Hate-Crime Victimization and Fear of Hate Crime Among Racially Visible People in Canada: The Role of Income as a Mediating Factor

Abstract

Hate-crime victimization against racially visible people is of growing concern and it raises questions about social cohesion in a multiracial and ethnic democracy such as Canada, particularly among immigrants across the country. Using income as a mediating factor, this article examines hate-crime victimization against visible minority groups in Canada using the Ethnic Diversity Survey. Using multinomial and binary logistic regression, the study describes the likelihood of experiencing hate crime victimization and fear of hate crime. The results indicate that hate crime and fear of hate crime depends on visible minorities' ethnic background, above and beyond their socioeconomic status.

The legislative context of prejudice motivated victimisation: perceptions of police legitimacy and citizen decisions to report hate crime incidents

“…The pie chart below illustrates the breakdown of victim groups in the NSPS and demonstrates that 1.081% of the 4256 survey respondents had been victims of a PMC, while 16.73% had been victims of a non-PMC, compared to 82.19% who claimed that they had not been victimised in the previous twelve months. These percentages are very close to Chongatera's (2013) findings in his study about hate crime victimisation in Canada. 82.7% of people have indicated not having been victims of a crime, while 15.8% have indicated victimisation by a crime with no prejudice motive and 1.6% have indicated hate crime victimisation (Chongatera, 2013).…”

“…Moreover, a racist offender, being sentenced to a prison term, may not cease to be racist, due to prison being one of the most racist institutions in society (Gerstenfeld, 2011;Perry, 2010a Hate crimes incorporate the full range of criminal behaviour; however, the offender's motivation about a victim's sociocultural characteristics distinguishes hate crime from non-PMC (Chongatera, 2013;Shively et al, 2001). Another debate concerning PMC legislation is, therefore, the need to prove prejudice motives.…”

“…Four categories exist for offenders engaging in hate crime, including thrill crime, defensive hate crime offenders, retaliatory offenders and crusaders (Chongatera, 2013;McDevitt, Levin, & Bennett, 2002). Thrill crimes are driven by excitement and power, while defensive hate crime offenders try to defend their resources, which they see threatened.…”

“…Thrill crimes are driven by excitement and power, while defensive hate crime offenders try to defend their resources, which they see threatened. Retaliatory offenders are driven by revenge and retaliation for a certain wrong against their group, while a crusader's mission is to rid the earth of evil (Chongatera, 2013;McDevitt et al, 2002). When hate crimes occur, the victims are likely to identify the offender with the dominant culture in society (Perry, 2010b).…”

“…Gender: I include a gender variable into my analysis to control for a likelihood of PMC victimisation based on respondents' gender (see also Chongatera, 2013). Respondents are asked for their gender by question "Are you male or female?"…”