I thought a bit about the whole hate crimes statistics that came out this week. They show whites committing the majority, about 6,500. What I noticed is missing from the 2001 stats is the attack on the World Trade Center, as it would have Middle Easterners running second, instead of blacks, as perpetrators, as thousands died in the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon.

It is also interesting to note that different figures are quoted (sometimes incidents, sometimes victims—whichever fits the slant better). This is much like quoting the numbers that voted for Pat Robertson in Palm Beach county. The numbers sounded rediculous, but the percentage fit the percentage that voted for him in the previous election. Muslim crimes up 1600% sounds ominous, but the few numbers of crimes makes it easy to have a jump, esp. when you compare incidents from 2000 to numbers of Muslims in the second. Note that the FBI report still shows both the number of incidents and number of people affected by “hate crimes” against Jews are still a lot higher than those against Muslims.

My point? None. It just goes to show how the media can make something out of nothing. The increase in population is not figured in to the comparisons, and the fact that a new standard was adopted in 2001, or that more agencies are reporting to the FBI is not taken into consideration. Plus, I think, personally, that a person should be tried for the crime committed, and there should be no special “hate crime”. When you beat someone’s head in and kill him, does it really matter if you did it because he, as an individual, ticked you off, or because he was a [put favorite racial slur here]. To the family and friends of the victim, the desire for justice is equal. The only thing I can see the “hate crime” designation adding, is making some highly visible special interest groups very happy.