Hate crime is the new rape, but unlike rape, which is colossal violation of human virtue and sanctity. When in reality a hate crime is a crime that targets the victim’s identity, for example instead of the victim’s equality as described under law. Yet according to “Hope-Fulfilling or Effectively Chilling? Reconciling the Hate Crimes Prevention Act with the First Amendment.” By Carter Coker, published by the Vanderbilt Law Review in 2011, “The powerful sense of violation that hate crime victims experience is comparable only to that of rape victims. In both situations, victims tend to experience psychological symptoms such as depression or withdrawal, as well as anxiety, feelings of helplessness, and a profound sense of isolation.” When in reality this is untrue as Jesse Larner states in his article Jesse Larner Replies, Larner replies to Michael Lieberman, a fellow journalist, “Lieberman presents the heightened emotional trauma of hate crimes as a factual matter. (The same as Coker) This is debatable. . . . In 1994, Arnold Barnes and Paul Ephross attempted to objectively measure victim trauma from bias crimes and found little difference between this kind of trauma and that of victims of other personal crimes.” He also mentions that, “Lieberman argues that bias crimes call for greater punishment than the underline physical crime for several reasons: they are often more violent than non-bias crimes; they have a unique emotional impact on the victims and they constitute intimidation of entire communities.” Where Lieberman is correct is that “greater harm demands greater penalties.” It can be implied that any crime committed is actually a hate crime if one really wanted to, evidence of a hate crime can be found in any crime. For example Larner illustrates a perfect example in his article Hate Crime/ Thought Crime. Larner states “Is someone who targets old women for money in the belief that they will be easy to overpower really committing an age-...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document