The twentieth century seemingly came to an abrupt end much as it had opened – with large fragmentations of violence and treacherous behaviour towards each other, specifically hate crimes. Racial, gender, ethnics and religious violence persists as mechanisms of oppression, which sadly is not too dissimilar from the past century with the likes of Hitler and his Nazi doctrines which drew heavily on extremist Christian beliefs of Arianism or more contemporary acts of hate crimes like the killing of Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson, the dozens of school shootings in America as well as the murderous rampage of Benjamin Smith. These all stand as reminders that the bigotry that kills is much more than an unfortunate chapter in the history of
…show more content…
1999). The second type of offence is based on a group selection model (also referred to as the discriminatory selection model). Under these offences the offender need only ‘select’ his/her victim from a particular protected group. The second type of offence is based on a ‘group selection’ model (also referred to as the discriminatory selection model). Under these offences the offender need only ‘select’ his/hers victim from a particular protected group. Proof of prejudice, bias, hostility, or hatred is not necessary. Under this interpretation of hate crime it can be speculated that, definitions of prejudice such as those put forward by Allport (1954) become irrelevant, well at least within the legality of things. Instead, the offender’s intention to choose a victim because of their perceived association with a particular group is all that is …show more content…
Like most laws, the act does not use the words ‘hate crime’, relying instead on more traditional criminal law language to create the specific offences of ‘racially or religiously aggravated’ assault, criminal damage, harassment, stalking, and several public order offences. The act itself very much dependant on the role of campaign groups which, undoubtedly, has been central to the way that policy has developed. Groups such as ‘victims groups’ included in hate crime legislation represent those who have activists and campaigners lobbying on their behalf, gathering data and engaging with criminal justice monitoring and advisory group. Campaigns had been initiated because those of which working alongside victims of hate—based violence or bigotry felt that the CJS were not taking victims seriously (Chakraborti, N. 2009). Hate crime was a useful banner under which to frame these claims and to highlight the similarities between different forms of victimisation. As many academics have noted, being included in hate crime legislation was designed to send a positive message to specific victim groups (Iganski, 1999; Hall 2013). For the police it was a useful way to engage communities and to win their ‘trust and confidence’ (ACPO 2000: 18). For the
1999). The second type of offence is based on a group selection model (also referred to as the discriminatory selection model). Under these offences the offender need only ‘select’ his/her victim from a particular protected group. The second type of offence is based on a ‘group selection’ model (also referred to as the discriminatory selection model). Under these offences the offender need only ‘select’ his/hers victim from a particular protected group. Proof of prejudice, bias, hostility, or hatred is not necessary. Under this interpretation of hate crime it can be speculated that, definitions of prejudice such as those put forward by Allport (1954) become irrelevant, well at least within the legality of things. Instead, the offender’s intention to choose a victim because of their perceived association with a particular group is all that is …show more content…
Like most laws, the act does not use the words ‘hate crime’, relying instead on more traditional criminal law language to create the specific offences of ‘racially or religiously aggravated’ assault, criminal damage, harassment, stalking, and several public order offences. The act itself very much dependant on the role of campaign groups which, undoubtedly, has been central to the way that policy has developed. Groups such as ‘victims groups’ included in hate crime legislation represent those who have activists and campaigners lobbying on their behalf, gathering data and engaging with criminal justice monitoring and advisory group. Campaigns had been initiated because those of which working alongside victims of hate—based violence or bigotry felt that the CJS were not taking victims seriously (Chakraborti, N. 2009). Hate crime was a useful banner under which to frame these claims and to highlight the similarities between different forms of victimisation. As many academics have noted, being included in hate crime legislation was designed to send a positive message to specific victim groups (Iganski, 1999; Hall 2013). For the police it was a useful way to engage communities and to win their ‘trust and confidence’ (ACPO 2000: 18). For the