Wednesday, 9 November 2016

Hate Crime and Terrorism

Hate crime and terrorism have various aspects in common. The choice of a criminal act and the choice of victim play a significant role in what should be the result. Some of the hate crimes are seen to be acts of terrorism, and that is why the two have some connects. In some cases experienced in the society, the distinction between terrorism and hate crime has come under high scrutiny. Society experiences some heavy hate crime activities that are said to be terrorist acts and not crimes. In the decision below, the concept of hate crime is discussed giving valid connection to terrorism as well as their differences.

The overlap and the distinction 

        Both terrorism and hate crime are elements with vague boundaries based on how they are applied in the society. Their application according to various studies conducted shows that they overlap. With no doubts, a crime can turn to be an act of terrorism or a hate crime. On top of this, what makes a crime an act of terrorism and what makes it a hate crime also overlaps. Having in mind that the aspects of the two situations are debatable, it can be said that whereas hate crimes are commonly differentiated from other common crimes by motivation, the act of terrorism is differentiated by their intentions. Terrorism is said to be an act of crime focused to spread fear in a society for the purpose of instigating political change.
        As for the hate crime, it does not actually need to be accompanied by clear political intentions. Hate crime definitions exist which tie the differential mark to intentions, but the intentions need not be pronounced for the purpose of count. The evidence needed to establish hate motive does not include evidence of given extensive planning. It is easier to commit a hate crime. For the terrorist act, it is not easy to carry out the act. With cases of hate crimes being common in the society, it is rare to experience a terrorist act. During the time of evaluating a hate crime, it is essential to take it serious for it can lead to a counterproductive decrease towards successful prosecutions.

Terroristic elements of hate crime

        With hate crimes just like acts of terrorism, they target not only the immediate individual victims but also affect the groups to which they are connected. The intended effect of the two types of crimes is to develop fear in the group. Also, they aim at reminding the victims of the heightened risk of more victimization. The minor harm of the hate crime is in most cases recognized as the justification for penalty enhancements. The two are also expressive of given attitudes and political aspects.

Patterns, Organization, and Planning

        Because of the planning nature of terrorism, it manifests the existence of a threat situation to the society. The fear which terrorism is intended to develop is no doubt the fear of another attack. When an event is called an act of terrorism, it signals that it is not interested in establishing the guilt of the punishing the perpetrator accordingly, but it’s aimed at eliminating that threat. Terrorism is conceived as something that is planned as well as organized. Hate crimes are intended to create and strike fear in a given setting, need not to have the aspect of planning and organization.
        In old days, the issue of hate crime was closer to people conception of domestic terrorism. Indeed, the United States antiterrorism law has its roots in the act of 1871 within the Ku Klux Klan. For the Sweden, the hate crime law has its roots in attempts to counter-act racist organizations. The current nature of hate crime is recognized later when the situation happens. Acts of terrorism in the present day are well organized while hate crimes do manifests and reinforce a pattern of happening. Hate is with no doubt confined to a given group or setting, but it exists distributed throughout the society. It can be seen that the reason why hate crimes are not organized is that it doesn’t need to happen in a given order to motivate the intended effect.

Terrorism and Alien to the System

        The difference between terrorism and hate crime as discussed above is that the concept expressed in an act of terrorism is considered to be alien to the system that is under attack. Terrorism is a threat towards citizen from the outsiders. The political nature of terrorism is to develop a change where the political system in some way. In that case, the threat of terrorism must develop from the outside setting. With no doubts, it is the reason why attacks with some Islamic nature are recognized as terrorist acts. For the hate crimes, they are considered as entrenched in some prevailing system. They are an expression of oppression of member of a marginalized set of group by a member of the majority. As a matter of fact, hate crimes are viewed as expressions of a similar sort of attitudes that led to development of discrimination and violence against minority groups.
        In some instances, hate crimes are seen as threats to society in general. The perception is a mistake in all ways. In a situation where terrorism is understood as crimes developed with the intention to create a political effect through causing fear, it then turns out that the defensive kind is more common than the alien related. For one to recognize the act of terrorism it requires that people rid of the conception of the alien attacker and handle the existence of conservative. The fear of a terroristic attack in the society would seem and lead to a fear of people who looks like and to the nature associated with the source of the threat. Some of the hate crimes that come with force are treated with authorities as attacks suspected to create or develop terrorism situations.

        Although there is recognized deal of overlap between terrorism and hate crime, it is essential to keep in mind the distinction between the exceptional and every day. Some of the hate crimes occur based on terrorism. There are those that happen as a result of terrorism, where some hate crimes are more impulsive crimes of opportunity. Even the hate crimes that are of impulsive nature comes with a certain pattern that in turn has the same sort of effects and are associated with terrorism. By understanding on the similarity between hate crime and terrorism, it means looking at the threat that hate crimes poses to an open society.

Thursday, 13 October 2016

Effects of Gender in National Elections Voting Patterns

In every election cycle, gender together with other social issues has been found to play a critical role in determining political participation. The general perception has been that women lag behind when it comes to political engagement. It is also notable that in the last few decades women turnouts in elections have surpassed that of men. It is, therefore, paramount to evaluate the social issues that influence the gender gap that has been prevalent in voting participation. The following is a discussion of three open-ended questions whose answers are essentials to exploring gender disparity in voting as well as the accompanying social issues.

What are the social problems that influence gender voting?

The first and arguably the strongest issues in gender voting is male chauvinism. Male chauvinism has been in existence for many decades discriminating against women by gender. Historically the prejudice has been assumed to be instigated by men towards women political aspirants. However, voting patterns in the last few decades show that women have not supported fellow women during elections.  The spill over of male chauvinism to women voters is, therefore, a major factor in influencing gender voting. Another social issue in gender voting is abortion. Although opinions on the legality of abortion are divided, women are more likely to vote in the direction of a political party that allows for abortion under extreme health conditions.
Same-sex marriage has also been a contentious social issue in election cycles. Political aspirants have consistently evoked emotions around the issue in most election cycles. Women have been found to be more supportive of political parties and aspirants who are opposed to same-sex marriages. The reason for the support from women is the inherent adherence to religious freedom and rights of children that women possess.  

How does gender affect political orientation?
Historically, women have shunned the election process in many instances. The debate among researchers has been whether the abstinence from voting is purely premised on gender or from the factors associated with gender differences. To answer this question, it is important to explore the factors that are regarded differently by different genders. The elements can then be used to ascertain the effect of gender on political orientation. Women are more supportive of family settings and are therefore more likely to be oriented to political parties with policies meant to safeguard the continuity of the household.
Equal legal rights, equal work, and equal pay are arguably the most prominent of women issues. Women are therefore more likely to be aligned with political parties that are more supportive of these matters. From this discussion, it is clear that gender by itself is not the primary determinant of political orientation but rather an issue associated with a particular gender whether male or female.

What are the implications of gender-based voting biases?
Biases premised on gender stereotypes have serious ramification on the entire governance system and enhancement of the democratic space in society. In many instances, gender biases inhibit objectivity in voting and override other important issues in voting. For example, the firm correlation between social issues and gender voting overrides more important matters such as economic development and better health care.
The preceding discussion explores three essential questions that are essential in understanding social issues and gender-based biases in voting. The questions are open-ended and, therefore, have no definite answers thereby expanding the scope of research on the topic.

Monday, 25 July 2016

Obesity and America: Management of the Epidemic

The U.S is one of the countries that have the highest number of obese people. The population of the obese people in this country keeps increasing. Obesity is a high-risk disease condition associated with other complications such as cardiac arrest and hypertension. The resultant conditions are responsible for the high mortality associated with obesity. The increase in the obesity cases and the danger associated with the disease makes obesity an important case to study.

According to Bray, the obesity cases are reaching critical levels with 250 million people in the world being obese. It contributes to the acquisition of life-threatening diseases including diabetes mellitus, coronary thrombosis, gallbladder disease, hypertension, cancer and osteoarthritis. These diseases may in turn cause death progressively.

Another significance of the research study is the social impact the disease has on the victims. Being overweight is associated with being gluttonous and unattractive. Obese people, therefore, live a traumatized life due to lack of confidence and low self-esteem. This can also lead to depression in the affected people.

Obese people are also less productive due to the social discrimination, other limiting conditions such as diseases and the fact that they are overweight. Due to this reason, as the rates of obesity rise, the productivity of the society and the country at large will reduce. To prevent the country from getting to such extremities, the disease needs to be controlled.

Obesity has lots of negative impacts on the society today. The surprising thing is that cases of obesity are soaring to a whole new level such that, it has been termed as an epidemic. There have been campaigns and public awareness created to educate people on how to control the disease. However, as evidenced by the ever increasing cases of obesity, more need to be done regarding the condition management in the U.S.