'Hate Crimes against Native Americans Essay\r'

' thither have been mishaps in the past wherein hatred victims argon stack from polar racial ethnicities, gender, and throng sleepers. The acts perpetrated against them argon sometimes move by loathe. These acts guinea pigize dis corresponding discourtesy, which has been prevalent in the United States for many course of instructions. There have been periods in time when abhor crimes targeted a specific racial group. Hate crimes are violent acts toward people base on race, religion and in exploital preference, and endemic Ameri ignores became the inveterate assault victims mainly due to misconceptions of people intimately them.\r\nHate plague\r\nHate crime is an gray pheno menon that has plagued the Statesns for many years now. This term and the interest that golf-club has placed on it are recent developments, although the acts associated with abominate crimes have a long history. Because of its complexity and the barrier of including all facets, it would be ha rd to exhaustively particularise detest crimes. In addition, people have opposite concepts of scorn crimes. Defining the concept tends to be influenced by adept’s social norms, political interests, and ethnical differences.\r\nIt would not be a surprise that in that location are even various academic and lord definitions of nauseate crimes around the world (Hall, 2005, pp. 1-2). In its simplest form, nauseate crimes are defined as violent acts make by loathe and target people or organizations base on race or the group affiliation that they belong to (Hall, 2005, p. 2; American psychological Association, 2009). Hate crimes emphasize the underlying values and character of the offenders, which sets abominate crimes unconnected from other sad acts.\r\nIn addition, the criminal behavior that the offender exhibits is driven by â€Å"prejudices from criminal conduct actuate by lust, jealousy, greed, politics, and so forth” (Gerstenfeld & international ampere; G rant, 2003, p. 304). Race and group affiliation are not the sole evidences which motivate despise crimes. In most cases, dislike crime victims are targeted because of color, national origin, gender, ethnicity, disability, and inner orientation (Gerstenfeld & Grant, 2003, p. 304). correspond to an FBI hate crime report, race outranked ghostly and informal orientation as motivation of hate crimes (Ruckman, 2009).\r\n to the highest degree people engage in hate crimes because they are influenced by alcohol and drugs. However, the main reason is smooth ground on personal prejudice which blinds people to the reality of what they are doing. Aside from these, people set up hate crimes because of a piece of reasons much(prenominal) as construes with members of minority groups, economic conditions, and racial stereotypes. Whatever the reason may be, one hate crime contingency can result to domino effect. This is because a hate crime is not just addressed to a single perso n, but to the group that the victim re demonstrates.\r\nThus, acts of hate crimes can cause fear in the consummate community (Gerstenfeld & Grant, 2003, p. 304). Victims and Statistics Hate crimes can be categorized depending on the basis for the motive. The basis can be ga in that respectd from race, religion, and intimate preference. In more than ways, hate crimes serve as hate messages direct to the targets. Hate crime informs the victims that they are not meet to the community or neighborhood (American Psychological Association, 2009). racial preconception remains the main determinant of hate crimes, which affects African Ameiricans, indigen Americans, Caucasians, and Asian/Pacific Islanders.\r\nThis menage of yield refers to the oppose opinion towards groups of persons such as blacks, Asians, or whites. This solidus is also based on physical characteristics. Religious deviate, on the other hand, refers to the negative opinion or attitude directed towards a group o f persons who have the same religious beliefs. Lastly, sexual preference bias refers to the negative opinion about a group of persons based on sexual preference (Office of the Attorney General, 2009). 1990-1995 For many years, reports were collected with regards to the preponderance of hate crimes in the United States.\r\nSince 1990, The Hate iniquity Statistics Act (HCSA) was enacted to gather data on hate crimes from law enforcement agencies from all over the United States. The undermentioned year, in 1991, 4,558 cases of hate crimes were gathered from police departments in 32 supposes. The next year, the data recorded 7,442 incidents. In 1993, there were 7,587 hate crimes, as reported by 6,865 agencies. By 1994, the hail dropped to 5,932. The number profitd to 7,947 in 1995 (Anti-Defamation League, 2009). Out of this total, 41 incidents targeted domestic Americans or Alaskan congenitals (CivilRights, n. d. ).\r\nA number of assaults which occurred between these periods wer e recorded. oneness such case, which occurred in August 1991, was said to be a dramatic incident of anti-Semitic hate crime. The incident occurred in Brooklyn in a motorcade for Grand Rabbi Menachem Scheerson. During the parade, a Hasidic Jew driving a car haply killight-emitting diode a black youth. This event precipitated four days of rioting full of vandalism, assault, and harassments, especially against Jews. During the riot, a 29-year-old rabbinic student was killed by a group of 15 African Americans.\r\nThis incident was â€Å"one of blind, baseless credulity and putrid violent hate” (Gerstenfeld & Grant, 2003, p. 305). There were other incidents of hate crime from 1990 t0 1995. In calcium alone, there were 44 documented cases wherein persons were attacked due to their sexual orientation. The most interesting finding about the cases is that most of the perpetrators were either underage or in their wee 20s (Human Rights Campaign, n. d. , p. 2). 1996 In 1996, the number of hate crime incidents increased. The criminal incidents, actuate by bias, reached to 8,759.\r\nAround 60% or exactly 5,396 of these incidents were motivated by race ( federal means of Investigation, 1996). One percent of the incidents were against native Australian Americans (Central Michigan University, 2006). Incidents based on religious bias compositioned for 1,401 of the total number of incidents. Incidents accounted under sexual-orientation bias were 1,016 in total. Other biases based on ethnicity account for the 946 incidents. The most common form of hate crime was intimidation, which accounted for 39% of the total incidents. goal or vandalism came as second speckle assault was third.\r\nDuring this year, there were 12 recorder individual reachs motivated by hate, of which eight were based on racial bias. Furthermore, the detailed information gathered revealed that the assure of California has the most number of hate crime incidents, write up for 2,723 inci dents out of the total number of incidents. deterrence was also the common form of hate crime (Federal role of Investigation, 1996). 1997-1999 The number of hate crime incidents decrease in 1997. From 8,759 incidents in 1996, the number decreased to 8,049 in 1997.\r\nThe number of incidents further decreased a year later, which accounted for 7,755. The breakdown of the cases according to bias is the following: 4,321 cases were motivated by racial bias, of which 36 were against Native Americans; 1,390 cases by religious bias; and 1,260 cases by sexual orientation. By the year 1999, the number of incidents increased to 7,876. More than 50% of the cases were motivated by racial bias, of which 47 incidents were against Native Americans; 18% motivated by religious bias; and 17% motivated by sexual orientation.\r\n bullying is still the number one form of hate crime (Uniform Crime Reports, â€Å"Hate Crime Statistics,” n. d. ). One of the brutal cases of hate crime within these p eriods occurred in 1998, when a disabled man from Texas was absented. James Byrd, junior , a black man, was on his way domicile from a party when three men offered him a ride to which he agreed. Byrd was taken outside the townsfolk and was chained by his ankles to the back of the car. The men because drove the car, thus dragging Byrd along a logging road. Byrd died after having his arm and head ripped apart from his body.\r\nThis was a traumatizing experience for the black community (Gerstenfeld & Grant, 2003, pp. 304-305). other hate crime motivated by sexual orientation bias was committed against a gay college student, Matthew Shepard. Two men robbed and beat him with a pistol, after which they tied him to a fence in a near-freezing temperatures. He died from rail ats to his brain stem. Another incident took place in Alabama in 1999. Billy Jack Gaither was abducted by two men who got angry by an alleged sexual heighten of Gaither.\r\nThey beat him with an ax handle and set him on fire atop burning tires (Human Rights Campaign, n. d. ). 2000 By 2000, there was again an increase in the number of hate crime incidents as recorded by the Federal agency of Investigation. The number was 8,063, wherein 53. 8% accounted for racial bias, 18. 3% motivated by religious bias, and 16. 1% motivated by sexual-orientation bias. The main form of hate crime, like from the past years, is intimidation. By this year, the number of offenses against Native American increased from 47 in 1999 to 57 in 2000 (Federal potency of Investigation, 2001).\r\nMurder cases directly connected to hate crime decreased to 16, from a previous 28 in 1999. Chicago, Columbus, and Colorado have increasing murder trends while New York City, Michigan, San Francisco and Houston have decreasing trends. However, murder is just the tip of the iceberg. Out of all the hate crimes documented for the year 2000, hate crimes occurred in polar forms in higher number than the murder cases. literal har assment has the highest number of hate crime incidents, accounting for 1,337 cases.\r\nIntimidation is also at the top of the total with 951 cases. Assault/attempted murder comes next with 786 cases. vandalism accounts for 120 cases while robbery and sexual assaults account for 95 and 80 cases, respectively (Moore, 2001, pp. 12-13). 2001-2004 The incidence of hate crimes increased significantly during 2001. The number of incidences was 9,730, registering a 20. 7% increase. Racial bias was the leading motivation, accounting for 44. 9% (Anti-Defamation League, 2005). One percent of these incidents victimized Native Americans.\r\nThis implies that one in ten hate crimes is targeted against the natives. This was said to be an interesting finding because Native Americans, along with Alaskan natives, comprise less than 1% of the U. S. population (Broyles, 2009, p. 30). Also, religious bias accounted for 18. 8% while sexual orientation bias was 14. 3%. The majority of the religious bias i ncidents were anti-Semitic crimes (Anti-Defamation League, 2005). The following year, FBI reported that the number of hate crime incidents decreased by almost 25%. Incidents were 7,462, as reported by FBI.\r\nAs expected, racial bias was seen as the primary motivation, which accounted to almost half of all the incidents during this year (Associated Press, 2003). In addition, there was an increase in the number of incidents against Native Americans. This year, the incidents reached 62 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, n. d. ). Also, more than 19% accounted for religious bias and 16. 7% on sexual-orientation bias (Uniform Crime Reports, â€Å"Hate Crime Statistics, 2002,” n. d. ). From 2003 to 2004, the number of hate crime incidents rose by 0. 9%, from 7,489 incidents in 2003 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Miami Division, 2005) to 7,649 in 2004 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, n. d. ).\r\nOut of the number of incidents in 2003, racial bias was again the main motivation fo r the crimes, religious bias followed, and then sexual orientation bias (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Miami Division, 2005). Again, there was an increase in the number of incidents against Native Americans, the total reaching 76 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2004). In 2004, more than 50% accounted for incidents motivated by racial bias.\r\nReligious bias accounted for 18% of the incidents while 15. 7% accounted for sexual-orientation bias (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2005, p. 5). It would be interesting to grapple that crimes motivated by biases in race, religion and sexual orientation comprised a very small piece of the total number of crimes in 2004. Crimes motivated by bias were only 0. 05% (Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, 2005, p. 12). In addition, the number of incidents against Native Americans increased to 83 (federal Bureau of Investigation, n. d. ). 2005 until the present\r\nFrom 2005 to 2006, there was a 7. 8% increase in the number of hate crime incident s while there was a downward trend from 2006 to 2007. The data from FBI showed that racial bias was the persistent motivation for all crimes, followed by religious bias and sexual orientation bias. In addition, intimidation was the main form of hate crime, move out in 2007 where the main form is destruction/damage/vandalism (Federal Bureau of Investigation, n. d. ). Native Americans as Victims Native Americans, also called American Indians, populated North America even before Europeans arrived.\r\nIn fact, they have been lively in the land for many years (NativeAmericans, 2007). The arrival of Europeans in America was the onset of the hate crimes that targeted Native Americans (Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1997). Europeans were materialistic and culturally arrogant that they wanted to lay claim on the land that Native Americans resided on (NativeAmericans, 2007). American Indians found the attitude of Europeans odious (NativeAmericans, 2007). Thus, the natives resisted the inv aders. In turn, the Europeans considered the Indians as barbaric.\r\nAlthough most of the natives remained passive, they did not experience so much hate crime as to the near genocide of the Yuki and Cheyenne Indians. By 1848, Indians were already the subject of violence through kidnapping, sexual assault, starvation, depletion of viands supplies, fraud, theft, murder, and other atrocities. It was found out that Europeans wanted to uproot the natives to give way to White settlements. In addition, the state itself sponsored kill parties to achieve this goal (Gerstenfeld & Grant, 2003, p. 6).\r\nIn lieu with the genocide, Broyles argued that not all of the deaths were done deliberately (2009, p. 29). The diseases that Europeans brought with them killed many Indians. Aside from the genocide, there were also conflicts which led to events victimizing the natives. Some of these events were the Indian Wars and the establishment of the Indian remotion Act signed by then president And rew Jackson. The Native Americans were defenseless because they were outnumbered. Aside from this, they lacked advanced weapons and were not willing to cooperate (NativeAmericans, 2007).\r\n'