2010 Hate Crime Statistics

According to the statistics when it came to racial bias: 69.8 percent were motivated by anti-black bias. Religious bias: 65.4 percent were anti-Jewish. Sexual orientation bias: 57.9 percent were classified as anti-male homosexual bias. Ethnicity/national origin bias: 65.5 percent were anti-Hispanic bias.

Certainly don't see the Islamophobia going on as we are led to believe. If anything Jews are much more afflicted by far, than all other religious groups combined.

Dearbornfreepress.com

January 27, 2012
By David Rusin

According to newly released FBI statistics for 2010, anti-Islamic hate crimes in the U.S. rose by almost 50% last year (160 incidents, 186 offenses, and 197 victims in 2010, compared to 107 incidents, 128 offenses, and 132 victims in 2009).

Those who push the “Islamophobia” narrative to muzzle critics of Islamism are touting the report as proof that Muslims face unique perils at the hands of American bigots. Yet proper context, found primarily in this table, reveals that criminal acts of hate against Muslims fall far short of an epidemic:

In 2010, the UCR Program’s Hate Crime Statistics Program included 14,977 participating law enforcement agencies that provided 1 to 12 months of data about bias-motivated crime. Of these agencies, 1,949 (13.0 percent) reported 6,628 incidents.
The remaining 87.0 percent of agencies participating in the Hate Crime Statistics Program reported that no hate crimes occurred in their jurisdictions.

Not sure if I'm reading this correctly, but is this saying that hate crimes are so rare only 13% of law enforcement agencies investigated 1 or more during 2010?

Hate Crime by Jurisdiction Tab

If there is so many attacks on Jews how come you never hear about it in the news?


EDIT: I don't think the stats paint a clear picture of what's going on.

Incidents involving Jews numbered 922 yet only 12 were considered aggravated assaults or 1%. Anti-Muslim incidents numbered 186 yet 17 were considered aggravated assaults or 9% (www.fbi.gov...).

Furthermore simple assaults were 65 for Jews and almost as many for Muslims with 46.

The only other statistic is that there were 201 cases of "intimidation" for Jews and 69 for Muslims.

Seems to me like this is an incredibly inflated number. The remaining incidents, 621 for Jews, 49 for Muslims, are unclassified. What accounts for all of these unclassified incidents?

It could easily be argued that the number of incidents involving Jews is so high simply because they complain the most. What are these 621 incidents? Did a fat guy fart too close to a Jew at a Mets game, the obvious motivation being antisemitism?

And what qualifies an action as a "hate crime"? If one were to say "you stupid Jew" is that a hate crime? How about you "retarded Muslim"?

Not even sure what they mean by "intimidation". That seems so incredibly arbitrary.

So if we total the two most relevant categories "aggravated assault" and "simple assault", we come up with 77 for Jews and 63 for Muslims.

Depending on one's motivation, the same data can be spun to draw very different conclusions. This is ridiculous.

Originally posted by gladtobehere
Incidents involving Jews numbered 922 yet only 12 were considered aggravated assaults or 1%. Anti-Muslim incidents numbered 186 yet 17 were considered aggravated assaults or 9% (www.fbi.gov...).

Furthermore simple assaults were 65 for Jews and almost as many for Muslims with 46.

The only other statistic is that there were 201 cases of "intimidation" for Jews and 69 for Muslims.

Seems to me like this is an incredibly inflated number. The remaining incidents, 621 for Jews, 49 for Muslims, are unclassified. What are all of these other unclassified incidents?

It could easily be argued that the number of incidents involving Jews is so high simply because they complain the most.

And what qualifies an action as a "hate crime"? If one were to say "you stupid Jew" is that a hate crime? How about you "retarded Muslim"?

edit on 29-1-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)

I bet the stats for anti-mental are low.

These statistics are garbage. You know what it takes to get a anti-white hate crime on the books? Basically an act of congress. I don't by into a single statistic that anyone puts out, they are all one sided.

I hate the term 'hate crime'. We are being steered into an Orwellian world of political correctness.
Someone was just arrested in the UK for 'making a racist gesture'. WTF is a 'racist gesture? The world has gone crackers. IMO it's just the thin end of the wedge. We will soon have 'thought crimes' - that's if we don't already...
These days it seems that killing/battering an 80 year old lady is of less consequence than doing the same to someone because of their race/colour. It's more acceptable to attack someone because they are frail and vulnerable that it is to attack someone because they are different.
Same goes for more severe penalties for hurting a police officer. Which implies that a police officer is of higher value than others. I don't think so. End of rant.

reply to post by Daedal


In the UK, five times as many white people are wounded in racist attacks as ethnic minorities.

A black person in Bradford (a UK city with a large black and Indian/Pakistani minority) is 3 times as likely, as an individual, to carry out a race attack while 'Asians' are 4 times as likely to carry out a race attack than a white person.

An ethnic minority person in the UK is 35 times as likely, as an individual, to wound someone in a racially motivated attack as a white person is!

Most race attack victims `are white'

Wilipedia - Bradford Demogrphics

BBC - Racism and race crime redefined

Wikipedia - UK Demographics