The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

DOJ Study: More Than 250,000 Hate Crimes a Year, Most Unreported

By Mark Potok on March 26, 2013 - 11:42 am, Posted in Hate Crime

More than 250,000 Americans over the age of 12 are victimized every year by hate criminals, according to a new government study that puts the number some 50,000 higher than the best earlier analyses. At the same time, the study found that in recent years only about one in three hate crimes are ever reported to law enforcement officials.

The study, carried out by the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, was based primarily on the annual National Crime Victimization Survey, which employs detailed questionnaires that are widely considered the most accurate measure of U.S. crime available. In addition to analyzing more recent years, it refines two earlier studies based on the surveys, to produce data for the years 2003-2011.

The two earlier studies found that there were an annual average of about 210,000 hate crime victimizations a year in 2000-2003 and about 195,000 in 2003-2009. But the new study’s authors, Lynn Langton and Michael Planty, explained to Hatewatch that they had made a number of technical changes to achieve greater accuracy. The most important was counting series of up to 10 hate crimes against one victim as individual crimes, rather than lumping them together as a single crime.

The bureau’s new study groups data into two periods, 2003-2006 and 2007-2011. It finds that the average annual number of hate crime victimizations was 256,080 for the earlier period and 259,690 for the latter — virtually unchanged, statistically speaking. (The numbers do vary greatly from year to year, from about 217,000 to over 281,000.) But it also found that while 46% of hate crimes were reported to officials in 2003-2006, that number dropped to just 35% in 2007-2011. The study’s authors did not suggest what might be behind that relatively major decrease.

The numbers are fairly stunning. Just a decade ago, the only figures available were the FBI’s national hate crime statistics, full sets of which have been published since 1995. Those numbers varied between about 6,000 and about 10,000 a year, depending on the year. But it soon emerged that there was an array of serious problems with the voluntary system for reporting hate crimes that resulted in severe undercounts. The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ three studies have attempted to remedy that, with the latest suggesting the real numbers are 25 to 40 times higher than the FBI totals.

Like other analyses, the new study also showed that a vastly higher percentage of hate crimes are violent than are crimes overall. About 92% of all hate crimes between 2007 and 2011 were violent, up from 84% in the 2003-2006 period. By comparison, the latest FBI statistics (from 2011) show that just 13% of all crime is violent. Experts also have long noted the extreme violence that characterizes hate crimes, with many murder victims, for instance, showing signs of suffering “overkill.”

Hate crime expert Jack Levin, a professor at Northeastern University in Boston, said the new report confirmed his longstanding suspicions. “The prevalence of hate crimes is vastly underestimated,” he told Hatewatch. “The FBI hate crime count is based on a voluntary reporting system that many local police jurisdictions refuse to support. In 2011, for example, only five hate crimes were reported for the entire state of Louisiana, just two for Wyoming and 11 for Arkansas.”

“By contrast,” Levin continued, “other states have typically reported a much higher rate of hate crimes. For example, Massachusetts reported 367 in 2011, and New Jersey had 508 reported hate crimes. It is hard to imagine such a huge divergence in rates arising out of anything but different reporting standards — and, perhaps, different levels of enthusiasm for reporting hate crimes at all.”

Assuming the new report’s numbers are correct, one would expect, on average, each of the 50 states to be experiencing more than 5,000 hate crimes a year.

One of the most troubling aspects of the new report is the very low level of reporting to police of hate crimes. Levin said that large numbers of victims don’t report hate crimes for a variety of reasons. The new report fleshes that point out, saying that the percentage of violent hate crime victims who don’t report attacks to police because they believe the police can’t or won’t help actually has risen, from 14% in 2003-2006 to 24% in 2007-2011. Levin also said hate crimes tend to be under-reported “because motivation is a central element, and motives are often difficult to prove.”

Another reason for the lack of reporting of hate crimes may be many victims’ reluctance to deal with the police, Levin said. “Based on a history of animosity, black and Latino victims may see law enforcement as an ‘army of occupation’; immigrants may identify police with a tyrannical regime in their home country or be concerned about being deported; and gays and lesbians may perceive, rightly or not, that police officers are generally homophobic,” he explained.

In addition, Levin said, victims with disabilities are often reluctant to report because they fear that their tormenters will retaliate. “They may have psychiatric or intellectual deficits that seriously interfere with their capacity to recognize false friendships or to report crime,” Levin said. “Or they may assume a position of dependence in a relationship with caretakers who conceal their sadistic urges in the high credibility of their institutional roles.” And this problem is a serious one. In 2011, only 58 of the 7,254 hate crimes reported to the FBI were aimed at people with disabilities. But when the Justice Department asked persons with disabilities anonymously why they believe they were targeted for violence, 14% — more than 30,000 people in all — said they thought it was because of their disability.

Comparing the two study periods, the new study also found that the percentage of hate crimes motivated by religious bias more than doubled, from 10% in the 2003-2006 period to 21% during 2007- 2011. At the same time, hate crimes motivated by racial or ethnic bias dropped from 64% to 54% over the two periods. The researchers did not offer reasons for the changes, but the rise in religiously based hate violence may be related to the fairly dramatic rise in Islamophobia in recent years.

The study offered one final, and rather depressing, statistic. Suspects were arrested in just 10% of cases in the 2003-2006 period — a number that dropped, for reasons that are not understood, to a mere 4% of cases between 2007 and 2011.

Bill Morlin contributed to this post.

  • WarEagle82

    Does this include the soldiers murdered at Fort Hood and the 200 or more people killed and injured in Boston?

    It would be good to know the specifics…

  • David

    Why do so many people here hate Edward?

  • Reynardine

    Edward:- ¡Va al carajo!

  • Edward

    If someone is screaming hateful things at me in Spanish, And if a police officer is standing there but doesn’t understand Spanish — the attacker won’t be charged with a hate crime.

  • Kiwiwriter

    “Edward — You seem obsessed about the possibility of people making slurs and insults at you in languages that you don’t understand. Just so you know, this may indicate a diagnosable mental illness on your part.”

    Languages Lon Chaney doesn’t understand…like English.

  • Reynardine

    Coral Sea, I’m familiar with them thar woods, and they’ve had stuff going on that would embarrass the folks in “The Deliverance”.

  • CoralSea

    Reynardine — I believe that Edward may have been referring to the incidents involving Hmong tribesmen and “white” hunters in Wisconsin some years ago. In 2004 a Hmong tribesman who was hunting deer shot and killed six “white” hunters in Northern Wisconsin after he claimed they yelled racial slurs at him. He was convicted of six counts of murder. I don’t know if any hate crime charges were on the table.

    Then, in 2007, a Hmong tribesman was found shot dead in the woods, and some members of the Hmong community apparently thought the shooting was in retaliation for the six murders. If so, then the shooting could certainly be considered a “hate crime” (as could, possibly, at least some of the six murders, if the Hmong tribesman simply decided to blow away other “whites” that he saw. I would have to read about the case).

    I don’t know if the situation among the Hmong and the “white” Wisconsinites has improved up north. I have encountered Hmong communities down in the southern/central parts of Wisconsin, and relations weren’t considered tense. Perhaps the issue up north has to do with hunting territories?

  • CoralSea

    Edward — You seem obsessed about the possibility of people making slurs and insults at you in languages that you don’t understand. Just so you know, this may indicate a diagnosable mental illness on your part.

    But seriously, there are cases in which someone lashes out at another primarily because they believe that the person is some class of people they REALLY don’t like. Gay-bashing is probably the most cut-and-dried of these incidents for people who get all riled up over race issues. Someone or several people happen upon or deliberately seek out another they believe is gay and attack the poor guy/girl. Especially if the attackers didn’t really know the person they attacked, but later boasted of beating up “a gay,” what else would you call it.

    Hate crimes can be difficult to prosecute, but the chilling effect they can have on communities (the Black residents who have seen a neighbor’s house torched after being spray-painted with KKK or the Muslims whose house has been vandalized with anti-Islamic slurs) can wound the psyches of all of those who bear witness to such acts, which are, at their heart, a form of domestic terrorism.

    Also, I have found some of your postings to be disagreeable, but if someone who didn’t even know you, but believed you represented some group they had a grievance with, and decided to harm you because of their perception of your affiliation, I would hope that they would be caught and prosecuted with a hate crime enhancement, and that you would survive and go on to have more compassion toward those singled out based on someone’s perception of them.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    “What this means is someone could commit a hate crime, but as long as they don’t say anything while attacking a victim, or leave any hateful symbols behind, they won’t get charged with a hate crime.”

    Hate crime punishments are based on judging the motive of the criminal. There are many ways in which a motive could be concealed, thus avoiding a more serious penalty.

    Hate crimes don’t make anything illegal, they merely add to one’s sentence for another crime if it is found to be motivated by the victim’s perceived ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc. All it’s saying is that if you don’t like the victim’s perceived ethnicity, religion, etc., leave them the hell alone and don’t commit any crimes against them.

  • Kiwiwriter

    Hey, Lon Chaney…also known as “Edward/Eugene/Ezra Mead/Jason/Annie:”

    When the Hmong Tribesmen or Native Americans beat the tar out of you as a “hate crime,” let us know.

    However, given the way you address people, and your behavior, I wouldn’t call it a “hate crime.” I’d call it “a snotnose barbarian getting what he deserved.”

    Remember this from “MR. POTOK?” Read it again:

    “First of all, Edward, perhaps you could address me by something other than my last name. Mark would be acceptable. Didn’t your mother teach you the basics of courtesy? What’s your problem? Why do you act like such a jerk? Can’t you have a civil discussion?

    “Edward, an apology would be in order. I’m totally fine with people disagreeing with me or challenging my ideas or interpretations. That doesn’t extend to the kind of obnoxious accusations you make, couched in an annoying schoolboy’s rude language and based on nothing beyond your own failure to actually spend two minutes looking at the underlying facts. Maybe you’ve heard this one before, Edward: You have a right to your own opinion, but you don’t have a right to your own “facts.””

    When you apologize for your behavior, answer my questions, stop acting like a jerk, engage in civil discussion and courtesy, I’ll give you the same thing.

    And here’s a surprise, Lon…if you treated other ethnic groups with the same ordinary level of courtesy, politeness, civic and civil behavior that your mother should have taught you (guess she was too busy watching soap operas to raise you properly), you might get along extremely well with those other ethnic groups you hate, and they would probably treat you the same way.

    New question: How many times have blacks behaved offensively to you….after you provoked them into doing so?

    You’re being tested on this material, genius!

  • Reynardine

    I’d like to see how many cases of hate-motivated attacks by Hmong tribesmen there are on white Americans in this country.

    Like any other element of the premeditation and malice aforethought required to prove Murder 1, demographic animus can be demonstrated in a number of ways. Pattern and practice and the absence of other motives can both be taken into account, as well as the actual utterances of the yahoos themselves and any orc scrawls they leave at the scene of the crime. Additionally, charging a hate crime can confer federal jurisdiction where the state courts are not able to handle the case or state officials are endangered. In regards to which, another prosecutor for Kaufman County, Texas, together with his wife, has been assassinated.

  • Aron

    Edward, no one said hate crime legislation is perfect.

    But the chance of you being beaten by someone insulting you in Hmoob or Inuit are infinitesimally small.

    Admit it.

  • Edward

    In table (1) of the report it says, “Hate crime includes incidents confirmed by police as bias-motivated and incidents perceived by victims to be bias-motivated because the offender used hate language or left behind hate symbols.”

    What this means is someone could commit a hate crime, but as long as they don’t say anything while attacking a victim, or leave any hateful symbols behind, they won’t get charged with a hate crime.

    It’s to perform forensics to prove a hate crime. Unless there’s a witness right there and hears the attacker using hateful epithets, there’s no way to charge the attacker with a hate crime.

    Or what if the attacker speaks an obscure foreign language (e.g. Hmong tribesman, Native American tribal language)? They could be saying the most hateful things in their language but witnesses won’t understand them. There are many people in America speaking languages other than English now, and they could be screaming hateful epithets in regards to race or sexual orientation while committing a crime, but we would never know.

    A Hmong tribesman could disparagingly refer to my race or sexual orientation in his language while attacking me. A policeman witnessing the attack probably won’t understand him.

  • Sam Molloy

    Welcome Bob. A picnic basket of common sense to a topsy turvey picnic.

  • Kiwiwriter

    Mark, thank you for saying what I have been repeatedly saying to this “Man of A Thousand Faces” and getting his attention, if only for a moment:

    “First of all, Edward, perhaps you could address me by something other than my last name. Mark would be acceptable. Didn’t your mother teach you the basics of courtesy? What’s your problem? Why do you act like such a jerk? Can’t you have a civil discussion?

    “And, by the way, where do you come up with the idea that the story “implies” that there are “250,000 evil white men” committing hate crimes? If you can actually read, Edward, take another shot at reading the story — you can do it! I don’t say anything that remotely suggests that, nor do I believe that. Is this how you argue, smart guy? You dream up a position that your opponent doesn’t have, then attack that position? if you spent three minutes on our website or the blog, you’d see that we write frequently about non-white hate criminals and hate groups. I know that must be a very challenging concept for you, given your overflowing prejudices. You need to take those blinders off your eyes, Edward.

    “Edward, an apology would be in order. I’m totally fine with people disagreeing with me or challenging my ideas or interpretations. That doesn’t extend to the kind of obnoxious accusations you make, couched in an annoying schoolboy’s rude language and based on nothing beyond your own failure to actually spend two minutes looking at the underlying facts. Maybe you’ve heard this one before, Edward: You have a right to your own opinion, but you don’t have a right to your own “facts.””

    Hey, “Edward/Eugene/Ezra Mead/Jason/Annie,” from now on, your name is “Lon Chaney,” who played the “Man of A Thousand Faces.” Here’s a message:

    Lon, apparently you do read what we post here. So read what Mark wrote, read it again, and keep on doing so, until you’ve got these concepts memorized and burned into your psyche.

    And when you do, answer my questions.

  • Mark Potok

    That’s true, Edward, about non-HIspanic whites. What I was responding to, obviously, was your claiming that I was making up the 250,000 number, that I was insinuating only “evil white men” were behind those hate crimes, and that you seemed to be confusing the FBI statistics with the BJS study. I was also, as you saw, objecting to what i thought was the undeniably rude and lousy tone you took — calling me a bunch of nasty names — in trying to make your points.

  • Karen in Green Bay

    I suspect that there are two problems with hate crimes reporting: 1) the police refuse to characterize obvious bias crimes as “hate crimes.” 2) the LGBT community in particular usually doesn’t report such crimes because when we do, nothing is ever done and the police make us feel like the criminal. Who needs that?

  • Edward

    Mr. Potok,

    Thank you for responding. I would like to present my argument. Here is the PDF link just so we’re all clear:

    http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hcv0311.pdf

    If you go to Table (8) on page 7 it says whites were 65% of hate crime victims in the years 2007-2011. The footnote indicates these are non-Hispanic whites.

    If you then go to Table (9) on the next page for the offender category it says that whites were 53% of offenders. There is no separate entry for Hispanics. Footnote (a) says, “Prior to 2011, data on the perceived Hispanic origin of offenders were not collected.”

    What this means is that Hispanics are being lumped into the group of “white” offenders. There is a separate category listed as “other” where Native Americans are counted (footnote b).

    My argument is this is a mis-classification. As an example, a Hispanic who is 90% Native America and only 10% Spanish would be automatically counted as a “white” person in this report. Thus white offenders are over-represented in the report.

  • Tobias A. Weissman

    All hate crimes have their underlying cause infused in the human tendency; “To find some one to blame.” That is the main reason why the Jewish People were practically blamed for every thing under the sun. Dictators used blame tactics to boost their acceptance upon the people. If we don’t address this underlying cause and figure out a way to educate out of it, we will always have “HATE CRIMES”

  • Mark Potok

    I hate to even reply to Edward’s foolishness. But I will.

    First of all, Edward, perhaps you could address me by something other than my last name. Mark would be acceptable. Didn’t your mother teach you the basics of courtesy? What’s your problem? Why do you act like such a jerk? Can’t you have a civil discussion?

    Second of all, you’re not much of a researcher, are you? Did you think I just made the numbers up? Did you manage to read down far enough into my post to note that I gave the exact averages for the two periods — “256,080 for the earlier period and 259,690 for the latter,” as I wrote? That’s why I said “more than 250,000.” You think that’s just left-wing propaganda? People like you, Edward, make me despair for my country.

    You know, if you’d clicked on the link I gave right at the top of the story, right there at the top you’d have found this:

    Highlights:

    From 2007 to 2011, an estimated annual average of 259,700 nonfatal violent and property hate crime victimizations occurred against persons age 12 or older residing in U.S. households.

    Wow! There it is, Edward. That was hard!

    Click on the pdf — don’t worry, it’s not too difficult — and read the first paragraph. Voila! Then, if you need more, read Table 2, “Hate Crime Victimizations, 2004-2011.” That will give you year-by-year totals. Or, if it seems easier to you, you could just read the press release.

    And, by the way, where do you come up with the idea that the story “implies” that there are “250,000 evil white men” committing hate crimes? If you can actually read, Edward, take another shot at reading the story — you can do it! I don’t say anything that remotely suggests that, nor do I believe that. Is this how you argue, smart guy? You dream up a position that your opponent doesn’t have, then attack that position? if you spent three minutes on our website or the blog, you’d see that we write frequently about non-white hate criminals and hate groups. I know that must be a very challenging concept for you, given your overflowing prejudices. You need to take those blinders off your eyes, Edward.

    One last thing, big boy. You seem to have completely missed the fact — clearly spelled out in my post — that the Bureau of Justice Statistics study is not the same as the FBI statistics, which is the cite you give. Didn’t you read that paragraph in my post before spewing out your invective, Edward? The point is that the BJS study was designed to get at the real level of hate crime, which most experts have long known was probably understated in the FBI statistics, in part because such a small percentage of hate crimes are reported to police. Of course, that’s just what I wrote. But you don’t seem very long in the understanding department, do you, Edward?

    Edward, an apology would be in order. I’m totally fine with people disagreeing with me or challenging my ideas or interpretations. That doesn’t extend to the kind of obnoxious accusations you make, couched in an annoying schoolboy’s rude language and based on nothing beyond your own failure to actually spend two minutes looking at the underlying facts. Maybe you’ve heard this one before, Edward: You have a right to your own opinion, but you don’t have a right to your own “facts.”

    I am really sick to death of this kind of thing. Can we talk about the world as it really is, instead of just shouting? Is that really too much to ask?

  • Bob

    Hate crimes – just another definition for thought control.

    If its a crime, CALL IT A CRIME and deal with it! You can NOT really determine the thoughts behind the causes.

    If we worried more about crime than political correctness, we’d have less crime. But we turn loose the repeat offenders and worry about the politically correct BS rather then dealing with the core problems – such as our excessive government interference and line of welfare type promises which is breeding a dependent class of person.

  • Nancy Ames

    Edward is probably just a troll.

  • Edward

    Hey check this out. Go to table 5 of the study:

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cj.....es/table-5

    single bias incidents = 7,240
    white offenders = 3092
    Take the ratio and that means whites committed only 42% of incidents.

    There’s a separate row for only race-based offenses:
    total = 3465
    white offenders = 1663
    That means whites committed only 47% of offenses.

    Yet non-hispanic whites are about 65% of the population. There is no separate Hispanic category of offenders, which means that Hispanic offenders are being lumped into the ‘white’ category. That means that somebody who is 90% Native American and only 10% Spanish is automatically lumped into the white category.

    Nowhere do I see a number like 250,000 ‘hate crime’ offenses. I don’t see where Potok came up with this.

    This story is written to imply there are 250,000 evil white men running around committing hate crimes against innocent minorities. This is a totally bogus story.

    Potok, you better explain yourself. Show me from what table you get the 250,000 number, and what percentage of offenders are non-Hispanic whites.

  • concernedcitizen

    The important information is that hates crimes are happening at an alarming rate and they are not being reported the way they should be. We know that hate crimes are committed by many different races against differing races than their own. This is not a competition on which race commits the most.

    Focusing on what race commits the most hate crimes is perhaps a matter for criminal statistics but in the overall picture as it pertains to our communities it’s like majoring in minors. We don’t want hate crimes happening…period!

    It is not the best argument to criticize the lack of resources cited and then carry on to omit your own resources.

    Here’s some statistics from the FBI.gov and the link:

    http://www.fbi.gov/news/storie.....t-released

    Hate Crimes Accounting
    Annual Report Released

    12/10/12
    Hate Crimes report logo
    View Report | Press Release

    In 2011, U.S. law enforcement agencies reported 6,222 hate crime incidents involving 7,254 offenses, according to our just-released Hate Crime Statistics, 2011 report. These incidents included offenses like vandalism, intimidation, assault, rape, murder, etc.

    The data contained in this report, which is a subset of the information that law enforcement submits to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, includes the following categories: offense type, location, bias motivation, victim type, number of individual victims, number of offenders, and race of offenders.

    Highlights from the 2011 Report:

    Of the 6,222 reported hate crimes, 6,216 were single-bias incidents—46.9 percent were racially motivated, 20.8 percent resulted from sexual orientation bias, 19.8 percent were motivated by religious bias, 11.6 stemmed from ethnicity/national origin bias, and 0.9 percent were prompted by disability bias.

    Breakdown of Bias cases
    Law enforcement agencies reported 7,713 victims of hate crime—victims can be individuals, businesses, institutions, or society as whole. Sixty percent of these 7,713 were victims of crimes against persons, while 39.8 were victims of crimes against property.

    Thirty-two percent of the 6,222 hate crime incidents reported took place in or near residences; 18 percent took place on highways, roads, and alleys; and 9.3 percent took place at schools or colleges. The remaining percentage took place at locations like houses of worship, parking lots, bars, government and office buildings, etc.

    New in Hate Crime Reporting

    Beginning in 2013, law enforcement agencies reporting hates crimes will be able to get even more specific when reporting bias motivation.

    For example, the new bias categories of gender and gender identity—which added four new bias types—were added to the FBI’s hate crime data collection as a result of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Other bias types were modified to comply with the race and ethnicity designations specified by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Data submitted under these new specifications will be part of the UCR program’s new system, scheduled to go online next year. (The 2013 crime data will be published in 2014).

    2012 Successes in Investigating Hate Crimes

    - In December, two Mississippi men pled guilty to federal hate crimes for their roles in assaulting African-Americans in Jackson. More

    - In November, a South Carolina man was sentenced for committing a federal hate crime against an African-American teenager. More

    - In October, a Louisiana man pled guilty to charges of defacing places of worship and lying to an FBI agent. More

    - In September, a jury in Cleveland convicted 16 defendants on federal hate crime charges for religiously motivated assaults on members of the Amish community. More

    - In August, a Detroit man pled guilty to a federal hate crime charge, admitting he assaulted a victim because he thought the man was gay. More

    - In April, three Houston men were sentenced to federal prison on federal hate crime charges related to a racially motivated attack against a man waiting at a bus stop. More

    FBI’s Role in Investigating Hate Crimes

    Hate crimes continue to be the highest priority of the Bureau’s civil rights program because of their heinous nature and their impact on victims and communities (see sidebar for case examples). We investigate hate crimes that fall under federal jurisdiction, assist state and local authorities during their own investigations, and in some cases—with the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division—monitor developing situations to determine if federal action is appropriate.

    In addition to responding to hate crimes, we’re also taking a proactive approach to hate crimes overall. We’re integrating a cadre of analysts with our experienced investigators to not only establish a national threat picture but to identify risk factors that can be used by FBI field offices to assess the potential for hate crimes at the local level.

    Increasing Hate Crime Awareness

    Most of all, we’re working to increase awareness of these crimes by establishing liaisons with civic and religious leaders and credible community organizations. Through our UCR program, we offer training to help law enforcement recognize hate crimes and also assist our partners in developing their own hate crimes training programs.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    Well Edward, since you sifted through the data, I’m sure you won’t have any problem providing your sources. Not for my benefit, as I already know where you get these claims. The claim that “Hispanics” are counted only as hate crime victims is simply bogus. The US census has “white non-Hispanic” and “white Hispanic. ”

    A hate crime is any crime where the motive was the victim’s perceived ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

  • M. Bright

    To Edward — you wrote, “a bogus concept invented by the Left as part of a brainwashing program to control the minds of White people.”

    I would suggest to you that you are running perilously close to a paranoid schizophrenic delusion.

  • DK rhodes

    http://www.mlive.com/news/musk.....ciden.html

    Follow this link and read the comments and you will see why people don’t report the incidents.

    Just in case it doesn’t work… google racial intimidation grand haven michigan… you can see the story unfold as painful as it is.

  • Edward

    Potock provides no link to a table of raw data. What are the races of victims and perpetrators in this study of ‘hate crimes’? That’s my big question. Upon going to the department of justice website and sifting through the data myself I have found the following:

    1.) The majority of perpetrators of hate crimes are non-Whites.

    2.) There is a mis-classification of who is ‘white’. Hispanics are given a separate victim category. But in the table of perpetrators, they are lumped in with the ‘white’ category. A separate review of county jail inmate photographs (from the top 15 metro-areas) shows the overwhelming majority are actually Mestizo in appearance. Yet are classified as ‘white’. In truth, most ‘Hispanics’ should be classified as American Indians. They have a majority ancestry from Aztec and other Indian tribes. For example, a Mestizo who is 90% Indian and only 10% Spanish will automatically be classified as ‘white’ in the study. Yet they don’t look anything like a Spaniard from the province of Castile in Spain. They are clearly not European individuals. And should be classified as “Native American”. Not “white”.

    3.) I believe the whole concept of a ‘hate crime’ is bogus. It is like George Orwell’s ‘Thought Crime’ in the novel “1984″. No machine exists that is capable of reading a person’s thoughts while they are committing a crime. There’s no way to quantify it.

    5.) Whites are disproportionally charged with ‘hate crimes’, I believe because it is a politically motivated category invented by the Left. I believe there is no such thing as a ‘hate crime’. It’s a bogus concept invented by the Left as part of a brainwashing program to control the minds of White people.

  • concernedcitizen

    The study offered one final, and rather depressing, statistic. Suspects were arrested in just 10% of cases in the 2003-2006 period — a number that dropped, for reasons that are not understood, to a mere 4% of cases between 2007 and 2011.

    Start at the place of origin to identify the problem with arresting these monsters. It it’s being reported but not acted upon then there’s something very foul within the system that is supposed to protect ALL of its citizens.

  • concernedcitizen

    “In addition, Levin said, victims with disabilities are often reluctant to report because they fear that their tormenters will retaliate. “They may have psychiatric or intellectual deficits that seriously interfere with their capacity to recognize false friendships or to report crime,” Levin said. ”

    Levin is right on the money with this statement. False friendships, and they take advantage of the handicapped and those with intellectual deficits. There are human beings like that and they operate through false friendships to further their hate crimes, they are the most despicable type of social parasites I have seen.

  • concernedcitizen

    Yes there needs to be stiffer sentences for hate crimes and those that actively engage in them by way of conspiring to commit the crimes with others.

    What’s sad is that I believe it is the failure of local police to respond that deters victims from reporting the crime and it doesn’t help if the bigots are the police force in the area.

    So with the lost of public trust who do the victims turn to? That’s when they must gather and take it to the Federal authorities and their state representatives. Even if just reporting all the events to help bring much needed change in areas that embrace hate crime groups and their blind stupidity.

  • Sam Molloy

    I have mixed feelings about including motives in considering the seriousness of crimes, and I think all crimes with victims should have stiffer penalties. To be fair to the Po-Po, if the victim is totally unknown to the perp, a crime is harder to prove, even if they have a pretty good idea who the Haters are in their area.There is no way of knowing, however, how many Hate Crimes were deterred by the possibility of more diligent pursuit of a case and a stiffer sentence.