BJS Hate Crime data
Please review the BJS Hate Crime data and complete the following: 1) Please present an overview of reported Hate Crimes in the US. Then, choose a local recent Hate Crime and discuss how the CJ System could have prevented this type of crime.
Hate crime is defined as apparent acts that indicate prejudice based on gender, religion, identity, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or disability. Crimes often perceived by victims as bias and weaponized attacks are measured by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) (Masucci & Langton 2). According to the BJS, racial motivations were behind victim attacks based on ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and religion from 2011-2015. The hate crimes victimization of 2004-15 involved violence as a majority, and physical assault such as rape or aggravated assault were part of it. However, half of the attacks were left unreported as the victims feared using alternative methods to solve the crimes. Hispanics faced higher hate crimes than non-Hispanics as the lowest income bracket homes faced higher victimization rates than all other income categories.
On May 19, 2021, a man known as Ali Alaheri set fire to a yeshiva and synagogue. Allegedly Alaheri also performed a hate crime by attacking a man wearing traditional attire, the Hasidic garb. By doing this, Alaheri performed hate crimes. The CJS should engage victims of threat to get both evidence and a better understanding of hate crimes and their impact. The CJS should also question and perform surveillance on any perpetrators who hold a history of hate crimes. Additionally, Law enforcement should arrest Perpetrators of hate crimes regardless of the severity of their crime.
Please research and review the cases of Ex Parte Qurin (1942) and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004). Please compare the two cases and discuss the status of the Enemy Combatant. Please discuss whether you believe that the Enemy Combatant is relevant to today’s threats in an essay.
The case of ex Parte Qurin and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld shared similarity in that protagonists from both cases were considered enemy combatants to the US. In the case of Ex Parte Qurin, the status of the enemy combatants were detrimentally sealed when a military committee was appointed to oversee judgement. A heated debate led to the conclusion that the detainee held no right to a fair trial by a jury (Madison III 383). While in the case of Hamdi V. Rumsfeld, the status of the supposed enemy combatant was indefinite detainment without trial. However, the court ruled that the accused had the right to due process and could challenge their status as an enemy combatant. Both trials took enemy combatant actions seriously by detaining them. Enemies of the states are considered a threat both to the government and its people. Additionally, they are denied rights to trials and are even executed as their actions are considered grave. However, despite being considered an enemy, combatants are given the right to challenge the accusation levelled against them.
Enemy combatants are enemies of the state regardless of whether they are citizens or not. In unanimity with the belief that the enemy combatant is relevant to today’s threat, enemies of the state cannot change. Enemy combatants are akin to terrorist, and a terrorist aims to wreak havoc in the highest magnitude. Today’s threats are riddled with intricate details that are not easily accessible. However, military combatants are often knowledgeable on their intended attack; this is possible due to insider information. Moreover, the state should use all available means and agencies at their disposal to curb the progress of military combatants. Lives can be saved when even small attacks are considered detrimental to the masses.
Please review Identity Theft and Identity Crime. How is Identity Theft different from Traditional Violent Crime in terms of Offenders and Victims? Please discuss this in an essay.
Offenders knowingly and unlawfully attempting to use an existing account without authorization fraudulently engage in identity theft. Major identity theft incidents engage the unlawful use of existing accounts. (Harrell & Langton 2)The use of personal information from victims leaves them in personal distress as they experience credit, financial and emotional problems. Identity theft cases could take upwards of a day to a month to resolve, and time is crucial as the victims suffer financial losses. Moreover, most victims don’t know how offenders got their information or the offenders themselves.
Individuals in higher-income households were likely to be victims of identity theft than low-income households (Harrell & Langton 3). The ages of 16-24 are less likely to be victims, as are 65-year-olds and above. There was a similarity in victimization between males and females as sex was not a common factor in determining theft. Financial institutions played major roles in unravelling identity theft as they contacted victims due to suspicious activity. Other companies or utility agencies served as informants of suspicious financial activity, especially with unpaid bills. Hence, most victims engaged in prevention methods such as changing passwords to protect their finances.
The difference between identity theft and traditional violent crimes is that the former is likely to have detrimental effects outside life, like school or work. Identity theft victims, while still affected, showed less distraction as a consequence. In contrast, violent crime victims were physically violated, leading to distraction affecting friendships and concentration. In the case of identity theft, emotional distress varied. As victims of personal information and new account fraud found the theft severely distressing as compared to credit card fraud victims
Harrell, Erika, and Lynn Langton. Victims of identity theft, 2012. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2013.
Madison III, Benjamin V. “Trial by Jury or by Military Tribunal for Accused Terrorist Detainees Facing the Death Penalty-An Examination of Principles That Transcend the US Constitution.” U. Fla. JL & Pub. Pol’y 17 (2006)
Masucci, Madeline, and Lynn Langton. “Hate crime victimization, 2004-2015.” NCJ 250653 (2017).