Police Brutality Thread

[Jabberwocky]

To give you an idea what my point is, I have noticed this argument that a policy is "discriminatory" and "racist" crops up quite a lot. I'm not saying that this should necessarily be ignored but it also needs to be considered that it's almost impossible to make a policy or a system that has exactly the same effect on everyone. There is always going to be some group that it "discriminates" against. Sometimes that is apparently accepted. For example, coronavirus lockdowns discriminated against black people because black people are more likely to hold so called "essential" jobs and being forced to go to work while white upper middle class people got to work from home. Yet I didn't hear a whole lot about how racist lockdowns were from the media, or even if they did mention it, it wasn't often used a reason they should be lifted.

The problem with terms like ‘discriminatory’, ‘racist’, or even ‘normal’ is they often don’t work well in conversations between regular people informed by our increasingly ignorant media and people with a strong (and quantitative) social science background. Academically, many hot-button words were until very very recently used frequently used in an almost value-neutral way. That something is discriminatory could be a good thing or bad thing depending on context. Racist is a bit more clearly normative - and any good social scientist would prefer the term ‘racialised’. Meanwhile normal/ abnormal is often just a reference to deviation from the median of a given population. I run into a lot of grief discussing whether Trans people are normal or not that way for example.

 

[aemetha]

To give you an idea what my point is, I have noticed this argument that a policy is "discriminatory" and "racist" crops up quite a lot. I'm not saying that this should necessarily be ignored but it also needs to be considered that it's almost impossible to make a policy or a system that has exactly the same effect on everyone. There is always going to be some group that it "discriminates" against. Sometimes that is apparently accepted. For example, coronavirus lockdowns discriminated against black people because black people are more likely to hold so called "essential" jobs and being forced to go to work while white upper middle class people got to work from home. Yet I didn't hear a whole lot about how racist lockdowns were from the media, or even if they did mention it, it wasn't often used a reason they should be lifted.

Thank you for this. This is exactly what I've been trying to have a discussion about. You're right, it is almost impossible to make a policy or system that has exactly the same outcomes for everyone. I think a lot of the issue right now is the size of the disparity. I am definitely not suggesting we should attempt to eliminate the gap completely as a practical goal. It might be an aspirational goal as part of an effort to decrease the size of the gap though.

When I think about this, there are some analogies to bussing during the civil rights era, no? That involved moving people from their geographical isolation and into more integrated groups. That was controversial, but it dd work. Perhaps if geography is the problem there needs to be more effort directed to creating more diverse communities in both inner-city and suburban areas? I'm just spitballing there, the point is to have a discussion about what things can be done to address the problem. I'm not suggesting that police don't do their jobs, my argument has been directed at highlighting the problem thus far, not suggesting a solution.

 

[burn out]

The problem with terms like ‘discriminatory’, ‘racist’, or even ‘normal’ is they often don’t work well in conversations between regular people informed by our increasingly ignorant media and people with a strong (and quantitative) social science background. Academically, many hot-button words were until very very recently used frequently used in an almost value-neutral way. That something is discriminatory could be a good thing or bad thing depending on context. Racist is a bit more clearly normative - and any good social scientist would prefer the term ‘racialised’. Meanwhile normal/ abnormal is often just a reference to deviation from the mean of a given population. I run into a lot of grief discussing whether Trans people are normal or not that way for example.

I don't think the media is as ignorant as you imply, I think they are trying to promote a narrative and they couldn't care less about how various terms are used academically. The programming is that discriminatory = bad and so if they don't like something they will call it discriminatory.

 

[burn out]

Thank you for this. This is exactly what I've been trying to have a discussion about. You're right, it is almost impossible to make a policy or system that has exactly the same outcomes for everyone. I think a lot of the issue right now is the size of the disparity. I am definitely not suggesting we should attempt to eliminate the gap completely as a practical goal. It might be an aspirational goal as part of an effort to decrease the size of the gap though.

Thank you for acknowledging this. I think this needs to be admitted as the starting place. We can't start by assuming the system should be perfect and then attributing anything less as proof of the evil racism behind it all and demanding the police be abolished but that is being done. I think it makes more sense to start by acknowledging what a huge challenge a criminal justice system really is and taking a moment to appreciate the fact that we have one that functions at all and then we can begin discussing how to go about improving it.

When I think about this, there are some analogies to bussing during the civil rights era, no? That involved moving people from their geographical isolation and into more integrated groups. That was controversial, but it dd work. Perhaps if geography is the problem there needs to be more effort directed to creating more diverse communities in both inner-city and suburban areas? I'm just spitballing there, the point is to have a discussion about what things can be done to address the problem. I'm not suggesting that police don't do their jobs, my argument has been directed at highlighting the problem thus far, not suggesting a solution.

Well I didn't say geography was the only problem, although I do believe if you took a group of black people and put them in a rural setting where they could grow their own food, rely on their neighbor and live closer to nature, the crime rate would drop considerably. But I don't like the idea of forcing people to live with each other against their will. Cities tend to already be diverse and not everyone wants to live in a diverse area.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

While it's difficult to speculate as to what's going on inside a person's head (and thus is kind of futile to argue, regarding any particular individual, "that guy is a racist!" or "that guy isn't a racist!"), I don't think it's entirely an issue of, "these police just hate black people, they're racist and they're picking on/shooting/maiming black people for shits and giggles" etc. The problem is related to race (for reasons already discussed) but is not solely about race. During the George Floyd protests over the summer, there were demos in western cities like Salt Lake City, and small hick towns populated mostly by white people. People who lived worlds away from the "inner city" found that this movement spoke to them enough that they were going to actively participate in it, but why? What spoke to them about the movement, what could they relate to?

I think it's because people are tired of being exploited by law enforcement officers who treat them with no respect, undermine their rights as a citizen into account and prey on them for "revenue generation".

From the Justice Dept report on the Ferguson Police Dept:

"Ferguson’s law enforcement practices are shaped by the City’s focus on revenue rather than by public safety needs. This emphasis on revenue has compromised the institutional character of Ferguson’s police department, contributing to a pattern of unconstitutional policing, and has also shaped its municipal court, leading to procedures that raise due process concerns and inflict unnecessary harm on members of the Ferguson community . . . The City’s emphasis on revenue generation has a profound effect on FPD’s approach to law enforcement. Patrol assignments and schedules are geared toward aggressive enforcement of Ferguson’s municipal code, with insufficient thought given to whether enforcement strategies promote public safety or unnecessarily undermine community trust and cooperation. Officer evaluations and promotions depend to an inordinate degree on “productivity,” meaning the number of citations issued . . . This culture within FPD influences officer activities in all areas of policing, beyond just ticketing. Officers expect and demand compliance even when they lack legal authority. They are inclined to interpret the exercise of free-speech rights as unlawful disobedience, innocent movements as physical threats, indications of mental or physical illness as belligerence. Police supervisors and leadership do too little to ensure that officers act in accordance with law and policy, and rarely respond meaningfully to civilian complaints of officer misconduct."

The point is that it's possible to recognize major problems with the way American LEO operate and advocate structural reform without even necessarily getting into the race issue at all. Some major reforms need to implemented regarding the role police have in our society (and the inner workings of some of these municipal governments) and the way they conduct themselves, i.e. they should actually behave like public servants and not petty shake-down artists who expect all of the power and none of the responsibility, who think that they're above the law and can violate people's constitutional rights with impunity. Like NYC's "stop and frisk" program back in the day, it's horrendous that you could simply be walking down the street in your own neighborhood and have some state-sponsored thugs accost you, put their hands and you and treat you in a demeaning fashion simply for existing, and I think I can condemn that kind of disgusting behavior without even mentioning race.

 

[cduggles]

Like NYC's "stop and frisk" program back in the day, it's horrendous that you could simply be walking down the street in your own neighborhood and have some state-sponsored thugs accost you, put their hands and you and treat you in a demeaning fashion simply for existing, and I think I can condemn that kind of disgusting behavior without even mentioning race.

I agree with a lot of your points, but I don’t think a full discussion about stop and frisk can occur without mentioning race.

 

[HatingThisLife]

@birdup.snaildown how about ancedotal...for a year I lived on the edge of Camden, NJ a predominantly black, high crime, high drug area. My white cousin and I used to take the bus, walk or bike down there to cop drugs. My cousin was stop countless times, when he finally left the state he had upwards of 50 arrests/charges for varying amounts of drug possession. Sometimes pills sometimes crack and dope. He once was caught with 13 bags of crack and 5 bags of dope, he was released in 2 days with the charges being kicked back to municipal court ending eventually with a fine. He already had at least 15 possession charges at that point. His very first charge at 18 years okd was credit card fraud and theft for stealing 1000s of dollars off credit cards by double charging them and pocketing the cash at a gas station he worked at, for which he did 2 years probation. Black friends we had got sentenced to 5+ years for similar levels of possession with less priors and almost always charged with intent to distribute. My cousin did intend to distribute to the towns people where we lived who were too afraid to drive down into Camden themselves. My cousin only ever used public pretenders, never paid for lawyers and was a junkie. Never got any time until the 45th charge where he did 90 days.

I know several other white people pulling the same shit we were who never did time either and I know several blacks who did get time for less than what we were doing. This is commonplace in those areas.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Discrimination, def: the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, sex, or disability.

It doesn't matter that nobody intended to discriminate, the outcome was unjust.

Racism, def: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

If it's discriminatory based on race, it's racism. Again, no requirement for an explicit intention to discriminate.

Men are responsible for more: sexual assaults; domestic abuse; murders; you name it. Consequently, men are incarcerated (and shot by police) at a higher rate than women.

According to your logic, men are being discriminated against and the nature of this discrimination is sexist.

I disagree with you.

That's fine, but how do you address the issue that more policing results in a higher capture rate of crimes committed, resulting in unequal crime rates across different communities.

Again, it's the chicken or the egg. You're not the only one to suggest that there are higher recorded crime rates because of heavy policing... but there wouldn't be heavier policing in these areas if the crime rate wasn't higher in the first place.

It is the snake biting its own tail. That's the point. There needs to be attention to it to address the inequality.

How would you address it? Let's assume that systemic racism exists. What is the solution?

It's essentially giving a free pass to some communities to commit crimes that are not given a free pass in others.

People have taken equality and stretched it out to a point of utter absurdity. Absolute equality is not possible. we shouldn't be doing backflips trying to achieve it.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think it's a problem that needs fixing. If more people commit crimes, there needs to be more police. I am yet to hear an alternative from you or anyone in this thread.

If increasing police presence in high crime areas results in discrimination - I still disagree with your choice of words, but just for the sake of argument let's assume it does - what is the solution?

Do we (in the name of absolute equality) ensure that the police are equally represented in all areas?

If so, do we increase police in areas with low crime rates or decrease police in areas with high crime rates?

Do the majority of people living in downtown Detroit want less police on the streets? Is what they want irrelevant, because equality trumps everything?

I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from.

If you could clarify your position a bit, I think we'd have a better chance at a productive discussion.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

how about ancedotal

With all due respect, I don't consider anecdotal evidence.

I've met racist people that justify racism because they've had negative interactions with people of certain ancestries (Indian, Lebanese, Sudanese, Chinese, etc). At the end of the day, their experiences don't define an entire ethnicity.

I need to see statistics and, then, I need to think about them.

As far as your cousin goes, I know numerous white Americans who have had drastically different experiences with law enforcement. I can't even begin to speculate as to why your cousin received such lenient sentencing, but I'm certain (both from my own anecdotal experiences and from looking at statistics) that he is not representative of the general white US populous.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

If you read what i said, I was not comparing ted bundy to black people. I clearly stated police were able to arrest bundy and bring him in without issue, but when encountering POC as of late, there‘s a trend of violence.

What Bundy did during his arrest is going to determine (at least to some extent) whether or not he is shot. Did he point a gun at a police officer? Did he resist arrest? I don't know the details. but - clearly - the police arrest Black people all the time without resorting to violence. Taking one example of a white guy and comparing it (very selectively) to particular examples of Black people isn't fair. I could do the same thing in the other direction.

Black people in the US commit something like 55-60% of the homicides. Black people currently constitute 13.4% of the population. Most of these homicides are committed by males within a certain age bracket. Somewhere in the vicinity of 5% of the population is responsible for nearly 50% of the homicides, but there are twice as many white people fatally shot by police as there are black people.

If African Americans and white Americans were equally responsible for violent crime, I'd agree with you... but they're not.

 

[dalpat077]

Oops. Another one.

'God knows what happened': North Carolina deputy fatally shoots Black man, but police release few details

The Pasquotank County Sheriff's deputy was placed on leave pending a review by the State Bureau of Investigation.

www.usatoday.com

 

[dalpat077]

By the way and before I get going here:

This shit is making it's way to our local and national radio stations here i.e. I didn't even have to look for the above this morning. Broadcast as there being "anger and outrage as another black man is killed overnight in the USA".

 

[birdup.snaildown]

@dalpat077

There's something I find odd about this whole thing.

Why do I never hear about white people being fatally shot by police?
It happens twice as often as Black people being shot.

I guess you can't spin it as racism, so it doesn't sell papers.

 

[dalpat077]

@dalpat077

There's something I find odd about this whole thing.

Why do I never hear about white people being fatally shot by police?
It happens twice as often as Black people being shot.

I guess you can't spin it as racism, so it doesn't sell papers.

For some reason of the other I added to my post above yours and the edit disappeared so I'll continue here.

Exactly what my point (edit) was. This shit shouldn't even be making the news. But it is. Because somebody somewhere deems it fit to be pushing the race narrative. And it simply is not true (but we'll get to that AGAIN).

Worse still: I didn't even go looking for this shit this morning i.e. broadcast on regional radio news the moment I woke up.

Coffee time.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

The US has this beautiful network of propaganda that operates under the guise of individual choice. People opt for one president or the other. They actually convince themselves not just to care but to be passionate... when, really, there is no difference.

Everything is an illusion, including freedom. The United States is where that illusion blossoms the most.

We need passionate lunatics in this world.
God bless the red white and blue.

 

[Jabberwocky]

It's like teenage Neitzsche and teenage Foucault hooked up and made a baby.

Edit:

 

[birdup.snaildown]

I would have accepted pubescent Nietzsche (sp!) crossed with anything or anyone... except ABBA.

 

[dalpat077]

Well. I'm just gonna go ahead and comment on some random posts during the course of the day (for what it's worth).

I've calmed down totally since my taking a step back from all of this. But I have been following the thread of course. And with much amusement if the truth be told.

And no long posts. God forbid somebody has to wade through more than five lines of text at a time!

Oh and rarely, if ever, do I come out in defense of another member that I don't know from a bar of soap. But could we cut @Blueberry_87 and good 'ol Ted Bundy there some slack? It was one of the more fruitful exchanges on this thread. If for no other reason than to give somebody like me pause. And that takes some doing as most will know!

 

[dalpat077]

@dalpat077

There's something I find odd about this whole thing.

Why do I never hear about white people being fatally shot by police?
It happens twice as often as Black people being shot.

I guess you can't spin it as racism, so it doesn't sell papers.

I'm quoting you again i.e. didn't have time finish my initial response.

Believe it or not I actually joked about this very thing just last night. I'm beginning to think that the moment an officer sees that a possible suspect is white: they've been instructed to turn their body cams off!

The numbers and statistics were addressed many pages back on this thread. It simply is not true that black people get shot more often. That based on facts and figures and nothing else. And from various sources too. Now I don't know if people willfully and emotively choose to ignore said facts and figures or if most have just jumped on this thread without reading what went before. Or if some are simply being argumentative and obtuse.

Moreover and given the figures: there simply isn't a problem. Not given the size of the population.

As for the papers: 100% spot on. That's all there is to it and nothing more. How people cannot see this (evidently) is beyond me.

 

[dalpat077]

I haven't looked into this particular case other than a cursory glance because it doesn't interest me... but, I'm curious: why do you think the officer pulled the trigger?

This surprises me a bit? Didn't realize you were also guilty of simply glossing over posts? Or is it just mine (too long maybe)?