Bias Crimes: What Do Haters Deserve

Criminal Justice Ethics, Vol. 11, p. 20, 1992

4 Pages Posted: 6 Aug 2009

See all articles by Jeffrie G. Murphy

Jeffrie G. Murphy

Arizona State University College of Law

Date Written: 1992

Abstract

This article responds to the argument made by Susan Gellman stating that it has long been recognized as illegitimate for the criminal law to regard motives material or defining elements of cranial offenses, and hate crimes, which punish people more severely when they act by reason of racial bias or hatred, are thereby making motives into material or defining elements. Thus hate crimes are illegitimate. This argument is unpersuasive because it is simply false in any important sense that the criminal law never takes account of motives as elements. Also, it fails because even if criminal law were to never take account of motives as an element to a crime, then the criminal law has been resting upon a mistake and ought to be improved by allowing motives sometimes to count, particularly in cases like hate crimes. Additionally, the very concept of harm or injury cannot be understood independently of motives and other mental states. If one objects to the validity of hate crimes solely based upon their supposed inconsistency with the non-motive considering criminal law, then one has no valid objection to hate crimes.

Keywords: Hate Crimes, Criminal Law, Motive

Suggested Citation

Murphy, Jeffrie G., Bias Crimes: What Do Haters Deserve (1992). Criminal Justice Ethics, Vol. 11, p. 20, 1992, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1444902

Jeffrie G. Murphy (Contact Author)

Arizona State University College of Law ( email )

Box 877906
Tempe, AZ 85287-7906
United States
(480) 965-5856 (Phone)
(480) 965-2427 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
100
Abstract Views
1,172
Rank
479,249
PlumX Metrics