The initial chapter in the series will introduce significant questions that will be addressed by the contributing authors. Via empirical data and case vignettes, issues of identification of the bias element in hate crimes and domestic terrorism will be debated.  The authors then discuss the limitations of law enforcement and experimental research on hate crimes.  Finally, a critical analysis of the role of culture and societal norms will be presented.

This chapter will describe the regime of federal and state hate crime enforcement and data collection laws and regulations in the United States. The authors will describe how hate crime laws complement American anti-discrimination and equality statutes, outline the arguments policy opponents have raised in opposition to these laws, provide updated information on constitutional challenges, and chart trends for the future.

The concepts of “hate crime” and “domestic terrorism” are often used interchangeably. Do the terms “hate crimes” and “domestic terrorism” actually distinguish distinct types of perpetrators and victims? In the United States, there are differences in the legal definitions that do not exist in Europe.  Differences between American and European legal perspectives concerning motivation and intent will be examined.

This chapter considers the French and Raven model of social power in peer influence to support and oppose hate crime statutes.  Psychological theories are discussed to further illuminate how and why hate crimes occur. North American and European studies are reviewed to identify the role of authoritarianism, gender, and inter-group contact in attitudes about the legitimacy of hate crime laws.

This chapter elaborates on the philosophical issues and debates linked to hate crime policy in Europe and the United States, and the need for research. The concept of a hate crime and how it relates to and makes use of notions from other areas (law and psychology) is discussed as is how different hate crime concepts link to the ethics and values underpinning policy. Links between terrorism and domestic extremist violence are suggested.

This chapter will analyze Slovakia’s approach to democracy as well as the democratic values towards freedom of speech. The role of the Supreme Court judges whose rulings on cases are used in the justification of limits of hate speech and hate crimes will be discussed. And the relationship between hate speech, incitement to violence, and hate crimes carried out against the Roma, Jewish, and LGBT populations will be examined.

Violence against women has been one of the most significant political and social issues during the last decades in Turkey. Based on the Violence against Women Report published by the Human Rights Organization, 4190 women were murdered by men in Turkey between 2005 and 2011. This chapter discusses new laws and presents information based on studies conducted by Research on Family Structure Turkey (TAYA) in 2006 and 2011.

This chapter explores the tension between hate crimes attributed to psychopathology or a semi-pathological nature (fixation, irrational prejudice, lack of impulse control, unconsciously framed perception, etc.) and seeing offenders as deserving a harsher punishment. To this effect, underlying theories from jurisprudence and the philosophy of law are related to the mental health characterizations of hate crime offenders.

This chapter addresses the role of authoritarianism in El Salvador in terms of violence and discrimination against minority groups. Historic adverse social conditions and the persistent threats to life is at the core of the intolerant and punitive social tendencies. Data will provide evidence to develop a predictive model of these undemocratic subjective orientations in violence against ethnic minorities and LGBT.

Hate crimes represent a unique classification of offense, characterized by violence against groups via attacks on individual targets, and having extreme negative physical, psychological, and social effects. Legislation to punish these crimes remains controversial.  Findings from three studies suggest that eliminating hate crimes in society may be contingent on combating oppressive attitudes that allow these crimes to continue.

In this chapter the constructivist idea that explanations of behavior (including the explanation of hate) are consequential for the reality of violence, and that we can only address manifestations of violence by understanding how we have been and continue to be changed by our explanations of that violence is discussed.  An explanation of violence is conducted as it relates to geo/political differences and the evolving consciousness of people.