Arguments Against Hate Crimes

Crimes committed against those who do no wrong, prejudices such as the terrors of burnings, lynchings, and decapitation are crimes of hate; the crimes that are motivated only by way of race, sexual orientation, disability, and many other stereotypes are those that are unforgivable. They serve no purpose but to humiliate, injure, and threaten. These crimes are the bane of society, but the role of authorities on matters of hate crimes has become blurred in a world of increasing violence of prejudice. Free speech and unprotected hate speech have come under review, and still violence increases. All of these statements beg the question: should the government more actively oppose hate speech?
Firstly, what are the different types of hate crimes?

After slaves were freed in the Civil War, a long period of anti-racial hatred sparked against many African Americans. Major spokespeople for ending segregation included Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. The first act of the federal government against segregation, a form of discrimination, was taken with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, establishing that "All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or prejudice of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.” The Civil Rights Act desegregated schools and other public facilities, but it did not majorly affect individual crimes (Civil Rights, 1964, Section 201, para. 1). The Civil Rights Act may have only pushed for desegregation of public facilities, but it completely changed how the government viewed racial equality (1964, para. 59). This act set in motion a series of events that would eventually equalize minorities in the United States. Many whites continued intentionally divisive practices through a loophole that was quickly closed with the Fair Housing Act of 1968. In addition to outlawing selling houses based on segregation it also increased the government’s ability to prosecute violent crimes associated with prejudice (Fair Housing, 1968, Section 901, para. 2). Such a law was necessary because formerly the government could not actually prosecute crimes other than on the basis

A large group of African American collegiate students have gone on strike at a number of colleges and universities after the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. According to Officer Darren Wilson, Michael Brown was walking disruptively in the middle of a road. Officer Wilson came to the realization that Brown and his companion had been participants in a recent robbery. Wilson departed his vehicle and gave chase. Wilson shot Brown after he thought he saw Michael Brown reach for a gun and charge at him (Ferguson Unrest, 2015, para. 12). The students feel that his death signified a call to band together and fight for their rights. The demands of the students, including increases in African American staff, removal of allegedly discriminatory and racist staff, free tuition for African Americans, and even preferential treatment of students and more affirmation are intended to combat these hate crimes they have suffered. Many of the students also claim that microaggressions have occurred against them from staff and other students (Sinyangwe, 2014). As this movement grows and changes, it will define how public and private institutions and government will react to such strikes and demands of those who feel marginalized. It will also define how the government deals with subtle,