone else, or attempts to do so, by force because of a person’s race, color, religions, or

Almost every person in America can pinpoint a time when they saw a news segment about some hate-based crime that was committed. Although some may argue that all crimes in the same category should be treated equally, hate crime should be punished more severely because the law requires it and it promotes safety and equality in communities.

A 2005 study conducted by National Institute of Justice, found that the Federal Government and all but one state, Wyoming, have laws related to hate crimes. A consistent problem identified by this study is there in no consistency in defining what constitutes a hate crime. (Carrie F. Mulford, Ph.D., & Michael Shively, Ph.D., Hate Crime in America: The Debate Continues, 257, Nat’l Inst Just., (2007). “The Federal Bureau of Investigation defines hate crime—also called bias crime—as “a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin.” ld.

Blacks were introduced to American soil during the 17th and 18th centuries via the triangular trade route, and were welcomed by whips, chains, shackles, and all the horrors of slavery. Slavery was legitimized by our government and continued for a few hundred years, taking a civil war and sixteen presidents before it was abolished. To this day, there is still much hatred between blacks and whites despite emancipation, desegregation, and integration; some would argue that the condition of African Americans in the United States is still one of a subservient nature. Federal law defines a hate crime as whenever a victim is attacked on the basis of his or her race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or

Opposition to all forms of hate speech laws are quite passionate. People who are adamant against hate speech laws affirm their beliefs through the First Amendment. Believing that the First Amendment protects all types of speech, no matter how terrible, these people go about calling others “snowflakes” just for protesting hate speech. Instead of actually understanding the harmful effects that have been proven by researchers they instead trivialize the effects (Neilsen 10-11). This type of resistive thinking is

Just a couple of months ago white supremacists rallied in Charlottesville to protest the tearing down of the statue of Robert E Lee. The racism and hate they spread through their march is unquestionably disgusting and serves no purpose in our society today. This event has led to social media sites such as Twitter to crack down even harder in a plight they started over a year ago to silence hateful speech. While there are some occasional dissenters, the general population agrees with the opinion that this speech is awful in every sense. With that being said, censoring their right to free speech is a bit too rash. We can all agree that free speech is one of the most important rights we have, and with President Trump throwing around the term “fake news” at major news organizations, it is more important than ever to protect that freedom. The article “The case for restricting hate speech” by Laura Beth Nielsen of the Los Angeles Times gives an argument for why hate speech should be censored. While she provides valid points, with the absence of factual statistics, none of them are strong enough to support her thesis that hate speech should be banned. I believe that in almost every instance, hate speech should remain protected just as much as our right to free speech.

In the name of free speech, hate speech should not be tolerated. Hate speech has devastating effects on the people and communities it is targeted at. Left unchecked hate speech can lead to harmful and violent effects. Over the past few years, the effects of hate speech used on women, homosexuals, ethnic groups and religious minorities have become more and more apparent. Hate speech can be very divisive in many of the situations it is used, depending on who interprets the expression can vary how people react, due to hate speech, not being easy defend when it does not hurt that certain person or community. If left uncheck hate speech can develop into harmful narratives that remain. While hate speech is not against the law, some have begun

Freedom of speech is the most important and basic right that human deserves it in every country. Freedom of speech and hate speech are two opposite things. Hate is speech attacks a person or group based on attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender. People shouldn’t limit their views, but they should limit how to express it and disagree each other with respect. No one chose his/her own race, ethnic origin, disability, or gender when they born. Human just born as they are, so, everyone deserves to be respected not to be hated just the way they are. Hate speech should be banned and extreme speech regulated because it is one of the reasons for many negative consequences in human lives.

The United States of America has come to be synonymous with the land of the free. This is almost entirely due to the rights granted by the first amendment to the Constitution. Most people would refine that statement further by stating that what truly makes the Unites States free, is the freedom of expression. The ability to speak and do what one pleases is a luxury that the citizens of very few countries enjoy. Americans tend to take this as mark of pride, yet another reason that America is the best; however, the ability to say anything can be extraordinarily harmful. Unfortunately, in the past few years hate speech and “incidents of racist and xenophobic harassment” have expanded (Okeowo). The problem with the unyielding support of free speech in the US is that it allows the law to fail to adequately protect those who are the target of hate speech. Not only does it harm through hate speech, but in a time full of alternative facts, not knowing if something is the truth or not can be detrimental. Because of this, there must be limitations on free speech because the right cause people harm through hate speech cannot outweigh the right to liberty that others have.

The first hate crime was passed in 1978 and was also provided for penalty enhancements in cases where a murder was motivated by prejudice. In spite of the term hate crime may seem now to sacrifice the attention it has received in the past several years, these types of offenses have been around for many years. From that moment on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, people have been victims of crimes and perpetrators. But most hate crimes are real because of the skin color and their religion. People may feel some type of way because the population is not like them. It may not make a difference in the number of days the person may spend incarcerated, but it makes a huge difference for the people to hold people accountable for what they did. Hate crimes are perpetrated because the victims are in some way considered different, some politicians play the racism card to govern votes and grab power , and can create public health issues.