A Crime of Prejudice

The Laramie Project tells a story of a community stricken by disaster through various interviews of the residents of the town this disaster resided in. 21-year-old Matthew Shepard met his tragic end by the hands of two young men named Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney. Knowing he was homosexual, the two men stated that he was hitting on them and proceeded to tie him to a post and beat him to death because of this. The details of this murder assert that this act was a hate crime against a homosexual.

The Webster Dictionary defines a hate crime as, “any of various crimes (as assault or defacement of property) when motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group (as one based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation).” In Matthew Shepard’s case, the two men were perceived to commit the crime based on sexual orientation. This “hate crime” came at surprise to the people of Laramie and they quickly responded that they were “pro gay” and the rest of the town is “not like this.”

Obviously, Laramie was considered an anti-gay location by the media and public at first, but this was before “the Laramie Project” made its big debut. Sherry Johnson’s interview in The Laramie Project caused an unusual observation of a hate crime. She talked about how another highway patrolman was killed and no one besides family and friends showed much concern. She posed the question as to why Matthew Shepard is so much more important than this patrolman. She then stated that a hate crime is not just about crime motivated by gender, race, or sexual orientation, but rather plainly, based on hatred. If this is the case, then one might be curious as to why Matthew Shepard became so famous and this highway patrolman didn’t. Two supposedly equal people, according to the U.S Constitution, had died, yet the case involving one of them was much more prevalent.

There are only a two logical answers to why Matthew’s case was more significant; Sherry Johnson’s definition of a hate crime is incorrect, or people are in fact not created equal. Matthew’s case is much more important than the patrolman’s because it is based off of crude hatred towards sexual orientation. The patrolman’s case was relatively unnoticed because this was a simple murder not based off of prejudice. People began to rally for Matthew Shepard because of the “hate crime” committed to him and not to the patrolman. The community also saw Matthew’s case as a representative of hate crimes. Some believed that to be gay was wrong and he “got what he deserved.” Others believed that what was done to Matthew was very wrong and to be gay is welcomed in the world we live in.

Sherry Johnson’s definition of a hate crime however, shows very plausible thinking. When a person hates another person and commits a crime against them it should obviously be called a hate crime. Just recently, on March 8, 2009, “An 88-year-old gunman with a violent and virulently anti-Semitic past opened fire with a rifle inside the crowded U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.” This man was motivated by hate according to Access World News. Showing a past history of anti-Semitism as well as time spent in prison, this man shot one security guard who later died in the hospital.

The circumstances of the elderly Nazi show a striking resemblance to Matthew Shepard’s case. Both of the victims were subjected to murder based on a hatred of a sexual orientation, or a belief. However, the elderly Nazi did not commit a hate crime towards a Jewish person. Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney committed a hate crime based on sexual orientation when they killed Matt. Though the security guard the Nazi killed was black, this was not the incentive to kill him. The Nazi showed that he hated the Jewish and all they stood for, but did not shoot a specific Jewish person. He wanted to prove that he disagreed with the Jewish and believed that this was enough motivation to attack. This nevertheless is a hate crime because the Nazi was showing prejudice towards the Jews. The attack was based off of a hate of a creed and even though the man who was shot and killed may not have been Jewish, the incentive for the attack was based on prejudice dating all the way back to the Holocaust. The Holocaust will always be known by the world as a time of hatred and fear. Since the Nazis targeted solo Jews, this act was a crime based off of creed and the beliefs the Jewish people hold. This giant “hate crime,” one might say, spawned World War II, which was much more prominent in the news than Matthew Shepard’s case.

On April 16, 2007, a man named Cho Seung-Hui committed one of the worst shootings in this nations history. He was responsible for the deaths of 32 people within Virginia Tech including students and teachers. After this rampage, he shot himself before S.W.A.T teams could detain him. According to The New Times, this attack was based off of a long building hatred and insecurity. The shooter had a long history of disturbing writings and was sent to counseling because of them. These writings show that he mostly hated “rich kids, debauchery and deceitful charlatans,” but also hated many others which provoked him to commit this massacre.

The hate crimes of the elderly Nazi, Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney, and even the Holocaust are all based off of prejudice, therefore they are considered hate crimes towards these types of people. These crimes are not based off of the person themselves, but what the person stands for. The criminal’s hatred is due to color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation, not, for example, a police officer being killed in trying to solve a crime. The Virgina Tech Massacre is not a hate crime, however. Cho Seung-Hui did not show any prejudice towards Americans, or any ethnic group, but rather students and specific people around him. Obviously this event is very significant and demonstrates a crime based on abhorrence, but not based on prejudice.

Sherry Johnson has associated “hate crime” with pure hatred when in fact it is actually concerning to prejudice. This title of hate crime is quite confusing in this sense. A logical name for a crime such as this would be a crime of prejudice, or to be specific to Matthew Shepard, a crime based on sexual orientation. If a hate crime were simply a crime based on hatred, the highway patrolman’s case should have been just as important to the public as Matthew’s. This would call for an entirely new name to the crime that was committed to Matthew Shepard.

However ambiguous the definition of a hate crime may be, the suffering that Matthew had to endure just from his sexual orientation is wrong. People around the world need to be aware that an act such as this is never acceptable. Gays are hated irrational reasons by some around the world, and these people need to be taught that hate crimes are unacceptable. The hate crimes legislation could easily be reinforced to teach people there is no need to show such hatred toward these people. Whatever their sexual preferences are shouldn’t matter to a person who is comfortable with their own.

Crimes of prejudice show no rational sense in the world we live in today. The word hate crime is confusing and baffles people as to what its true definition is. It should be changed from its original title to a more suitable one such as a crime of prejudice, because that’s what it actually is. Since this definition is so subjective, a hate crime could be considered to be any crime that any person shows anger or hatred to. Sherry Johnson believes this to be the definition of a hate crime. Many people probably share this definition as well, which is why this title of a hate crime needs to be changed to something that actually can be identified without debate.