Hate Crimes: Criminal Law and Identity Politics

by James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter

Book Overview

In the early 1980s, a new category of crime appeared in the criminal law lexicon. In response to concerted advocacy-group lobbying, Congress and many state legislatures passed a wave of "hate crime" laws requiring the collection of statistics on, and enhancing the punishment for, crimes motivated by certain prejudices. This book places the evolution of the hate crime concept in socio-legal perspective. James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter adopt a skeptical...

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0195114485
• ISBN13: 9780195114485
• Release Date: May 1998
• Publisher: Oxford University Press
• Length: 224 Pages
• Weight: 1.20 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.9" x 6.4" x 9.7"

Customer Reviews

Valuable to both the student of law and the layman.

This book methodically deconstructs the ideas behind the notion of "hate crime" and proceeds to smash them one by one. The only area not distinctly attended to is the near monolothic double-standard applied to enforcing hate crimes mostly against white male heterosexual offenders.

Sober well reasoned

This book is a clearly written and well researched discussion of the notion of "Hate Crime". It clearly shows that the tendency of some states in the United States to pass hate crime legislation is a poor response to a complex phenomena. The authors show that in fact hate crime has been declining and the passing of laws probably lead society to become more divisive.The statistical material suggests in fact that there has been a decline in prejudice over time and that current criminal laws handle issues of social conflict in an adequate way. The setting up of hate crime units and the passing of laws has achieved little and used scarce resources.Hate crimes it would appear are an issue that is pushed by parties of the left in the United States. (Perhaps more accurately parties of the not so right). This attack however is not some piece of political rhetoric based on a political position but a clear inditment of poorly worked out social policy.

Logical arguments against rediculous hate crimes laws

This short book covered virtually every possible angle that many liberals use to justify new laws seemingly every time a crime is perpetrated against someone who falls into on of the "so- called" minority or protected groups. These two authors should be commended on the fine job of laying out the facts. The task is noble but I think today most of Americans think that all our problems can be solved by the Government by passing another law. But as the authors point out in the book the facts just don't substantiate a "wave" of hate crimes to need any additional laws. In fact laws are already on the books that cover every conceivable crime. With the addition of new laws will be the incentive for many minorities to claim racism when attacked by someone white.

The writing is wooden; but the arguments are excellent.

This is the book to read if, like a lot of us, you were outraged by the killing of the gay student in Wyoming and want to do something about it. "Hate Crimes: Criminal Law & Identity Politics" makes clear that what we SHOULDN'T do is adopt more legislation singling out hate crimes for special punishment. The authors are sensitive to the plight of victims. But they point out, in subdued, legalistic language, the morass of problems that can face us: Which groups should be included? Why is one victim's suffering worthy of more punishment than another's? Isn't there a danger that hate-crime investigations will end up being an inquiry into the criminal's thoughts? The only problem with this book is the writing. It's not particularly bad. But it isn't compelling. The organization of each chapter is professorial (one of the authors is a law professor). Segments are pedantically labled, as if they were lecture notes and not a book about a widening legal and societal issue that is intrinsically interesting. The authors end chapters with conclusions that reiterate what we have just read. The writing feels as if the authors dictated it, then lightly edited it.But the writing weaknesses are only a small impediment. A serious reader, worried about how to deal with crimes committed out of bigotry, will find this book thought-provoking and, at the end, convincing.