Saturday, September 22, 2007

Hate Crimes: Entitlement for Vengeance?

"...it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order." -- Thomas Jefferson

I'm not a fan of hate crime legislation, and recent events in Jena, Louisiana have not led me to change my mind. Far from it, I wonder if part of what we're seeing in Jena is a sense of entitlement for vengeance from a class of people given permanent victim status by hate crimes laws.

This WaPo article got me thinking that. Consider this:

The outrage over the Jena 6 arose initially after the teenagers were charged with attempted murder. Moreover, critics complained, three white teenagers who had hung three hangman's nooses in a tree at the high school in August 2006 -- the incident that began a spiral of events that culminated in the December altercation -- were never prosecuted for committing a hate crime.

The Post story says the fact that white cretins who hung the nooses on the tree were never "prosecuted" for a hate crime...a failure that led to the mob beating of Justin Barker (no relation).

As I understand them, Hate Crime laws don't punish non-criminal actions. Hate Crimes laws tack on more severe punishments and reporting requirements for violent acts actually committed. Unless LA has a statute on the books that prohibits symbolic noose hanging, this act -- while hateful -- was not a crime. It should have been (and was) punished by the school (the students involved were expelled, then the school relented and only suspended them, a mistake, I think). The noose hanging, however, does not appear to be illegal.

However, I don't think that's the popular understanding of hate crimes laws. Because those white boys did something hateful, some in the Jena community (according to the Post) thought they had committed a crime. When the government didn't punish them for that crime, feelings of injustice were stoked. And the community then felt justified taking matters into their own hands which led to a mob beating of Barker, who, from what I have seen in the media, had no connection to the nooses.

There are many other issues at play here, notably the inequity of punishment of blacks compared to whites. I'm just wondering what, if any, role the mis-perception of hate crime laws played in creating a sense of entitlement to vengeance by the mob.

A timeline of events in Jena here.

A list of Louisiana hate crime laws here.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

noose hanging is illegal in LA.. its incitement to riot.. they arrested a white yahoo who was going near the march with two tied to the back of his pickup.. its been on CNN and other news reports

Scott said...

Thanks for the tidbit, but after reading the story, I think you're wrong: displaying a noose is not illegal. The men in the story were arrested for driving while intoxicated AND inciting to riot, which would I think depend on context and circumstances. The CNN story does not say "noose hanging" is illegal in LA.

Steven said...

I'm in line with your thinking, not that I have gotten the story straight, er "cleared."

Anonymous said...

noose hanging is not a crime in LA, but six people beating someone is. While some would like to have the 3 white students prosecuted for a hate crime, I dont understand why its not considered a hate crime for 6 black students to do this to a white student. Prejudices arent one sided and if the legislation is going to have hate crimes on the books then they should apply to blacks committing crimes against whites just as much as whites against blacks.