or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WTF over-zealous police? - Page 78

post #1156 of 6095
I just saw DeBlasio on TV talking about "centuries of racism".

I don't think the Garner case involved racism one bit.

If Garner were a 350 Lb white man with the same background, the same thing would have happened.

It had nothing to do with race, other than the agitation by the usual suspects.

NYC Mayor on Garner Decision: ‘Centuries of Racism’ Brought Us to Today

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nyc-mayor-on-garner-decision-centuries-of-racism-brought-us-to-today/
post #1157 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

I just saw DeBlasio on TV talking about "centuries of racism".

I don't think the Garner case involved racism one bit.

If Garner were a 350 Lb white man with the same background, the same thing would have happened.

It had nothing to do with race, other than the agitation by the usual suspects.

NYC Mayor on Garner Decision: ‘Centuries of Racism’ Brought Us to Today

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nyc-mayor-on-garner-decision-centuries-of-racism-brought-us-to-today/

De Blasio's argument, as it's currently stated, doesn't insist that the cop had explicitly racist motives for choking Garner (and uncovering someone's hidden motives is never a perfect science anyways). His argument lacks specificity (what he means, exactly, for racism to have led to where we are today), but at least it has some familiar but true facts behind it: this country does have centuries of racism in its past (duh), this history has an impact on how people live their lives today (duh), and even if all of this didn't figure in precisely accountable ways in the incident, it still matters for what that event means at the citywide and national levels.

But even if you were take take exception to De Blasio's argument, your own counterargument should do better than articulating a personal opinion, a hypothetical conjecture, and then a confident assertion. OTOH, you didn't mention Al Sharpton, so that's progress.
post #1158 of 6095
Perhaps police in US has to change its tactics and focus from arresting people for minor violations to some other more cost-effective, less-violent methods of controlling non-violent violations of law. US methods of policing are aching to totalitarian fascist state where citizens can be arrested and thrown in jail for not paying 20.00 parking ticket from 10 years ago. It is this absurd aggressive policing that is causing most of the problems.
post #1159 of 6095
there was an angry black man on my train yesterday. Claimed that "if you punch a fag, it's a hate crime, kill a black man, and it's ok."

Also something about how everybody wants to "dress like us, and be like us", but I didn't understand that point either.
post #1160 of 6095
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/couple-reenacts-garner-chokehold-on-live-news.html

whatever those people were doing before they did that ... I want to know what it is so I can partake.
post #1161 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

The Ferguson case was about how police overreach is a widespread problem in poor black communities.

No, it wasn't. The Ferguson case was about someone who robbed a convenient store then attacked a police officer when he was confronted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post


I think it's consistent to say there's a widespread problem and it's particularly acute in poorer minority areas.

Look at the stats on the number of blacks killed by cops versus the number of whites killed by cops, then adjust for population. There is no epidemic. The epidemic is the disproportionate amount of crime minorities commit.

Eric Garner is not Michael Brown. Garner's death is a justifiable reason for outrage and discussion.
Edited by suited - 12/4/14 at 10:11am
post #1162 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

I just saw DeBlasio on TV talking about "centuries of racism".

I don't think the Garner case involved racism one bit.

If Garner were a 350 Lb white man with the same background, the same thing would have happened.

It had nothing to do with race, other than the agitation by the usual suspects.

NYC Mayor on Garner Decision: ‘Centuries of Racism’ Brought Us to Today

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nyc-mayor-on-garner-decision-centuries-of-racism-brought-us-to-today/

The NYC police were using overtly racist tactics with Stop and Frisk for years. Why should we believe that it wasn't an element in this case? If a big fat white guy was on the street selling single cigs, would he choked out by four officers? Going to bet he'd have politely been issued a ticket and told to scram.
post #1163 of 6095
"Stop and frisk" was not "overtly racist," unless you think sending cops to high-crime areas is racist. Then who's the real racist?
post #1164 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

No, it wasn't. The Ferguson case was about someone who robbed a convenient store then attacked a police officer when he was confronted.
The case resonated with the people of Ferguson (and nationwide) because they saw a situation that brought to light broader problems. Isolating it as "lol thug got popped" is really missing the broader social point.
Quote:
Look at the stats on the number of blacks killed by cops versus then number of whites killed by cops, then adjust for population. There is no epidemic.
.

There aren't even good stats on the number of people shot by police. You'd think exercises of state violence on citizens would be rigorously reported and made available, but nope, reporting to the national level is strictly voluntary and poorly analyzed. One might suspect that authorities don't want this information to be widely known. Even with that in mind, our rates of people killed by police are far higher than most other First World countries. Many average zero a year, and most are single digits. We have at least 400/year, with many unreported and untracked. Even without the racial dynamic there's a great deal to be concerned about.

The limited data does show that blacks are much more likely to be shot than whites, adjusting for population.
Quote:
The epidemic is the disproportionate amount of crime minorities commit.

Even that's strongly weighted by policing tactics. Blacks are far more likely to be arrested and spend time in jail for drug offenses than whites (likely other crimes too). Once you're arrested, it's much harder to work productively in society, and the whole thing spirals from there. The system doesn't operate in a vacuum. Then there's the whole poverty thing in the first place, but that's a much bigger argument.

On the shootings subject, you again have this feedback loop. Officers know that blacks are more likely to have committed crimes, so they are much tougher on black citizens as a rule. Blacks, even those who have never done anything illegal, then have predominantly negative interactions with the police. This colors how they interact with the police in the future. This tension and fear results in people getting shot who didn't need to get shot.

Most of these patterns are reasonable on the micro level. It makes sense to spend more time policing in areas with higher crime. Officers are naturally going to be more suspicious of people who are more probable threats. I don't know how you break that cycle, but it's really toxic in the minority community. Ending the War on Drugs would be a good start.
post #1165 of 6095
^ Yup. Here's one of the recent articles pointing out how we really don't know how many people have been killed by police, how the numbers available are based on voluntary reporting by each police department, etc. So suited can act as if his claim is backed up by solid evidence, but that solid evidence doesn't exist.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-many-americans-the-police-kill-each-year/
post #1166 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

"Stop and frisk" was not "overtly racist," unless you think sending cops to high-crime areas is racist. Then who's the real racist?

That's really not a justified conclusion if you actually look into the statistics.


Most relevant bits:
Quote:
NYPD stops are significantly more frequent for Black and Hispanic citizens than for white citizens, after adjusting stop rates for the precinct crime rates, the racial composition and other social and economic factors predictive of police activity. These disparities are consistent across a set of alternate tests and assumptions.

Blacks and Latinos are more likely to be stopped than Whites even in areas where there are low crime rates and where residential populations are racially heterogeneous or predominantly White.

So it wasn't only happening in high crime minorities regions.
Quote:
analysis also showed that blacks and Hispanics, once they had been stopped, were more likely to be subjected to the use of force, even though the probability of the stop resulting in further action—like an arrest, or a summons—was actually lower in cases involving minorities than in those involving whites.
Police are systematically more likely to use force against minorities, and were more likely to use force against innocent minorities to boot.
Quote:
Whites were carrying weapons 1.9 percent of the time; the number for blacks was 1.1, Hispanics, 1.3. For "contraband other than weapons," the numbers are 2.3 percent for whites, 1.8 percent for blacks, and 1.7 percent for Hispanics.

At best, the police were much more likely to have false positive suspicion about minorities than whites. Either it's just abject racism or the police were incorrectly over-weighing how likely minorities were to be criminals and doing it in a systematic way (seems more likely to me). It's still racist, and no wonder there's no trust of the police in the community. Even accounting for the rates of criminal behavior, police are twice as likely to assume a black man is a criminal as a white man. And they're wrong far more often.
post #1167 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by gomestar View Post

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/couple-reenacts-garner-chokehold-on-live-news.html

whatever those people were doing before they did that ... I want to know what it is so I can partake.
Quote:
You two can now go back to the midwestern hellhole from which you crawled.

Does one have to be a native New Yorker not to be looked down on? I mean, if someone moves from flyover country to NYC, are they now part of the tribe?
post #1168 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post


Does one have to be a native New Yorker not to be looked down on? I mean, if someone moves from flyover country to NYC, are they now part of the tribe?

The transplants are frequently the most arrogant. No zeal like the convert, and such.
post #1169 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

At best, the police were much more likely to have false positive suspicion about minorities than whites. Either it's just abject racism or the police were incorrectly over-weighing how likely minorities were to be criminals and doing it in a systematic way (seems more likely to me). It's still racist, and no wonder there's no trust of the police in the community. Even accounting for the rates of criminal behavior, police are twice as likely to assume a black man is a criminal as a white man. And they're wrong far more often.

So I take it that you're withdrawing your claim that it was "overtly racist"?
post #1170 of 6095
It was ruled these cops used proper levels of force and the brothers were charged with assaulting an officer. Anyone not agree with that ruling?

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/23284012/brothers-charged-with-assaulting-detroit-police-say-they-were-assaulted-first
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?