06-01-2018, 01:16 PM
(06-01-2018, 12:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actual police disagree with you
Off Duty black NYP officers claim to be targets of racial profiling...http://gawker.com/nypd-racial-profiling-captures-off-duty-black-cops-1674627902
"A" police officer, is not police, plural.
Quote:St. Louis Police chief fired for ordering officers to concentrate on arresting blacks at a mall....http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/st-louis-county-police-lieutenant-who-allegedly-targeted-blacks-is/article_691eb995-7247-5c0b-a48b-e7048c777b37.html
Some context would help your argument here. Such as, why did he make the order? I'm not saying the order was right, but was there a reason for making it other than assuming the chief doesn't like black people?
Quote:There are many studies showing that police racially profile. The most famous is the NYC "stop and frisk" policy where only 9% of the stops involved white people and 98% of the stops found no contraband. So cop were stopping innocent people for no reason and 91% of them were minorities.
In a study of 313 random traffic stops in Cincinnati in '03-'04 it was found that "Blacks were between three and five times more likely to (a) be asked if they were carrying drugs or weapons, (b) be asked to leave the vehicle, © be searched, (d) have a passenger searched, and (e) have the vehicle physically searched in a study conducted. . https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00398.x
We know what happened, that doesn't tell us why it happened. Are there reasons for the higher rate of these instances that aren't based on race? Simply saying it happens to black people more frequently does not automatically mean it happens because they are black.
Quote:A study from Richmond Virginia in 2001 found that blacks were stopped at a disproportionate rate based on their percentage of population even though whites were more likely to be ticketed or arrested when stopped. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1098611101004001001
Traffic stops are initiated for a reason. Many of those reasons are going to be more prevelant for less economically advantaged people, e.g. broken taillight, expired tags, cracked windshield. Also, from your own link.
"Minority citizens in general, and African Americans in particular, were disproportionately stopped compared with their percentage in the driving-eligible population. However, they were searched no more frequently than Whites; in fact, Whites were significantly more likely than minorities to be the subjects of consent searches. Compared with Whites, and after controlling for variables, minority drivers were more likely to be warned, whereas Whites were more likely to be ticketed or arrested."
EDIT: I missed this bit from the end;
"Examining officer race as a predictor revealed White officers were no more likely than minority officers to stop, search, or arrest minority drivers."
I appreciate your helping me prove my point.
Quote:A 2009 study of traffic stops in West Virginia showed that minorities were 1.5 times more likely ot be stopped and 2.5 times more likely to have their vehicles searched than white people despite the fact that white people were MORE LIKELY to have contraband in their possession.
Odd, as the study above found the exact opposite. What are to conclude from these findings?
Quote:The list goes on and on. Police think minorities are more likely to be criminals, so they concentrate more on minorities.
Speaking in such broad generalities could be perceived as profiling, sir.
Quote:But this turns out to be a self fulfilling prophesy. Since they concentrate more on minorities they en dup arresting more minorities.
Or not, per your own sources.
(06-01-2018, 12:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: While I get what you're saying here, it is my understanding based on the work of Chris Uggen, that while people of color are more likely to be searched when pulled over for a traffic stop, white people are more likely to have illegal items in their possession. What this points to is that there may (I'm saying may because assigning motive is very difficult with these sorts of things) be something more at play than basing it more on suspicious activity and race may play a greater role than many believe, including the officers themselves.
Possibly. However such a subjective conclusion would be impossible to prove.
Quote:We have been led to believe for a long time that people of color, black men specifically, are more likely to be criminals. They are arrested, charged, and incarcerated at higher rates for longer sentences than other demographic groups. But the ethnographic data collected points to them not committing crimes at a rate any higher than white men, for instance.
Fred addresses this later and I'll go into more detail in my response to him, but this is, sadly, not the case.
Quote:This is one of the issues I have with the idea of "community policing" or other programs founded on the broken windows principles. There is a level of subjectivity there that is very easy to abuse and cause inequity in our application of the criminal justice system. I just wish we had a good way to really fix it, because that is difficult. As you say, LEOs are human beings and they will have the same flaws as anyone else. Same for prosecutors and judges. I don't harbor the notion that we will ever solve this issue 100%, I just wish we could have productive conversations about it.
You are correct on this, focusing on obvious crime, such as graffiti, mans LEO's will come into contact with residents of poorer neighborhoods more often. As these areas skew minority this does mean they will be contacted at higher rates.
