Hate Crime Victimization and Weapon Use

Prior research has suggested that hate crimes hurt more, in that they are more physically severe than other crimes. A separate body of research has focused on the role of weapons in exacerbating violence; yet, no research has considered the role of weapon use in bias crime victimization. Following this, this research examines the relationship between weapon use, bias motivation, and victimization in the United States. On one hand, weapons may play an important role in hate crime by exacerbating violence. On the other hand, weapons may be unnecessary for facilitating hate crime violence, given the animus associated with bias motivation. Using data from the National Incident-Based Reporting System, we find that bias crimes are both (a) less likely than nonbias crimes to involve weapons and (b) more likely than nonbias crimes to involve serious or lethal victim injury. These patterns are particularly pronounced for antisexual orientation hate crimes.

Hate Crimes Against LGBT People in the United States

Hate crimes (or bias crimes) are crimes motivated by an offenders’ personal bias against a particular social group. Modern hate crimes legislation developed out of civil rights protections based on race, religion, and national origin; however, the acts that constitute a hate crime have expanded over time, as have the groups protected by hate crimes legislation. Anti-LGBT hate crimes, in which victims are targeted based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. LGBT people are highly overrepresented as victims of hate crimes given the number of LGBT people in the population, and this is especially true of hate crimes against transgender women. Despite the frequency of these crimes, the legal framework for addressing them varies widely across the United States. Many states do not have specific legislation that addresses anti-LGBT hate crimes, while others have legislation that mandates data collection on those crimes but does not enhance civil or criminal penalties for them, and some offer enhanced civil and/or criminal penalties. Even in states that do have legislation to address these types of hate crimes, some states only address hate crimes based on sexual orientation but not those based on gender identity. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act gives the federal government the authority to prosecute those crimes regardless of jurisdiction; however, this power has been used in a limited capacity. Hate crimes are distinct from other crimes that are not motivated by bias. For example, thrill seeking, retaliation, or the desire to harm or punish members of a particular social group often motivates perpetrators of hate crimes; these motivations often result in hate crimes being more violent than other similar crimes. The difference in the motivation of offenders also has significant consequences for victims, both physically and mentally. Victims of hate crimes are more likely to require medical attention than victims of non-bias crimes. Likewise, victims of hate crimes, and especially anti-LGBT hate crimes, often experience negative psychological outcomes, such as PTSD, depression, or anxiety as a result of being victimized for being a member of an already marginalized social group.

The Nature of Bias Crime Injuries: A Comparative Analysis of Physical and Psychological Victimization Effects

The core justification of bias crime statutes concerns whether bias-motivated crimes are qualitatively different from otherwise motivated crimes. We test the hypothesis that bias crimes are more detrimental than non-bias crimes by testing for multi-dimensional injuries to victims of bias and non-bias-motivated criminal conduct. Using National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Extract 2013 Collection Year Incident-level Extract File, we analyzed physical injuries and psychological trauma to NCVS victims during 2013. We found a range of covariates consistent with the likelihood of physical injury and psychological trauma. These included whether the incident was bias motivated, whether weapons (firearms, knives, other or unknown type of weapons) were involved, whether the incident involved multiple offenders or strangers, or whether drugs or alcohol were involved. Our findings reinforce previous studies that detected empirical evidence of multi-dimensional physical and psychological injuries to bias crime victims.

The Likelihood of Injury Among Bias Crimes

In 2009, President Barack Obama signed the Mathew Sheppard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Protection act and thereby extended the list of previously protected classes of victims from actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, disability and sex orientation to gender and gender identity. Over 45 states, the District of Columbia and the federal government now include hate crime statutes that increase penalties when offenders perpetrate hate crimes against protected classes of victims. Penalty enhancement statutes sanction unlawful bias conduct arguably because they result in more severe injuries relative to non-bias conduct. We contend that physical injuries vary by bias type and are not equally injurious. Data on bias crimes was analyzed from the National Incident Based Reporting System. Descriptive patterns of bias crimes were identified by offense type, bias motivation and major and minor injuries. Using Multivariate analyses, we found an escalating trend of violence against racial minorities. Moreover, relative to non-bias crimes, only anti-White and anti-lesbian bias crimes experienced our two prong “animus” criteria of disproportionate prevalence and severity of injury. However, when compared to anti-White bias, anti-Black bias crimes were more prevalent and likely to suffer serious injuries. Implications for hate crime jurisprudence are discussed.

Sexual Orientation Bias Crimes

LGBT hate crimes are typically more violent and involve greater victim injury as compared to other victimizations, but they are substantially underreported. Victim reluctance to contact law enforcement may arise from perceptions of police bias. This study explores victim–police interactions, specifically reporting to the police, perceived police bias among victims who did not report, and differential police behavior among victims who reported. Using multiple years of National Crime Victimization Survey data, sexual orientation bias victimizations are compared with other forms of victimization. Logit regression models are examined before and after the Matthew Shepard Act. The pattern of results indicate that in the years following progressive policy reforms, LGBT bias victims continue to perceive the police as biased. Results do not significantly differ between sexual orientation bias victims and victims of other types of crime regarding police reporting and differential police response. Implications for policing efforts with the LGBT community are discussed.

Youth Involvement in Anti-Gay and Anti-Lesbian Bias Crimes

There is currently little information available about youth who commit bias crimes. This article contributes to the literature by highlighting the similarities and differences between sexual orientation-motivated bias crimes committed by adult and youth suspects. Among 894 reported sexual orientation-motivated incidents in Los Angeles County between 2002 and 2008, this study found that, when compared to adult suspects, youth suspects were more likely to target other youths, were more likely to be in mixed-gender groups, were less likely to commit crimes against person, and were most likely to be reported as committing the crime at school. These preliminary findings highlight the need for additional research into bias-motivation among youth and to clarify the links between bullying and bias crimes.