ipl-logo

Comparison Of The Mathew Sheppard And James Byrd Act

576 Words3 Pages

Today crime is no longer associated with murder, theft, and assault among other common offenses but rather the bracket encompassing crimes has increased. This is because in addition to these common offenses there are hate crimes and cyber crimes which are evolving as the world continues to change. The justice system has thus established crime laws that are meant to protect citizens in a nation against these crimes. The Mathew Sheppard and James Byrd act are hate crime laws designed to prevent hate offenses against individuals as a result factors such as gender, ethnicity, and culture (Mogul, Ritchie, and Whitlock, 2011).
This act was established by the federal law within the US and passed in October 2009 by the Congress (Altschiller, 2015). It protects individuals from hate crimes that may be directed to them by other individuals. As a result of their differences in gender, ethnicity, and origin. This act gives the justice system of the US the authority to punish those who engage in hate crimes that are motivated by their victim’s race, religion and ethnicity among others. Moreover, for a victim the hate crime to be protected by this act, he or she does not …show more content…

The fact that hate crime is deemed a major problem for a nation makes the Mathew Sheppard and James Byrd act to be implemented at all levels. This act is implemented at the local, state and federal level within a nation. This because the federal. Local, federal and state authorities join forces during investigations and prosecution of these hate crimes to protect the entire nation from violence evolving due to hate among people. Therefore, to mitigate expansion of hate crimes in the nation all authorities are given the power by Mathew Sheppard’s act to prevent hate crimes and prosecuting

Open Document