By Triana McNeil

  A hate crime occurs nearly every hour in the U.S., based on data reported to the FBI. Investigations of recent hate crimes have suggested that exposure to hate speech on the internet may have contributed to the attackers’ biases against their victims. In 2021, the FBI placed hate crimes at the same national threat priority level as preventing domestic violent extremism. GAO was asked to review information on hate crimes and hate speech on the internet. This report examines (1) the extent to which DOJ collects data on hate crimes that occur on the internet, (2) what company data indicate about steps selected companies have taken to remove hate speech and violent extremist speech from their internet platforms, and (3) what is known about users’ experience with, or expression of, hate speech on the internet, and its relationship to hate crimes and domestic violent extremism. GAO analyzed U.S. hate crime data and interviewed DOJ officials. GAO analyzed data and interviewed officials from six selected companies operating internet platforms with publicly available policies prohibiting hate and violent extremist speech. GAO assessed peer reviewed and nonprofit studies that described hate speech on the internet, hate crimes, and domestic violent extremist incidents. What GAO Recommends GAO recommends that BJS explore options to measure bias-related criminal victimization that occurs on the internet through the National Crime Victimization Survey or in a supplemental survey, as appropriate. BJS agreed with this recommendation.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2024. 87p.

By Kateira Aryaeinejad and Thomas Leo Scherer

Over the years, the National Institute of Justice’s (NIJ) funding for research has provided important opportunities to advance our understanding of topics related to crime and justice within the United States. Drawing from this portfolio, this synthesis paper compares and contrasts the data and findings from NIJ-sponsored research projects on violent extremism, mass shootings, and bias crimes. This comparison focuses both on the content of the data and on the creation and coverage of the data, examining findings from four research projects: ■ The Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) database of 2,226 individuals who demonstrated at least 1 of 5 extremist or radicalized behaviors. ■ The Bias Incidents and Actors Study (BIAS) database of 966 adults arrested or indicted for bias crimes. ■ The National Hate Crime Investigation Study (NHCIS) database of 1,230 hate crime cases. ■ The Violence Project dataset of 172 mass shootings. This synthesis first reviews the creation of each dataset and the types of information that are collected to better understand their generalizability and the ability to make comparisons across separate datasets. There are significant differences in the size, time span, and information of the four datasets, which limits the comparisons that can be made between the individuals described in each dataset and necessitates caution in drawing strong conclusions from such comparisons. With that caution in mind, the datasets suggest some similarities in the individuals who commit bias crimes and mass shootings and display violent extremist behavior. These individuals are primarily males in their 20s and 30s and unmarried at the time of their offenses. They may exhibit higher rates of unemployment than the general population and often have prior criminal histories. However, that is not to say that these characteristics should be used as a profile to determine who is at risk of or more likely to commit any of these types of offenses or behaviors. Rather, it calls into question what other factors may be impacting individuals with these characteristics who go on to commit these types of offenses. The datasets also suggest some differences in the individuals who commit each type of offense or behavior. Individuals associated with violent extremism tend to be more educated than those who commit mass shootings or bias crimes. Individuals who commit mass shootings exhibit higher rates of mental health issues than those who commit bias crimes or participate in violent extremism offenses. The comparison of individuals across categories also highlighted differences among individuals who committed the same type of offense. Among individuals who supported violent extremism, for example, those acting in support of far-right ideologies were more likely to have military experience than those following other ideologies. Comparing these datasets highlights their potential and their limitations, suggesting paths forward for future research. The different collection methods show the importance of precisely describing the data collection method, discussing which behaviors are missed by that method, and triangulating among data with different methods to understand what is missing. The differences in the types of information that each dataset collects about each individual and action suggest that future collections could have greater overlap and comparability. The establishment of potential similarities in demographics and life experiences also allows for more targeted data collection focusing on why most individuals who fit that profile do not commit an offense, while others do. In this way, these projects not only contribute to our current understanding of these types of offenses and behaviors but also allow future research and programming to be conducted more effectively.

Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2024. 43p.

By Everytown Research & Policy

Executive Summary Hateful rhetoric and violence against transgender people has become a feature of society and politics across the globe in recent years, but in the US—where there are more guns than people —it often turns lethal. To better understand the risk factors for violence against transgender people, and the role firearms play, Everytown Research analyzed over 200 homicides of transgender and gender-expansive people in the United States and Puerto Rico from 2017 to 2022. The findings from this research warrant renewed calls for strong gun violence prevention policies that keep guns out of the wrong hands, such as laws that require background checks on all gun sales, raise the age to purchase a gun, and disarm domestic abusers. They also highlight the need to combat discrimination against trans people and to manage upstream risk factors, like housing insecurity, inequality, and poverty in order to help save trans lives. Key Findings Our analysis of the 228 known homicides of transgender people in the United States and Puerto Rico from January 2017 through December 2022 revealed the following: laws that require background checks on all gun sales, raise the age to purchase a gun, and disarm domestic abusers. They also highlight the need to combat discrimination against trans people and to manage upstream risk factors, like housing insecurity, inequality, and poverty in order to help save trans lives. 4 5 6 A gun was used in more than seven in 10 transgender homicides. Sixty-five percent of transgender victims of gun homicide were Black trans women. Yet among the general US population, only 7 percent of gun homicide victims are Black women. Nearly six in 10 trans victims of homicide were under the age of 30. More than one in three identified gun homicide perpetrators were legally prohibited from possessing a firearm due to prior felony convictions or other prohibiting factors. One-third of transgender victims of homicide experienced housing insecurity or homelessness. The majority of those victims were killed with a gun. Trans people killed with a gun were nearly twice as likely to be killed by a family member or intimate partner than were gun homicide victims generally. A disproportionate number of gun homicides of trans people took place in the South, and Florida and Texas together were home to nearly one out of every five trans gun homicides

New York: Everytown Research & Policy, 2024. 31p.