Talk:Hate crime

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2021 and 13 March 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): J.perales1121.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TylaE28.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sgarcia98.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Iran

I have a concern with this section. The individual country sections are detailing hate crime laws/legislation in those countries, where the entry for Iran talks about actions of the state against homosexuals. This material seems much more suited to Human rights in Iran. Kevin (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

If there are no objections I will move/merge the material as above. Kevin (talk) 22:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Obviously I object. It's relevant because of Iran's presence in the media regarding their hate crimes against gays. Their own President saying "There aren't any homosexuals in Iran" was all over the news, world wide. The section on Iran's torture and killing of gay Iranians speaks to how it deals with hate crimes. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 23:18, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Is there a source describing their actions as a hate crime, rather than a human rights abuse? My view of hate crime is more related to individuals and/or groups actions toward others, rather than a governments actions toward it's citizens. Kevin (talk) 23:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Anyone else? Kevin (talk) 03:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

It sounds like it would be relevant to both topics to me. LadyofShalott 05:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Has it already been moved or is it the last paragraph with many refs on it? -- Banjeboi 15:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It's the last paragraph with many refs on it. - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 17:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I have a concern with the entire section. It is supposed to be a section that describes the laws in the nation dealing specifically with hate crimes. None of the sentences do that, neither the ones referencing the constitution nor the ones that describe Iran's human rights record.

Look at all the other nation's entries. Each describes the state of hate crime enhancement laws, or the lack thereof, in the country. Iran just looks like someone added the consitution entries to make Iran look good in this light, and then others added the human rights record to debate that. Really, all of this material should be removed and replaced with specific information on hate crime punishment in Iran, of whatever form they might have.--joeOnSunset (talk) 04:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I pared down the whole section. Most of the consitution references don't deal with hate crimes. I kept the one that came the closest, so as not to have to blank the entire section. I have been unable to source any material that deals directly with the topic of hate crimes protections in Iran. --joeOnSunset (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Revisiting this, I now suggest removing the entire Iran section. Here's why: a nation does not necessarily have laws related to hate or bias crimes they way they are defined in this article. There is now already a list growing in this article naming such countries. The section of the Iran constitution quoted plainly does not relate to bias crimes. I have been unable to find ANY information from a secondary source about such legislation in Iran (for two years, see above.) So I've removed the section. Anyone wishing to bring it back should just please find a cite that's on-topic. --joeOnSunset (talk) 03:54, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Change to lede: perceived membership

I have changed the following sentence in the lead:

Hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her membership in a certain social group,

to

Hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group,

Hate crimes are generally defined according to motive. A gay-bashing does not become less a crime directed against gay people, for instance, just because the victim is a heterosexual mistaken for a homosexual. --TS 00:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Israel

Why isn't Israel on the list? http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1104506.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcovitaly (talk • contribs) 03:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Canada in Eurasia

Got to be merged with Canada in its right place. 217.195.19.145 (talk) 13:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

• Merged Canada into North America section. Per WP:CYCLE, I've made a few adjustments to the use of double and single quotes and attached references to each quote. I felt the two sentences regarding Section 319 were redundant and have merged them together as well. Feel free to re-word. Ruodyssey (talk) 01:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Homeless

I removed the section about hate crimes against homeless persons (added here) for several reasons, none challenging its validity. All of its links are now dead, so it lacks a Reliable Source. This subsection was copied and pasted into both this article and Hate crime laws in the United States, where it would be more appropriate anyway. Hate crime#US is meant to be a Summary, so this just adds Undue Weight. More to the point, the section was added by the indefinitely banned sockpuppet Drutton57 and can be removed for this reason alone. - Ruodyssey (talk) 09:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

White-On-White Hate Crimes

A court in the United States has found that a white-on-white (or any same-race) crime can still be prosecuted as a racially motivated incident if the attacker was motivated by the victim's being in an interracial relationship. I'm not quite sure how to work this in, though (should it get its own section in this article, or should there be a separate article for same-race racially motivated violence?) Any advice would be welcome.[1] [2] Stonemason89 (talk) 17:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The second ref may not be an RS, so it's a shame the first is so short. I'd recommend adding this tidbit into a subsection of Hate crime laws in the United States instead of here once we have some more informative refs -- maybe as this case plays out. Ruodyssey (talk) 04:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

There has been an increase of what would be called "hate crime" incidents over other social group status: Italians, Polish people, Mormons, French speaking Canadians, Southerners and Irish people. For example, to make an ethnic joke or claim "these people are so and so" can qualify as "hate speech" therefore an act of racial, sociocultural or ethnic group hatred. I'm not joking around here, this is serious since a person comes up to you and make fun of your group/background like they are "mafioso, polacks, polygamous or wackos, too stupid to speak English, rednecks or drunks/pagans". + 71.102.7.77 (talk) 00:19, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Is "hate speech" a "hate crime"? No.

Hate crime

Hate speech

A "hate crime" is a criminal matter. A "hate crime" has two elements: (1) a subsumed crime, e.g., assault, and (2) the perpetrator's hatred of the victim. The perpetrator hates the victim because the victim belongs (or is believed to belong) to some hated group. The perpetrator's hatred may be manifested by "hateful speech," by his graffiti, by his tattoos, or by other means. A "hate crime" has a higher penalty than the subsumed crime.

"Hate speech," in matters of law, is not the same as "hateful speech." Hate speech is an offense which may be a criminal matter or a civil wrong or both. Where hate speech is an offense, it is an offense by itself; hate speech does not need any other criminal behavior to accompany it. Hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is offensive to some group that the law protects. Hateful speech does not amount to hate speech unless a protected group takes offense.

PYRRHON  talk   23:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Hate speech should not be included in Hate Crimes, based on constitutional decisions that have been noted in my removal. Hate speech, as opposed to speech that constitutes "fighting words" is protected as defined in Wikipedia's article on the subject of "hate speech" This was reverted when I amended this sentence on the "hate crime" page, which I will challenge and request a decision from administratorsArodb (talk) 16:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles should have a ||WP:GLOBAL|global perspective]] as far as possible. You introduce a US perspective in the lead. A US perspective is OK to mention in the parts that discuss the specific situation in that country, but putting it in the lede puts undue weight on the law in one country. This is especially problematic as the US law regarding hate speech is unique. Sjö (talk) 06:13, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Canada

I removed the opinion which introduced the section on Canada because "An encyclopedia is a collection of facts" not opinions (See WP:Writing better articles.), and because the opinion deals with hate speech although this article is about hate crime. I removed the information about hate propaganda because that information is a matter of hate speech not hate crime. (Matters of hate speech are at Hate speech laws in Canada.) I quoted the hate crime provision of Canada's Criminal Code to show how hate crime provisions are worded. I deleted the mention of Canada's civil laws against discrimination because those laws are not a matter of hate crime. PYRRHON  talk   16:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Hate crime debate

I just visited this page for the first time, and noticed up front two comments about "Multiple issues." They were "Tagged since June, 2010." As I write this, the date is May 19, 2010. How can anything be tagged "since" a date in the future? George Hannauer georgehannauer@oberlin.net 208.66.211.248 (talk) 23:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Merge

The article Hate crimes against white people contains some useful information. However, we don't have articles about Hate crimes against black people, or Hate crimes against Asians, and I don't think that hate crimes against whites deserve their own article either; it just isn't done on Wikipedia. Rather, the contents of that article should be merged, where appropriate, into the established articles Hate crime (general), Hate crimes in the United States (the section on the US) and South African farm attacks (the section on South Africa). Any thoughts? Stonemason89 (talk) 03:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

That's right. I agree. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 06:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Following the discussion, I have merged contents to Hate crime laws in the United States and South African farm attacks, but I did not find any material to merge here. Thanks. --FormerIP (talk) 12:49, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Critiquing reliance on the prison industrial complex

This subsection of Opposition is completely unsourced (by reliable sources) and puts undue weight on that particular argument. --70.128.125.237 (talk) 08:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Undisclosed COI

While James Cantor was contesting[3][4] my removal of an EL that he had added to his coworker, I looked into some of the many other ELs that he has added, and found that many of them were to his own blog, those of coworkers and, or colleagues. The EL to Gregory M. Herek's blog, which James Cantor added to two pages[5][6] seemed not to be conflicted until I noticed that both Herek and Cantor were editors of the same magazine[7]. Thoughts? BitterGrey (talk) 21:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Doing the Math

Hi everyone,

I found the following article from Southern Poverty Law Center to be interesting:

• <ref>"Anti-Gay Hate Crimes: Doing the Math". Intelligence Report. Southern Poverty Law Center. 2010. Retrieved 2010-11-28.</ref>

It gives total victimization of target groups in the U.S. population for 1995-2008.

Here are its results in table format:

targeted group	percentage of U.S. population (A)	hate crimes against persons (B)	percentage of hate crimes against persons (C: B/(sum B))	ratio (C/A)
homosexuals	2.1%	15,351	17.4%	8.3
Jews	2.2%	not given	7.7%	3.5
blacks	12.9%	not given	41%	3.2
Muslims	0.8%	not given	1.5%	1.9
Latinos	15.8%	not given	8.8%	0.6
whites	65.1%	not given	13.3%	0.2
total		88,463

--Kevinkor2 (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Color of Crime

The New Century Foundation's pamphlet The Color of Crime, does not deserve a section in this article - it has no relevance to the subject, represent a fringe POV and even mentioning it here is probably undue weight. ·Maunus·ƛ· 15:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

So it's okay to commit crimes for fun?

But it's not okay if you have a reason? 71.212.210.137 (talk) 19:28, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

says who? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 19:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Examples section

I would question whether a well-written, well-referenced section on examples of incidents described as hate crimes would add anything to the article. The 'Examples' section being added to the article is far from that- I'm not about to go out and buy a book, just to find what page either of the dubious examples is discussed on, if they are discussed at all. The silliness about banning intimidation by the homeless as a hate crime is unacceptable without a direct quote. And the section on 'Kick a ginger day' says nothing about any of these incidents being described as hate crimes. Most coloured people I've spoken to about this episode had a sense of humor about it. Nevard (talk) 04:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Moreover, despite the fact that the RCMP reportedly investigated the kid who started the group to determine whether he had actually committed a hate crime, he was never charged. Nevard (talk) 04:34, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Context on a quote in the "Canada" section

Would someone please check over the concern voiced over on Yahoo! Answers? The sentence is a quote, so it's probably relevant to include, but it seems POV when out-of-context—which it currently is in the article. I don't have immediate access to the source (not on Google Books :P ) and am somewhat too busy to look for a physical copy—would someone please either improve on the context for that sentence, or remove it? I've already tagged the sentence in question with a hidden note and a {{context-inline}}. Thanks, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 14:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

RfC

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Strangely worded sentence.

"The term "hate crime" is now used more often than in the past mainly because the groups that used to have official endorsement under with intergovernmental and/or armed forces involvement." There's clearly a problem here, but I cant figure out what exactly to change to fix it. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 12:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I rewrote the History section before I read your post. I couldn't figure it out either, so I simply deleted it. If anyone can figure out what it meant they are welcome to put the information back, with references of course. Sjö (talk) 06:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Discussion regarding the 'n' word(s)

In what countries do people say nig**r acceptably and how so is this even allowed. I thought that i may find for such knowledge here but am asking for further iscussion of interpretations. Is it just a racial problem or a problem of ethnicities and nationalism? How so? Examples? I think that such questions should be adressed as the current article is unclear as to what constitutes it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.119.156 (talk) 16:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Can someone please check this change in statistics?

Here.[8] Thanks. Ping me please when you do. Doug Weller (talk) 20:45, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: The number 9 million LGBT Americans is on the first page of the Williams institute source. However, as the report explains, it's difficult to measure the percentage of Americans who identify as LGBT. The number will also depend on how you define the terms. 9 million refers to those that identify as LGBT, but the report mentions estimates that 19 million Americans have engaged in same-sex sexual behavior, and that over 25 million acknowledge some same-sex attraction. You could argue about the definition, but 9 million is a lower bound, according to the source, and it's not as low as 5,421,300 which seems to be a number grabbed from thin air. Of course, there are other estimates that might give different numbers but the one we have in the article now seems reliable enough. 9 million is a round number, which is reasonable given the difficulties of defining and estimating the size of the group. Let's not use some mathematical calcuation based on percentages and the current population to come up with some ridiculously exact number like the one that was removed in the edit above.

As for the victims, I checked the FBI sources and restored the number 7,231. That's the total number of offenses labeled Sexual Orientation less the number labeled Anti-Heterosexual. There's a problem there that means the article might need to be tweaked: the article says victims, but the statistics count offenses. There's not a one-to-one relation between the two, but I think it's close enough to allow calculating a per capita rate. Sjö (talk) 07:29, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks User:Sjö. I also thought that the made it up, as they apparently have on other articles, so gave them a 31 hour block. I see they've made a malformed block appeal and somehow managed to transclude something irrelevant from my talk page. Doug Weller (talk) 07:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Hate crime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150430112651/http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/criminal/17543/8978 to http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/criminal/17543/8978
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150717214828/https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/index.html to http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140709181446/http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/table_02.htm to http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/table_02.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150622112802/http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_01.html to http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_01.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

New article

2017 Chicago torture incident

In January 2017, four people were arrested for torturing a learning disabled man in Chicago, Illinois, after they livestreamed the incident on Facebook. The victim was kidnapped, bound, gagged, beaten, had part of his scalp removed with a knife, and was forced to drink from a toilet bowl. At least one of the suspects shouted "Fuck Trump" and "Fuck white people."

Bk33725681 (talk) 02:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

References

I think it's too soon to gauge its significance in the grand scheme of things. WP:Not news and all. Let's give it some time. —PermStrump(talk) 03:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Evaluation of this article

In the "victims of the United States" section, there seems to be a bias on African American hate crimes rather than a broad view of hate crimes committed on all races, sexual orientation, and religion that is shown on the table. There were a few sentences that talked about hate crimes towards LGBTQ people but overall the section mainly focused on African Americans. The section itself is neutral but it lacks to mention any other races such as Asian Americans who are underrepresented in this article over all. Though Asian Americans are not always on the news does not mean that they have not been discriminated and harassed, same goes to every other race, religion, and LGBTQ people. Also the table that is placed in the section is outdated; the number of hate crimes committed to these people have increased since 2012. FBI 2015 hate crime statistics Sgarcia98 (talk) 20:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

I concur.

That section currently begins, "Most hate crimes in the United States are committed against African Americans," citing 2010 FBI statistics.

It that still true? Has it been true historically?

It's probably true, but not certain.

In any event, it would be good to have it updated to discuss an apparent increase in hate crimes since Trump began his campaign for the presidency in 2015. Unfortunately, I likely will not find the time to do it myself. DavidMCEddy (talk) 14:58, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I can't quite get my head around the two pages for 2015, see my comments below. Doug Weller talk 15:03, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

FBI statistics

These badly need updating. The latest seem to be 2015. There are two pages of stats with different numbers, so that needs sorting.[9][10] Doug Weller talk 14:50, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Hate Crime Satistics

Crimes in general are broken into catagories, but can not find Hate Crimes broken down. Believe these numbers are important, yet no factual numbers on Wiki. Just percentages used and all Hate Crimes are lumped in one pile of data. Can this issue be researched? Or admit the data provided by FBI is unclear? Not disputing hate crimes, just need numbers broken down and not only by group impacted. Thank you. Ruth31ess (talk) 16:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Hate crime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050513164532/http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/fundamental_rights/pdf/legisln/msracequality/greece.pdf to http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/fundamental_rights/pdf/legisln/msracequality/greece.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001050247/http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c4/15/36/d74ceabc.pdf to http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c4/15/36/d74ceabc.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110825214959/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/bills/09-AggPrej/index.htm to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/bills/09-AggPrej/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614124916/http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/state_hate_crime_laws.pdf to http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/state_hate_crime_laws.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130517030446/http://www.lakeconews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28459%3Afbi-releases-2011-hate-crime-statistics&catid=1%3Alatest&Itemid=197 to http://www.lakeconews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28459%3Afbi-releases-2011-hate-crime-statistics&catid=1%3Alatest&Itemid=197
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110610125417/http://www.aei.org/speech/17122 to http://www.aei.org/speech/17122
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041024015252/https://www.fbi.gov//ucr/ucr.htm to https://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Let's be real here

"Some have argued that if it is true that all violent crimes are the result of the perpetrator's contempt for the victim, then all crimes are hate crimes."

The citation that would presumably be relevant to this sentence makes no such arguments. The "some" being referred to are comedian TV writers in an episode of South Park. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:48F8:4056:11D:D472:E058:C9BF:E028 (talk) 02:04, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Hate crime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120331011308/http://www.ravnopravnost.hr/web/184/ to http://www.ravnopravnost.hr/web/184/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110311053343/http://217.71.145.20/TRIPviewer/show.asp?tunniste=HE+55%2F2007&base=erhe&palvelin=www.eduskunta.fi&f=WORD to http://217.71.145.20/TRIPviewer/show.asp?tunniste=HE+55%2F2007&base=erhe&palvelin=www.eduskunta.fi&f=WORD
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726172327/http://www.ihfhr.org/documents/doc_summary.php?sec_id=3&d_id=3860 to http://www.ihfhr.org/documents/doc_summary.php?sec_id=3&d_id=3860
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111012020416/http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/constitutionality.asp to http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/constitutionality.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:43, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Etymology

Even though it is not an article about racial violence, but rather about the legal / cultural term "Hate Crime",

Nowhere in the article does it say why it is called a "hate crime", and it isn't a trivial question - the term reflects particular politics, and is very far from being a technical description of a type of crime. Even in the History section there's no real history, just a brief "it appeared in the 80s", and then an arbitrary account of racial violence events in history.

• What was the first time a hate crime was judged as such?
• What social changes led to the term being adopted?
• What is the debate about the term, about what things fall under it and what don't and why,
• Why do hate crimes in many jurisdictions carry increased sentences, what rational was guiding legislators in making it so, what are the effects of this legislation on crime statistics and all that.
• What's even the connection between specifically hatred, and inter group violence based on ethnic, religious, sex and other differences?

Seriously, it's a weird term, it's very interesting how it came to be and what it means, it's even very special as a language thing - it's almost as if it came from Orwell's newspeak and should actually be written as hatecrime, like thoughtcrime, sexcrime, etc.

Compared to other Wikipedia articles, there seems to be a significant part of the article's essence missing.

Why not address bias in enforcing hate crime laws, and fake hate crimes?

It is (humorously) claimed that blacks cannot commit hate crimes. Funny, but humor tends to have a core of truth. https://u.osu.edu/huang.2130/2014/09/18/humor-is-a-way-of-telling-the-truth/ Shouldn't this article cover that truth, not just of blacks, but in fact all sorts of discrimination in the enforcement of hate-crime laws? Generally, there are indeed biases about the enforcement of hate crimes, and the incidences of fake hate crimes. Tawana Brawley was a very early example in about 1986 or so. The Duke Lacrosse team case was another, from about 2006. Google 'fake hate crime' for an eye opener. Just found this: http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/ 2601:1C2:4E02:3020:69CA:E689:966C:1A0 (talk) 05:35, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Can you provide reliable sources? I've not heard of "fake" hate crimes before. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:07, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Motive or Intent

In the subsection Hate crime#Support for and opposition to hate crime laws, we state that "In Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that penalty-enhancement hate crime statutes...allow courts to consider motive [wikilinked] when sentencing". I'm not sure whether we mean motive or intent. Motive has to do with the criminal's background and, possibly, upbringing; intent is more immediate -- the state of his mind just before he committed his crime.

If we do mean intent, we should change the above text to read "consider intent when sentencing". If the Supreme Court actually allows the lower courts to consider motive then we should change the second sentence in the Motive (law) article to read "Motive, in itself, is not an element of any given crime (except hate crimes);".

I'm doing some research into Mitchell but if anyone knows the answer, you can save me some time. I'm adding this discussion to the talk page of Motive (law) as well. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 16:08, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Middle East in Sidebar

Small edit, but lack permissions to do it - Middle East is formatted one level too deep, and so shows under the "South America" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:F10E:100:A971:537:B4E9:E9A2 (talk) 06:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Removed from article

I removed the following text from the article:

The murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom and the Wichita Massacre were not classified as "hate crimes" by U.S. investigative officials or the media.

This was then followed by a sentence stating that multiple conservative commentators had said these crimes constituted black-against-white hate crimes, something which was not supported by the cited source. As far as I can see, without the remark about the commentators, this sentence is a mere un-cited hook to hang the commentary off, and I've removed it as it no longer logically belongs in the section without its context. -- The Anome (talk) 16:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

misogynistic terminology "forcible rapes"

In the Hate Crimes Laws section for the United States, mention is made of "...forcible rapes...". Are there non-forcible, consensual types? Is this acceptable terminology? It is misogynistic language used by some Republican politicians, should it be repeated here? What is the author trying to say here? RSTate (talk) 23:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

In the FBI classification scheme, "Forcible Rape" is the official term for the Part I offense and is defined as "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Attempts or assaults to commit rape by force or threat of force are also included". The "forcible" prefix is done primarily to distinguish the offense from statutory rape incidents committed without the use of force. There's an argument to be made that all rape incidents occur as part of a social power differential, but there is legitimate reason for using the terminology in regards to the law, at least. Kidmax (talk) 00:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)