• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Black NYPD: Any of us could've been Eric Garner

What do you think is responsible for those statistics, Max? Are blacks more likely to be poor because they are criminals, or more likely to be criminals because they are poor?

Criminals are responsible for those statistics. And last time I checked, NYC police duty is to find and detain criminals, not to ask them to 'be nice' by offering welfare checks if they don't blow the heads off their peers.
 
As if every black parent in the country doesn't already know that white neighborhoods are safer(and white schools are better). What's next from the geniuses at NR? Only snows in the cold?

I haven't any idea what your statistical bombast has to do with the article or Eric Garner.

It's pretty simple. This is code for "those goddam n*gg@ars are only poor because they're all lazy, and we have to shoot and jail them because they're all violent criminals."

As for their crimes...whites never get stopped for "driving while black," or "walking on the street while black...or brown"...both notoriously dangerous crimes, I am sure. Police racism and classism is pervasive and clearly visible. To deny it as NR does is to condone it. I never read that rag.
 
What do you think is responsible for those statistics, Max? Are blacks more likely to be poor because they are criminals, or more likely to be criminals because they are poor?

Criminals are responsible for those statistics. And last time I checked, NYC police's duty is to find and detain criminals, not to process welfare checks for the mau-mauing 'aggrieved' at the City/State welfare office.
Nice dodge, you bigoted racist fuck.
 
What do you think is responsible for those statistics, Max? Are blacks more likely to be poor because they are criminals, or more likely to be criminals because they are poor?

Criminals are responsible for those statistics. And last time I checked, NYC police duty is to find and detain criminals, not to bribe them to 'be nice' with welfare checks at the City/State welfare office.

Their PRIMARY "duty" is to maintain the peace. If they are able to get through a shift without locking anybody in jail or killing anybody, they are doing pretty good. It is a hard job, but I think you are missing the only reason to have them...not to enforce a rigid slate of laws, but to maintain the peace.

Their attack on Eric Garner was a radical departure from maintaining the peace and bordered on hunting small time criminals and killing them...like a death squad.
 
What do you think is responsible for those statistics, Max? Are blacks more likely to be poor because they are criminals, or more likely to be criminals because they are poor?

Or are black folk just more likely to be arrested, charged and convicted?

Careful, Athena, max could blow a fuse if you challenge too many of his prejudiced assumptions at once.
 
Umm ... ya. :confused:

As an example, I work at a bank. If I see a co-worker stealing money from their clients, I have to report him. If I don't, I get fired and go to jail. If my supervisor doesn't take action after the report, he gets fired and goes to jail. If no action is taken against the co-worker after I report him, I have a duty to escalate it or I get fired and go to jail. In no instances would talk of how banking culture has us look the other way so long as profits are maximized, potential repercussions from supervisors or the risk of awkward conversations around the water cooler serve to mitigate the punishment I would receive for allowing the crime to continue.
Well, suppose if you reported the co-worker, the other co-workers shunned you, made sure you took the blame for any errors and placed you in dangerous situations, and your supervisor made sure that you would never advance? Because police who report other police can face tremendous negative repercussions.

If the police dept has that kind of culture, then the blame rests on the police chief and the mayor/city council for appointing that chief and allowing him or her to keep the position.
 
Nobody is policing the police. This needs to be changed.

That's the city council's job and in some instances the state's job in conjuction with a special investigation they can initiate at any time and fire/hire the appropiate people in charge of the PD.

The question is, how does the city council benefit from a toxic culture at their city's PD? I don't understand why they choose people that implement such a culture.
 
What do you think is responsible for those statistics, Max? Are blacks more likely to be poor because they are criminals, or more likely to be criminals because they are poor?

Or are black folk just more likely to be arrested, charged and convicted?

They are more likely to be arrested in proportion that they are more likely to commit crimes, when you analize the victimization rates of crimes. This article has a good analysis, suggesting racism is a tiny factor, if it is even a factor at all, as far as arrest rates are concerned. I wish the same disproved talking points wouldn't keep coming up over and over. If one can't acknowledge the established facts, then conversation is truely hopeless.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime/19439
 
Or are black folk just more likely to be arrested, charged and convicted?

They are more likely to be arrested in proportion that they are more likely to commit crimes, when you analize the victimization rates of crimes. This article has a good analysis, suggesting racism is a tiny factor, if it is even a factor at all, as far as arrest rates are concerned. I wish the same disproved talking points wouldn't keep coming up over and over. If one can't acknowledge the established facts, then conversation is truely hopeless.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime/19439

To measure the breadth of arrest disparities, USA TODAY examined data that police departments report to the FBI each year. For each agency, USA TODAY compared the number of black people arrested during 2011 and 2012 with the number who lived in the area the department protects. (The FBI tracks arrests by race; it does not track arrests of Hispanics.)

The review did not include thousands of smaller departments or agencies that serve areas with only a small black population. It also did not include police agencies in most parts of Alabama, Florida and Illinois because those states had not reported complete arrest data to the FBI.

The review showed:

• Blacks are more likely than others to be arrested in almost every city for almost every type of crime. Nationwide, black people are arrested at higher rates for crimes as serious as murder and assault, and as minor as loitering and marijuana possession.

• Arrest rates are particularly lopsided in some pockets of the country, including St. Louis' Missouri suburbs near Ferguson. In St. Louis County alone, more than two dozen police departments had arrest rates more lopsided than Ferguson's. In nearby Clayton, Mo., for example, only about 8% of residents are black, compared with about 57% of people the police arrested, according to the city's FBI reports. Clayton's police chief, Kevin Murphy, said in a prepared statement that "Ferguson has laid bare the fact that everyone in law enforcement needs to take a hard look at how we can better serve our communities and address any disparities that have existed in our departments for too long."

• Deep disparities show up even in progressive university towns. USA TODAY found police in Berkeley, Calif., and Madison, Wis., arrested black people at a rate more than nine times higher than members of other racial groups. Madison Police Chief Michael Koval said most of the arrests happen in the poorest sections of the city, which are disproportionately black, and where some residents have pleaded for even more police presence. Still, he said, "I think it would be remiss to suggest the police get out of this whole thing with a free pass. We have to constantly be doing the introspective look at who we are hiring and how we are training."

• Arrest rates are lopsided almost everywhere. Only 173 of the 3,538 police departments USA TODAY examined arrested black people at a rate equal to or lower than other racial groups.

Phillip Goff, president of the University of California Los Angeles' Center for Policing Equity, said such comparisons are "seductively misleading" because they say more about how racial inequities play out than about what causes them. Those disparities are closely tied to other social and economic inequities, he said, and like most things that involve race, they defy simple explanations.

"There is no doubt a significant degree of law enforcement bias that is the engine for this. But there's also no controversy that educational quality and employment discrimination lead to this," he said. "It's not an indicator of how big a problem there is with a police department. It's an aggregator of what's going on in the community."

Still, he said, "there's some level of disparity that is a warning sign."

Whatever the causes, Harris said such pronounced disparities have consequences. "Believe me, the people who are subject to this are noticing it and they're noticing it not just individually but as a group. It gets talked about, handed down, and it sows distrust of the whole system," he said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/18/ferguson-black-arrest-rates/19043207/
 
Nobody is policing the police. This needs to be changed.

That's the city council's job and in some instances the state's job in conjuction with a special investigation they can initiate at any time and fire/hire the appropiate people in charge of the PD.

The question is, how does the city council benefit from a toxic culture at their city's PD? I don't understand why they choose people that implement such a culture.

Because it is what the majority wants?
 
That's the city council's job and in some instances the state's job in conjuction with a special investigation they can initiate at any time and fire/hire the appropiate people in charge of the PD.

The question is, how does the city council benefit from a toxic culture at their city's PD? I don't understand why they choose people that implement such a culture.

Because it is what the majority wants?
Exactly.

In the early 1980s, the business owners in Santa Cruz, CA got tired of the street musicians and deadheads cluttering up the sidewalk, so they put pressure on the city council to do something about it. The solution? They hired a bunch of new cops from L.A., cops with a reputation for being brutal assholes. The new cops began to 'clean up the streets' by taking homeless people behind the police station and beating the crap out of them - usually in handcuffs. I was targeted by them one night, and only got out of it because my Mom happened to live in a nearby town at the time, a fact that made the cops uncomfortable when i mentioned it right after one of them told me he was going to "pop (my) head like a zit."

Everyone knew what was going on, but nobody cared (other than the homeless) because the "problem" was being dealt with. The brutality went on for several months, and only ended when the police threw a drunken homeless man off a bridge into the San Lorenzo river, where he drowned because he was too drunk to get up. 6 cops were suspended and eventually released from the local force. Not charged with anything, of course, just told to go be assholes somewhere else, thanks for all the help.

When the business community decides that a problem needs to be "cleaned up," the city council and mayor march in lockstep - even in a progressive California beach town. The "kick the shit out of group x" approach never works long-term, but it appeases the powers that be.
 
They are more likely to be arrested in proportion that they are more likely to commit crimes, when you analize the victimization rates of crimes. This article has a good analysis, suggesting racism is a tiny factor, if it is even a factor at all, as far as arrest rates are concerned. I wish the same disproved talking points wouldn't keep coming up over and over. If one can't acknowledge the established facts, then conversation is truely hopeless.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime/19439

To measure the breadth of arrest disparities, USA TODAY examined data that police departments report to the FBI each year. For each agency, USA TODAY compared the number of black people arrested during 2011 and 2012 with the number who lived in the area the department protects. (The FBI tracks arrests by race; it does not track arrests of Hispanics.)

The review did not include thousands of smaller departments or agencies that serve areas with only a small black population. It also did not include police agencies in most parts of Alabama, Florida and Illinois because those states had not reported complete arrest data to the FBI.

The review showed:

• Blacks are more likely than others to be arrested in almost every city for almost every type of crime. Nationwide, black people are arrested at higher rates for crimes as serious as murder and assault, and as minor as loitering and marijuana possession.

• Arrest rates are particularly lopsided in some pockets of the country, including St. Louis' Missouri suburbs near Ferguson. In St. Louis County alone, more than two dozen police departments had arrest rates more lopsided than Ferguson's. In nearby Clayton, Mo., for example, only about 8% of residents are black, compared with about 57% of people the police arrested, according to the city's FBI reports. Clayton's police chief, Kevin Murphy, said in a prepared statement that "Ferguson has laid bare the fact that everyone in law enforcement needs to take a hard look at how we can better serve our communities and address any disparities that have existed in our departments for too long."

• Deep disparities show up even in progressive university towns. USA TODAY found police in Berkeley, Calif., and Madison, Wis., arrested black people at a rate more than nine times higher than members of other racial groups. Madison Police Chief Michael Koval said most of the arrests happen in the poorest sections of the city, which are disproportionately black, and where some residents have pleaded for even more police presence. Still, he said, "I think it would be remiss to suggest the police get out of this whole thing with a free pass. We have to constantly be doing the introspective look at who we are hiring and how we are training."

• Arrest rates are lopsided almost everywhere. Only 173 of the 3,538 police departments USA TODAY examined arrested black people at a rate equal to or lower than other racial groups.

Phillip Goff, president of the University of California Los Angeles' Center for Policing Equity, said such comparisons are "seductively misleading" because they say more about how racial inequities play out than about what causes them. Those disparities are closely tied to other social and economic inequities, he said, and like most things that involve race, they defy simple explanations.

"There is no doubt a significant degree of law enforcement bias that is the engine for this. But there's also no controversy that educational quality and employment discrimination lead to this," he said. "It's not an indicator of how big a problem there is with a police department. It's an aggregator of what's going on in the community."

Still, he said, "there's some level of disparity that is a warning sign."

Whatever the causes, Harris said such pronounced disparities have consequences. "Believe me, the people who are subject to this are noticing it and they're noticing it not just individually but as a group. It gets talked about, handed down, and it sows distrust of the whole system," he said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/18/ferguson-black-arrest-rates/19043207/

And how does this data compare to victimization rates in each of these areas? Once again, you focus only on the arrest rates without determining whether it is due to increased rate of crime commission vs. racism. What, specifically, do you disagree with in the academic studies in that link I posted (if anything)?

- - - Updated - - -

That's the city council's job and in some instances the state's job in conjuction with a special investigation they can initiate at any time and fire/hire the appropiate people in charge of the PD.

The question is, how does the city council benefit from a toxic culture at their city's PD? I don't understand why they choose people that implement such a culture.

Because it is what the majority wants?

Why would the majority want a police force that gets away with crimes against its own citizens? Do you have evidence to suggest this is true?
 
The question is, how does the city council benefit from a toxic culture at their city's PD? I don't understand why they choose people that implement such a culture.
There are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of by Dr. Pangloss.
 
To measure the breadth of arrest disparities, USA TODAY examined data that police departments report to the FBI each year. For each agency, USA TODAY compared the number of black people arrested during 2011 and 2012 with the number who lived in the area the department protects. (The FBI tracks arrests by race; it does not track arrests of Hispanics.)

The review did not include thousands of smaller departments or agencies that serve areas with only a small black population. It also did not include police agencies in most parts of Alabama, Florida and Illinois because those states had not reported complete arrest data to the FBI.

The review showed:

• Blacks are more likely than others to be arrested in almost every city for almost every type of crime. Nationwide, black people are arrested at higher rates for crimes as serious as murder and assault, and as minor as loitering and marijuana possession.

• Arrest rates are particularly lopsided in some pockets of the country, including St. Louis' Missouri suburbs near Ferguson. In St. Louis County alone, more than two dozen police departments had arrest rates more lopsided than Ferguson's. In nearby Clayton, Mo., for example, only about 8% of residents are black, compared with about 57% of people the police arrested, according to the city's FBI reports. Clayton's police chief, Kevin Murphy, said in a prepared statement that "Ferguson has laid bare the fact that everyone in law enforcement needs to take a hard look at how we can better serve our communities and address any disparities that have existed in our departments for too long."

• Deep disparities show up even in progressive university towns. USA TODAY found police in Berkeley, Calif., and Madison, Wis., arrested black people at a rate more than nine times higher than members of other racial groups. Madison Police Chief Michael Koval said most of the arrests happen in the poorest sections of the city, which are disproportionately black, and where some residents have pleaded for even more police presence. Still, he said, "I think it would be remiss to suggest the police get out of this whole thing with a free pass. We have to constantly be doing the introspective look at who we are hiring and how we are training."

• Arrest rates are lopsided almost everywhere. Only 173 of the 3,538 police departments USA TODAY examined arrested black people at a rate equal to or lower than other racial groups.

Phillip Goff, president of the University of California Los Angeles' Center for Policing Equity, said such comparisons are "seductively misleading" because they say more about how racial inequities play out than about what causes them. Those disparities are closely tied to other social and economic inequities, he said, and like most things that involve race, they defy simple explanations.

"There is no doubt a significant degree of law enforcement bias that is the engine for this. But there's also no controversy that educational quality and employment discrimination lead to this," he said. "It's not an indicator of how big a problem there is with a police department. It's an aggregator of what's going on in the community."

Still, he said, "there's some level of disparity that is a warning sign."

Whatever the causes, Harris said such pronounced disparities have consequences. "Believe me, the people who are subject to this are noticing it and they're noticing it not just individually but as a group. It gets talked about, handed down, and it sows distrust of the whole system," he said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/18/ferguson-black-arrest-rates/19043207/

And how does this data compare to victimization rates in each of these areas? Once again, you focus only on the arrest rates without determining whether it is due to increased rate of crime commission vs. racism. What, specifically, do you disagree with in the academic studies in that link I posted (if anything)?

- - - Updated - - -

That's the city council's job and in some instances the state's job in conjuction with a special investigation they can initiate at any time and fire/hire the appropiate people in charge of the PD.

The question is, how does the city council benefit from a toxic culture at their city's PD? I don't understand why they choose people that implement such a culture.

Because it is what the majority wants?

Why would the majority want a police force that gets away with crimes against its own citizens? Do you have evidence to suggest this is true?

Because the majority votes for candidates that promise to "clean up the streets" and "restore law and order," to "take back our city from the thugs and hoodlums"
 
It's pretty simple. This is code for "those goddam n*gg@ars are only poor because they're all lazy, and we have to shoot and jail them because they're all violent criminals."

It is even simpler than that: The duty of cops is to stop crime and in NYC blacks are responsible for far more crime than other races, far more than NYC whites. When a predominantly black community has a shooting rate 81 times higher than white communities then you have more suspects, more crime, and more stops of blacks. When blacks commit 75 percent of all shootings in New York, and whites a little over 2 percent, one detains those persons who are more likely to be the shooters...blacks (especially young black males).

The picture is the same nationally. Black males between the ages of 14 and 24 committed homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic males combined in the same age category in 2008, resulting in a homicide victimization rate nearly as disproportionate. As for interracial crime, black homicide offenders in 2010 had nearly three times the absolute number of white and Hispanic victims as there were black victims of white and Hispanic homicide offenders, despite blacks’ much lower population numbers.

Willy Sutton, when asked why he robbed banks, disarmingly quipped "Because that's where the money is". Well, NYC officers stop blacks because "Those are where the criminals are".

Simple, honest, and racially realistic.

So if it's right and good for the police and righteous citizens both to profile blacks for the greater good, shouldn't it be acceptable for blacks to profile all whites as racist? If we examine US history, the overwhelming evidence is that whites systematically and brutally oppressed blacks for centuries. Therefore, according to what I'm hearing from you, the white race in its entirety should be profiled as racist. And they should accept that.
 

First the quote from the article

The per capita shooting rate in predominantly black Brownsville, Brooklyn, is 81 times higher than that of predominantly white and Asian Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, according to the New York Police Department.

now the quote from Max, post 36

When a predominantly black community has a shooting rate 81 times higher than white communities then you have more suspects, more crime, and more stops of blacks.

These two quotes do not say the same thing. One compares two extremes while another compares one extreme to all communities generally across the board. That is not honest, Max.

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Shame on you.

And as for the National Review piece, slanted would be so euphemistic a word as to border on lying as a description of Heather Mac Donald's writing on this subject.
 
It is even simpler than that: The duty of cops is to stop crime and in NYC blacks are responsible for far more crime than other races, far more than NYC whites. When a predominantly black community has a shooting rate 81 times higher than white communities then you have more suspects, more crime, and more stops of blacks. When blacks commit 75 percent of all shootings in New York, and whites a little over 2 percent, one detains those persons who are more likely to be the shooters...blacks (especially young black males).

The picture is the same nationally. Black males between the ages of 14 and 24 committed homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic males combined in the same age category in 2008, resulting in a homicide victimization rate nearly as disproportionate. As for interracial crime, black homicide offenders in 2010 had nearly three times the absolute number of white and Hispanic victims as there were black victims of white and Hispanic homicide offenders, despite blacks’ much lower population numbers.

Willy Sutton, when asked why he robbed banks, disarmingly quipped "Because that's where the money is". Well, NYC officers stop blacks because "Those are where the criminals are".

Simple, honest, and racially realistic.

So if it's right and good for the police and righteous citizens both to profile blacks for the greater good, shouldn't it be acceptable for blacks to profile all whites as racist? If we examine US history, the overwhelming evidence is that whites systematically and brutally oppressed blacks for centuries. Therefore, according to what I'm hearing from you, the white race in its entirety should be profiled as racist. And they should accept that.

Perhaps you should choose a better example. Whites commit racism, but racism is not (in and of itself) a crime.
 
Back
Top Bottom