| by James F. Anderson , Laronistine Dyson , Jr. Willie Brooks Introduction Because of its continued occurrence, in 1990 President George W. Bush signed into law the Hate Crime Statistics Act. The Act was amended by the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. According to this law, all hate crimes must be reported and compiled along with other Type I Index crimes. The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting Program has worked to establish a nationwide system for collecting statistics on bias-motivated criminal incidents. Hate or bias crimes are defined by Congress as actions where the defendant's conduct was motivated by hatred, bias, or prejudice directed toward an individual or group solely because of his or her perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation (Schmalleger, 1992). Moreover, other victims of hate crime can also be Whites who are associated with or sympathetic to any of those in this protected class. Others that have recently been added to this group include women and those who are disabled. Crimes against them are included in this category of crime when they are perpetrated solely because of the person's gender or disability. Despite this, the latter groups will not be included in this paper. In 1996, police reported that the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) indicated that 8,759 hate crimes occurred (U.S. Department of Justice, 1997). Further, in 1997, the UCR reported that over 11,211 law enforcement agencies (in 48 states and the District of Columbia) were beginning to realize the seriousness of compiling these statistics on bias crimes. Though nearly 17,000 police agencies participate in the collection of index crime data, the UCR reports that the number of policing agencies reporting bias crimes has grown in recent years (U.S. Department of Justice, 1998). While it is very difficult to assess the actual numbers of hate crimes that occur each year without the full participation of the law enforcement community, reports indicate that many agencies are creating programs designed to train officers to recognize and report these crimes. While there have been several articles written on hate crimes, these works have been published to describe and discuss hate and the crime that has revolved around hate. Some of these articles include Freeman and Brith's (1994) discussion of hate and the law; Israel (1992) and Herek and Berrill's (1992) work on hate crimes and gays and lesbians; Wolfe's (1928) thesis of hate as a crime of passion; Levin and McDevitt's (1993) examination of the rising tide of bigotry and violence; Lawrence's (1999) discussion on punishing hate; Jacobs and Potter's (1998) investigation of hate crimes and identity politics; D'Angelo's (1998) study of hate and the psychology of offenders; and Jenness and Kendel's (1997) study of hate and social movements. Though these articles focus on hate and related crime, this article addresses a neglected area of hate crime research--collecting accurate hate crime statistics, profiling, and preventions. As such, this paper is divided into four parts. Part One provides hate crime statistics for 1996 through 1998. Part Two presents theories on the causes and spread of hate. Part Three argues that a general profile of offenders can be constructed, and Part Four discusses prevention strategies. In the final analysis, the authors contend that hate crimes can be reduced. Part One : Hate Crime Statistics (1996-98) Hate crime groups have grown drastically in recent years. Traditionally, when one thought of a hate group, images of the Ku Klux Klan emerged along with cross burnings and figures of people wearing white robes. However, the reality is that the Klan is on decline and other hate groups are now on the rise. Today, some separatists feel that the old Klan is a "dinosaur," not aggressive and technical enough in its approach of asserting dominance and power. This view has led to the formation of other divisions of hate groups. It is estimated that over 500 such groups exist. Some include: The White Aryan Resistance (WAR), White Patriot Party, The Order, Aryan Nations, Posse Comitatus, The Covenant, The Sword, The Army of the Lord, Christian Conservative Church, neo-Nazis, "skin heads," militias, and other separatist groups expounding God's law of an America ruled exclusively by people of noncolor (see Holden, 1988; Intelligence Project, 1999). Despite this, The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) reports that new evidence suggests that membership in these groups is growing at an alarming rate because of the anonymity of receiving membership over the Internet using a computer in the confines of one's own home (see Intelligence Project, 1999). The article reports that since nearly every home has a computer and hate groups disseminate literature over the Net, membership can be acquired surreptitiously. Unlike the past, when those desiring membership would have to meet with members of the Klan in a public or private forum, today this can be done at home, in a library, a copy store, or any place that has a computer and access to the Internet. This, the SPLC contends, will invariably help to increase membership in separatists groups. Despite future projections that hate crime groups are increasing in numbers, the UCR provides information on hate crimes that indicates whether these crimes have increased or decreased in recent times (See Table 1 for hate crime trends). Table 1 reveals that in 1996 police agencies indicated that 8,759 bias motivated criminal incidents were reported. Of these incidents, 5,396 were motivated by racial bias; 1,407 by religious bias; 1,016 by sexual orientation bias; 940 by ethnicity and national origin bias; and 6 by multiple biases. Twelve people were murdered in 1996 in hate-related crimes. Racial bias motivated ten of the murders and sexual preference bias accounted for the remaining two. Of the majority of reported hate crime incidents in 1996, thirty-one percent occurred on residential properties. Twenty-one percent occurred on highways, roads, alleys, and streets, and nine percent occurred in schools and colleges. Police agencies reported, of the known offenders, 63 percent were White and 19 percent were Black. Offenders were unknown in 14 percent of the cases. The number of known offenders totaled 8,935 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1997). Of the hate crimes committed in 1997, Table 1 shows that 8,049 bias-motivated criminal incidents were reported. Of these incidents, 4,710 were motivated by racial bias; 1,385 by religious bias; 1,102 by sexual orientation bias; 836 by ethnicity and national origin bias; 12 because of disability; and 4 by multiple biases. Eight people were murdered in 1997 in hate-related crime. Racial bias motivated five of the murders and sexual preference bias accounted for three. Of the majority of reported hate crime incidents in 1997, thirty percent occurred on residential properties. Twenty-one percent occurred on highways, roads, alleys, and streets, and eleven percent occurred in schools and colleges. Police agencies reported of the known offenders, 63 percent were White, 19 percent were Black, and 18 percent were unknown. The number of known offenders totaled 8,474 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1998). For hate crimes statistics collected in 1998, Table 1 shows that 7,755 bias motivated criminal incidents were reported. Of these incidents, 4,321 were motivated by racial bias; 1,390 by religious bias; 1,260 by sexual orientation bias; 754 by ethnicity and national origin bias; 25 because of disability; and 5 by multiple biases. Thirteen people were murdered in 1998 in hate-related crime. Racial bias motivated ten of the murders and sexual preference bias accounted for three. Of the majority of reported hate crime incidents in 1998, thirty-two percent occurred on residential properties. Twenty-one percent occurred on highways, roads, alleys, and streets, and fourteen percent occurred in schools and colleges. Police agencies reported of the known offenders, 66 percent were White, 17 percent were Black, and 17 percent were unknown. The number of known offenders totaled 7,489 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1999). Part Two: Theories on the Causes of Hate Crimes Social Learning Hate is hard to measure. It takes many forms and not just crime. Some experts believe that hate crimes increase during tough economic times, and when the economy gets better race relations improve. Hate is not an intrinsic behavior that one has, but rather, it is a learned behavior. One does not need membership in an organization that teaches hate in order to learn hate. One can be directly or vicariously taught to hate within the context of the socialization process by family members and friends. Despite this, Akers (1985) argued that the wider social environment was the most important factor in learning any behavior. According to Akers, the social environment provided the reinforcement needed to continue any behavior, especially criminal. He reasoned that learning was contingent on social interactions that provide a stimulus. Akers believed that not only did people learn behavior, but they also learned the definitions that went along with the behavior. The definitions provided the moral component of learning, which would indicate to the person if reward or punishment would be forthcoming. Definitions could be verbal or symbolic that served as discriminative stimuli or cues about the consequences of behavior--reward or punishment. Social learning argues that to the extent that behavior is rewarded, it will continue. However, if it is punished, the behavior should discontinue. Those with membership in hate groups must be socialized and indoctrinated into the groups' shared norms and lifestyles. While exposed to the group, they learn how to neutralize and devalue minorities, Jews, people with alternative lifestyles, and anyone who is sympathetic or associates with people who are non-White. They learn to view these people and groups as less than human. By being able to dehumanize another's personhood, hate crime offenders are free to engage in episodes of fatal violence. Historically, supremacists and hate groups have perpetuated ideas that other races, ethnicities and groups of people were less than human and inferior to Whites. They have even gone so far as to make biblical references to their assertions. According to the learning theory, people learn behaviors by associating and interacting with others who provide them reasons favorable to engaging in certain behaviors. Moreover, they provide the techniques that are necessary to accomplish a desired goal. Where hate groups are concerned, learning takes place in intimate personal groups that promote the groups' norms. Symbolic Interactionism Sociologists have long argued that symbolic interaction occurs in intimate groups and can explain group behavior. Symbolic interaction posits that in close groups, members or people belonging to a clique communicate with each other orally, as well as symbolically. They come to define who they are based on the expectations of other members. Their personality and behaviors are molded by what they perceive is valued by the group. They are also rewarded and held in high esteem if they exhibit those qualities that the group values and promotes. Therefore, if a group advocates violence and oppression of other people, those individuals who display these behaviors are highly valued within these subcultures. Blumer (1969) thought that human behavior was a product of social symbols communicated between individuals. He argued that the mind and self were products of their social environments. In the process of communicating and interacting with others, one learns how to define others, as well as themselves. Blumer postulated that for those in a clique or group, the symbols that are communicated provide meaning to members. Moreover, he argued that each person selects his own self-concept from the perception we feel that others have of us. He contends that others are not necessarily persons we may know, but rather, they could be the generalized others. As such, we create our own identities by reflections from others. The logic of symbolic interactionism is that we may have a multiplicity of identities based on the social settings and gatherings in which we participate. As a result, each setting may demand its own role, behavior, attitude, and its own identity. Therefore, a proper definition of the situation is mandatory in order to respond with appropriate behavior. Cultural Transmission of Deviance The cultural transmission of deviance theory helps to explain the behaviors that occur and are produced by hate groups. The theory argues that new members are taught and trained by seasoned members on how to hate and inflict violence with impunity. This explains why violence and hatred continue to occur from one generation to the next. Sellin (1938) discussed conduct norms that were unique to groups and cultures. He argued that conduct norms defined appropriate behavior within the context of a group in which one had membership. Sellin argued that if a group approved of certain behaviors yet the dominant culture disapproved of such behaviors, the stage was set for criminal behavior, especially if members of the group had more allegiance to the subculture rather than the dominant culture or conventional society. Sellin argued that through a process of interaction, cultural norms specifying acceptable behavior within the group were passed on from one generation to the next. This accounted for the acceptance of crime and deviance in certain groups and cultures continuing over extended periods of time. This explains how separatists groups sustain themselves over time. Strain Theory The strain theory provides a different approach to explain the cause of hate. Instead of a learning theory, strain is a social structural explanation that many view as an economic theory. As such, the case can be made that when economic conditions are strained and there is a shortage of jobs, this could be conducive to the rise in crimes targeted against people of different races and ethnicities. For example, in a documentary entitled, On Hate Street, aired by 48 Hours, news anchorman Dan Rather reported that experts contend during harsh economic times, hate crimes may be motivated by competition from non-Whites. He argued that hate crime offenders reason that their plight would not be as grim were it not for other races and groups of people perhaps taking or having a job or economic opportunity that they could otherwise have. Levin and McDevitt (1993) report that during these times, minorities are used as "scapegoats" as the cause of the negative conditions that others are experiencing. Because of the strain of having limited employment opportunities, they react with violence against those whom they perceive are the cause of their economic hardship (also see Daly and Wilson, 1988; Gartner and McCarthy, 1991). While crime statistics indicate that hate crimes increased in the 1990s, reports on the state of the economy revealed that almost all Americans have experienced economic growth. For example, in an article entitled, "U.S. Income Reaches Record," census officials reported that the median household income rose in every region of the country for the first time since economic measurements began in 1975 and the nation's overall poverty rate is 12.7 percent, which is the lowest it has been in two decades (The Kansas City Star, 1999, A1 and A13). If hate crimes are believed to increase during tough economic times and current reports indicate that the economy has never been better, why did hate crimes increase in 1995 and level off in 1997? The inverse relationship (of fewer jobs and more crime) expounded by hate crime experts is not found. A lack of economic opportunity does not appear to be the driving force behind the number of hate crimes committed in the 1990s. Part Three: Profiling Hate Crime Offenders A profile is a picture or representation of a person. Profiling is a dangerous exercise that typically has the unintended effect of being tantamount to stereotyping or generalizing about an entire race or group of people. For example, statistics indicate that those who typically engage in hate crimes are young White males who normally commit assaults and intimidation (McDevitt, 1996). This is largely what hate crime offenders do. They look at people of other nationalities and races and immediately form opinions about the entire group without considering differences that exist. The authors of this work do not intend to make the same mistake that appears to be so commonplace among separatists. If a typology of hate crime offenders were constructed employing a content analysis that examined the physical (demographical) characteristics of those who have engaged in all reported hate crimes with respect to race, age, gender and education, the point would be missed because physical features alone are not enough to correctly provide a profile. Indeed, many innocent people would be immediately regarded as having a propensity to harbor and act on hate. Therefore, this paper will take another approach that ignores personal characteristics (e.g., race, age, gender, and education) and focuses instead on the personality of hate crime offenders. After examining hate crimes using a content analysis with data provided by the SPLC, offenders appear to be those who are socially isolated, considered persona non grata by most conventional standards, have low self-esteem, just wanting to belong to a group or desperately seeking to find their place in the world. As a result, they will sometimes take acceptance and belonging anywhere they can find it. Once accepted, they are taught the group's valued norms and philosophy. As a member of a separatist group, they learn the ideas, values, and expectations shared by the group. If they are good at exhibiting the group's values, they are elevated within these structures. They do not typically appear to be those who are well adjusted or competitive. This does not suggest that they cannot be, it implies that those who are adjusted and competitive represent the exceptions, rather than the rule. Those who appear to be stable and educated are typically in leadership roles. They write articles, head fund raisers, and promote greater membership. They are those who work behind the scenes, while those who openly display violence and antisocial behavior are those who do grunt work. They are the foot soldiers. They are the most visible representatives of separatists. Part Four: Strategies to Prevent Hate Crimes Because of its amorphous nature, it will take a community-wide commitment to adequately address the problem of hate and to provide effective preventions to either reduce or eliminate hate crimes that occur each year. Community-wide effort in this context literally means help from all institutions (official and unofficial) in America. Some historians (see Aptheker, 1993) adamantly argue that the American government has helped co-author a negative past that has promoted racial segregation and unequal treatment through its policies. They quickly cite the case of Plessey v. Ferguson (1896). In Plessey, the United States Supreme Court held that separate facilities for Blacks and Whites were constitutional, and though the Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision would overturn Plessey's "separate but equal" edict, racism, prejudice, and separatism were deeply embedded in the American culture. The legal endorsement of Plessey served to institutionalize disparate treatment in all facets of American life (i.e. education, employment, housing, and public accommodations) and may have been a catalyst that promoted hate, separation, and racial superiority for many people of noncolor since they benefitted from the then existing social arrangements. Historians argue that in the past such policies helped to legitimize divisiveness between the majority and cultural and ethnic minorities. Notwithstanding the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment granting due process and equal protection, civil rights legislation and affirmative action policies to correct pass injustices, historians contend that the government should play an active role in correcting many of the existing problems of race relations in contemporary society. Again, preventing hate crimes is not the sole responsibility of the government, though it is charged with protecting its citizenry. Despite this, crusades should be mounted from both community residents and official responses to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, hate crimes. Viable strategies that can be used to prevent the continuation of hate crimes that can come from the efforts of official and unofficial responses include better data collection, educational campaigns on cultural diversity awareness and racial tolerance, civil litigations, and deprogramming hate crime offenders. The Need for Better Data Collection In order to prevent hate crime, one must know the actual numbers that exist. Many hate crimes are not reported for the following reasons: (1) Some illegal immigrants have a language barrier and may face the prospect of deportation; (2) Homosexuals want to "stay in the closet" choosing not to have their lifestyle discovered at the risk of having their reputations destroyed; (3) Officers are not properly trained to recognize hate crime. As such, some illegal behavior is not detected and reported as a hate crime; and (4) Many people are unwilling to report that hate crimes occur in their community out of fear that the negative publicity could create further strain on race relations. Without accurate data, one would have a difficult time determining if efforts to reduce these crimes are having a significant effect. Moreover, the validity of the hate crime statistics provided by the FBI from 1996 to 1998, can be challenged since in 1998 despite there being over 17,000 police agencies, only 10,461 agencies reported hate crime statistics. The actual participation from the law enforcement community has declined from 11,211 in 1997. This comes as a surprise since the Justice Department has promised to increase its efforts to collect better statistics by increasing police training and urging jurisdictions to participate in the collection of hate crime data. What accounts for the decline in the number of police departments that participated in these data collections in the past? What about the other organizations that do not participate? They could account for "missing" hate crime data. Therefore, official reports of hate crime must be viewed as suspect, at best. Because of the sporadic nature of hate crime, it has confounded criminal justice scholars and FBI personnel responsible for compiling the UCR. The UCR and National Crime Victimization Survey indicate that victimization is not random, but rather, a function of personal and ecological factors--not so where hate crimes are concerned. In addition, those employed by public interest organizations are confronted with the same problem. One irony that one confronts while examining hate crime data is the inconsistencies in the number of crimes reported by official and public interest organizations. Official agencies report hate crimes, about which they are certain when they have been properly trained to recognize them. On the other hand, public interest organizations tend to report any incidence of a hate crime including bias-motivated comments as hate crimes, and accept all reports--even from anonymous sources (Levin and McDevitt, 1993). One report indicates that while the UCR reported 8,759 hate crimes in 1996, a public interest organization reported 10,702. This creates problems of accuracy if one desires to know the actual numbers occurring each year. This makes creating a profile all the more difficult. What is needed is the construction of a hate crime index where there is consensus about its definition. Perhaps, this anomaly in data collection begs the question--why haven't law enforcement officers done a better job of identifying patterns that are associated with these crimes, similar to other index crimes? Despite this question, some experts argue that collecting these statistics might not be as simple as it seems. For example, Levin and McDevitt (1993) argue that much uncertainty exists over the number of hate crimes committed each year because data are incomplete. Massive Educational Campaigns in Cultural Diversity Awareness and Racial Tolerance Because some believe the "sons inherit the sins of their fathers," attitudes are grim about changing the beliefs and behavior of older adults; however, critics remain optimistic about the prospect of reaching young people before they are introduced to and consumed with hate. Of the many strategies that can be used to stop the spread of hate, experts feel the most important is education. They argue that people must be aware of the multiculturalism that exists in the United States. As such, everyone should be taught about the many cultures and contributions of other races and ethnic minorities. Education should encourage differences and tolerance. Education, they contend, should not start when students reach high school age, but rather, educational efforts should begin as early as the pre-adolescent stage in the United States. For example, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has been involved in a number of youth intervention and hate crime education programs. The ADL in Massachusetts has assisted the A World of Difference Institute along with its local Attorney General's Office with developing the Youth Diversion Project in which nonviolent youth offenders are diverted into alternative education and community service programs. In addition to targeting children who are at risk, the ADL has helped to develop a model curriculum for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to be used in the instruction of Federal, State, and local police officials with the detection of hate crime. Furthermore, the Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) has funded a project to develop a comprehensive hate crime training curriculum. OVC has released a manual entitled, National Bias Crimes Training for Law Enforcement and Victim Assistance Professionals (Archer, 1996). These latter efforts should generate more accurate detection of hate crimes among law enforcement officers and foster greater participation in collecting hate crime statistics. Attempts to generate diversity awareness and racial tolerance are not exclusive to classrooms and law enforcement settings, but rather, some religious groups and church congregations are taking special efforts to address the problem. The Racial Reconciliation Initiative, sponsored by the National Black Evangelical Association and the National Association of Evangelicals, disseminates materials that help Christians understand the sources of conflicts between races. The initiative is issued by these groups to promote racial and cultural tolerance. It is hoped that what is preached and taught in churches will filter into the respective communities where the congregations reside and race relations and tolerance will become a reality, instead of a theory. Civil Litigation Remedies--Some Pertinent Cases in the 1980s and 1990s In addition to tracking the movement and growth of separatist and hate crime groups, the SPLC has championed the cause of filing civil litigations against these groups. Some strategists believe that this is one of the most effective ways of stopping the spread of hate. They argue that if these organizations lack the economic resources to sustain themselves, they will eventually dismantle. Therefore, when SPLC represents the victims or surviving family members of hate crime, it tries to render these organizations financially drained from the experience in the hope that other groups will be deterred from similar behavior. For example, in 1987, the family of Michael Donald, along with the SPLC won a $7 million judgement against the Alabama Klan headquarters based in Tuscaloosa after Michael was severely beaten and lynched in Mobile, Alabama. Moreover, In 1988, a jury assessed nearly $1 million against a Klan group that attacked a group of interracial marchers in Forsyth County, Georgia. In the same year, the SPLC sued the "skin heads" who killed an Ethiopian student in Portland, Oregon. A jury awarded $12 million in damages to the victim's relatives. Again, in 1990, White Aryan Resistance and its members were ordered to pay $12.5 million to the family of Mulugeta Seraw. In another lawsuit that occurred in 1990, a case that happened ten years earlier was finally resolved involving the Klan attacking peaceful marchers in Decatur, Alabama. Klansmen agreed to pay damages, perform community services and attend a race relations course taught by their victims. Nine Klan members were later convicted of criminal charges. In May 1996, the SPLC won a judgement against a neo-Nazi leader who has 21 chapters in 13 states. He is the same leader who authored the book on a race-war entitled The Turner Diaries. In Mansfield v. Pierce, the jury verdict sent the message that the law will not allow hate groups to evade responsibility for the violent actions of their members. In this case, attorneys at the SPLC won an $85,000 judgement in the death of Harold Mansfield against William Pierce. A North Carolina jury found that Pierce tried to help hide the assets of another hate group, the Church of the Creator, (COTC) that was earlier found responsible for the death of a Black soldier (SPLC Report, 1998). A jury had already ordered that COTC pay the surviving family $1 million for the death of Mansfield, but the COTC, in an attempt to circumvent the jury's decision, tried to turn over its property ownership to Pierce. In two recent cases, the SPLC won judgements against the White Aryan Resistance and the KKK for the beating and lynching deaths of two African-American men. These judgements yielded $12.5 and $7 million, respectively. Moreover, the SPLC has recently filed another suit against a state KKK organization on behalf of an African-American church that was torched by a Klan member. In Manning, South Carolina, a jury ordered the Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, its state leader, and several others to pay $37.8 million for their role in a conspiracy to burn a Black church. The burning of the Macedonia Baptist Church and the verdict returned by the jury, according to the chief trial lawyer, Morris Dees of the SPLC, "signals that Americans hold some things sacred and that there are still some lines that no one can cross." Moreover, after a five-day trial in North Carolina the jury ordered the Klan national organization to pay $15 million for punitive and $300,000 for compensatory damages after being convicted of criminal charges. The SPLC argued that while the Klan in North Carolina does not have the money to defray the costs of the lawsuit, it will more than likely be put out of business, or it will be severely diminished in its ability to influence others to act on hate (SPLC Report, 1998). Lawyers for the SPLC plan to initiate legal procedures to attach bank accounts, property and other assets belonging to the Klan. The cases provided in this section are not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather, they are representative of many others that have occurred and some that are pending. The strategy behind suing hate groups is to inform them that they are not immune to criminal prosecution and that their organization is civilly liable for the behavior of its members. Moreover, acting on hate can be expensive. It is hoped that continued successful litigation against the Klan and other hate groups will have a deterrent effect on others with a potential to act on hate. Deprogramming Hate Crime Offenders After members have been part of these groups for extended periods of time and desire to discontinue membership and the lifestyle, they must undergo extensive counseling to overcome the effects of long-term indoctrination of hate and separatism. These programs are usually taught by former members of hate crime groups who have invaluable insight into the minds of those wanting to be freed from hate and its associates. Perhaps a politically correct label for this process is reeducating former members so that they can unlearn hate and embrace diversity and racial tolerance. For example, such programs exist and have met with success. The Minnesota Department of Education has created a program designed to teach offenders to unlearn hate and promote self-worth. This program has been used in schools as well as communities. The program operates from the frame of reference that violence can be either individual or institutional. Officials of the program argue that because children learn appropriate and inappropriate behaviors in a variety of settings, preventing and reducing the problem of hate manifested via violence calls on efforts from family, schools, faith communities, organizedsports, and the media. These arenas bear responsibility by either perpetuating violence or can help build positive youth development by being positive role models. The program attempts to bridge the gap between adults and their children by educating both and getting them connected. The program's therapeutic approach believes that positive attachments will strip away violent behaviors. In cases were parents are also consumed with hate, the program believes that the education system will be the most significant factor. It postulates that the insidious nature of racism serves only to erode a person's worth, hope, and meaning when it manifests in violence. As such, the Minnesota program provides violent offenders with a strong sense of cultural identity that it believes will make offenders less likely to engage in at-risk behavior. The programs advocate that diversity that is understood, celebrated, and embraced can be the strength of a community. The program reports a significant decline in crimes that are motivated by hate. Perhaps other groups faced with deprogramming hate offenders can model their programs after the Minnesota program in hope to achieve similar Success. Conclusion There is no question that it will take a communitywide effort to reduce and prevent hate crimes from occurring. However, the law enforcement community will have to play a major role in this endeavor. For example, in order to determine if these crimes are on the rise or decline, the law enforcement community will have to do a better job of collecting hate crime statistics. Without its full participation, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to assess the overall deterrent effect of prevention strategies to reduce hate crimes. As such, a challenge to the law enforcement community is issued to increase its efforts and not allow a reduction in participation to the extent that occurred from 1997 to 1998. For without its complete involvement, efforts to prevent hate crimes may be futile. Despite the uncertainty about the accuracy of these statistics, the total number of hate crimes appear to be declining. However, in some areas such as murder, they have actually increased from 8 in 1997 to 13 in 1998. The authors of this article contend that if the recommendations in this piece are ignored, the consequence might be that more unnecessary deaths will occur. In addition, the authors of this manuscript suggest the construction of a hate crime index that is acceptable by all who collect data to reach a consensus on the number of actual crimes that occur each year. Moreover, distinctions must be made between actual crimes and verbal threats or insults. The latter are not crimes and when included in crime statistics cause confusion. Therefore, they should be excluded from hate crime data. A failure to address this serious shortcoming in data collection might render hate crime statistics suspect. Another important theme of this article was its construction of a profile of the personalities of those who have the potential to act on hate. Based on the profile presented in this article, these individuals are volatile (i.e., depressed, bitter, socially isolated, lonely) and may be "waiting to explode." Therefore, people in general should embrace all and not exclude persons from conventional activities because they look or act a certain way. The continuous rejection by conventional society might "send them over the edge" into a violent rage that ends with serious injuries and death. An episode of this nature occurred at Columbine High School in Colorado. A group called the Trench Coat Mafia was formed containing many of the school's rejects who were not accepted by conventional students. As a reaction to the rejection, this social group was created to give those rejected status and a support group. Eventually, some of the members of the group went on a killing spree targeting minorities, football players, and others who were popular. Perhaps the tragedy that occurred at Columbine teaches a lesson to the broader society--that if people do not find acceptance in conventional society, they might accept it wherever they can find it and engage in that group's norms even if it fosters violent criminal behavior. | |
Table 1: Hate Crime Data Collected From 1996 to 1998
1996 1997 1998
Category of Hate Crime
Racial Bias 5,396 4,710 4,321
Religious Bias 1,407 1,385 1,390
Sexual Orientation Bias 1,016 1,102 1,260
Ethnicity/National Origin 940 836 754
Disability 0 12 25
Multiple 6 4 5
n 8,759 8,049 7,755
Murdered Victims
Racial Bias 10 5 10
Sexual Orientation 2 3 3
n 12 8 13
Location of Hate Crime
residential Properties 31% 30% 32%
Highways, Alleys, Streets 1 21 21
Schools and Colleges 9 11 14
Known Offenders
Whites 66% 63% 66%
Black 20 19 17
Unknown 14 18 17
Number of Known Offenders 8,935 8,474 7,489
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigations, Criminal
Justice Information Services Division.
| | References Akers, R. L. (1985). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach (3rd edition). Belmont, CA: Wadworths. Aptheker, H. (1993). A documentary of the Negro people in the United States: From the NAACP to the New Deal (volume 3). New York: Carol Publishing Group. Archer, C. W. (1996 March 19). Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U. S. Department of Justice (Testimony before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary). Aston-Wolfe, H. (1928). Crimes of love and hate. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspectives and methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. D'Angelo, L. (1998). Hate crime. Philadelphia, PA: Chelsa House. Daly, M., and Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter Press. Freeman, S., and Brith, B. (1994). Hate crime laws: A comprehensive guide. New York, NY: Anti-Defamation League. Gartner, R., and McCarthy, B. (1991). "The social distribution of femicide in urban Canada, 1921-1988." Law and Society Review, 25, 287-311. Herek, G. M., and Berrill, K. T. (Ed.). (1992). Hate crime: Confronting violence against lesbians and gay men. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Holden, R. (1988). "God's law: Criminal Process and Right wing Extremism in America." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences. San Francisco, CA, April. Israel, C. (1992). Hate crimes against gays and lesbians in the mainstream: An examination of six Texas dailies. Las Calinas, TX: Monument Press. Jacobs, J., and Potter, K. (1998). Hate crimes: criminal law and identity politics. New York: Oxford University Press. Jenness, V., and Broad, K. (1997). Hate crimes: new social movements and the politics of violence. New York: Aldine de Gruyther Press. Lawrence, F. M. (1999). Punishing hate bias crimes under American law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Levin, J., and McDevitt, J. (1993). Hate crimes: The rising tide of bigotry and bloodshed. New York: Plenum Press. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Merton, R. K. (1938). "Social structure and anomie." American Sociological Review, 3, 672-82. McDevitt, J. (1996 March 14). Telephone interview with Brian Levin, Counsel, Klanwatch, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Schmalleger, F. (1999). Criminal justice today: An introductory text for the 21st century. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Sellin. T. (1938). Culture conflict and crime. New York: Social Science Research Council. The Southern Poverty Law Center. (1999). "Deadly `Church' Attracts Headlines and Sociopaths." Intelligence Report (Summer 95). Montgomery, AL. --. (1999). "Hate Groups Top 500." Intelligence Report (Winter 93). Montgomery, AL. --. (1999). "Special Patriot Movement Issue." Intelligence Report. (Spring 94). Montgomery, AL. Southern Poverty Law Center Teaching Tolerance Intelligence Project Litigation. "Court upholds judgment against neo-Nazi leader." SPLC Report, 28(3), 1-3. --. "Jury hits Klan with $37 million verdict." SPLC Report, 28(3), 1-3. U.S. Department of Justice. (1997). Crime in the United States. Uniform Crime Reports. Federal Bureau of Investigation. --. (1999). "Hate Groups Top 500." Intelligence Report (Winter 93). Montgomery, AL. (1998). Crime in the United States. Uniform Crime Reports. Federal Bureau of Investigation. --. (1999). "Hate Groups Top 500." Intelligence Report (Winter 93). Montgomery, AL. (1999). Crime in the United States. Uniform Crime Reports. Federal Bureau of Investigation. "U.S. Income reaches record: Almost every group gains." (October 1). The Kansas City Star, A1, A13. Cases Cited Brown v Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Plessey v. Ferguson, 186 U.S. 537 (1896). James F. Anderson is an Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology, Criminal Justice and Criminology at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. He received a doctorate in Criminal Justice from Sam Houston State University. Laronistine Dyson is CEO and Director of Residential Alternatives Inc. She received a Master's in Communication from Bowling Green State University. Willie Brooks, Jr. is Program Head of the Department of Criminal Justice at The Victoria College in Victoria, Texas. He received a Master's in Criminal Justice from Eastern Kentucky University. |
|
