Charles Blow: At Yale, the Police Detained My Son

[KeepTalking]

The officer, who himself is African American, was responding to a specific description relayed by individuals who had reported a crime in progress.

https://messages.yale.edu/messages/University/univmsgs/detail/116871

The problem is with the way the officer confronted Blow. There was no reason to draw a gun, even if Blow had been the burglar. A burglary is not an armed robbery, you approach potential suspects differently based on the crime that was committed.

 

[Derec]

I'm sure he believes there are moral black people; he just likes to think that they're a statistically insignificant subgroup or something and would rather you focus on asking what's up with black people being all immoral and shit.

Wrong. Most black people are not criminals. That doesn't change the fact that blacks are significantly more likely to commit crimes than whites.
But have fun with your straw men. You and akirk just love playing with them.

 

[Derec]

Your post was predictable for you...more predictable indeed than the prediction that a black person is statistically more "criminal." I am more aware of your reference catalog of memes than you are. You seem to always want to focus on RACE....AND WHAT IS WRONG WITH BLACK PEOPLE.

It is not I who focuses on race. The OP (and many other recent threads) have been about race from the beginning. Also, why is it considered wrong to point to a statistical fact about crime rates?

It is as if you are satisfied they (black people) are inferior and will never overcome their built in flaws..

I did not say they are inferior or that their flaws are "built in". But is is a fact that blacks have a significantly higher crime rate. We should all be able to agree that that is a problem that should be fixed.

so just dress them down for being black and part of the carnival of crime that race represents to you.

I am doing no such thing.

You don't seem to realize there are black people who are every bit as "moral" as you are.

Most of them are. That doesn't change the fact that among those that aren't, blacks are overrepreseneted. Why should that fact be censored lest one be accused of racism?

 

[Derec]

Are black suspects are treated differently by police than whites are?

Your anecdote seems to imply they aren't. That said, both your "family members" experiences and Blow Jr.'s experience are anecdotes and thus not really data.

Are black people are treated with greater suspicion by police and by the general public than white people are?

Possibly, but not relevant to this case since there was a specific crime and suspect the police were looking for. It wasn't a case of general suspicion.
In other words, had the burglar been white, they'd have been looking for a white suspect and would not have stopped Blow Jr. since he would not have resembled the suspect.
And since blacks commit a disproportionate share of crimes other, innocent, blacks are more likely to find themselves resembling a suspect through no fault of either their own or the police.

Are police are too quick to shoot or otherwise use excessive force with suspects or 'suspects.'

I would say that in general US police are very quick to shoot at suspects regardless of race. However there is a selection bias where black suspects shot by police are disproportionately likely to lead to physical protests and hashtivism. Take Michael Brown, or Jerame Reid (subject of this thread still on page 1 as of now).

And is that speed affected by the race or perceived race of the 'suspect.?

I think the angry response afterwards is definitely affected by "the race or perceived race" of the suspect.

Ah: profoundly GRATEFUL. Thanks for pointing out a deleted word.

But the outcome was not any different for this black guy. Both your white family members and Blow Jr. were held at gunpoint by police and not shot.

You are seriously missing my point. I don't know if it is deliberate or you just don't understand.

Third possibility: I disagree with your point.

Only the first was held in the case of mistaken identity. Yes, we were profoundly grateful that he was white as even though this was years ago, the cops in that area had a serious reputation for shooting black suspects or 'suspects' first and then checking to see if they had the right person after.

Was that reputation justified or were the instances of police shooting suspects due to suspects attacking police or making other aggressive movements while at gunpoint? Whatever the facts, the "community" tends to side with the perp against the police, even if they steal a car and hit an officer with it.

In the second case, I realize that the police arrived at the scene expecting that they might encounter an armed suspect although my family member told them that the robber had fled on foot and was vastly different in physical description than the family member who called in the robbery. I realize the need for caution on the part of police and their need to be prepared to encounter a very bad situation. Where our gratitude for being white comes into play is that today, police still have a serious reputation for shooting black suspects or 'suspects' first and checking after to see if there was a gun or if they had the right person, etc. Being white gave my family member an edge that should not have been needed. If my family member had been black, I am not at all certain they would still be alive. There were a lot of guns pointed inches from their face.

It is interesting you bring this in relation to this case where the outcome was identical even though Blow Jr. is black and your family members are white.

 

[dystopian]

It is not I who focuses on race. The OP (and many other recent threads) have been about race from the beginning. Also, why is it considered wrong to point to a statistical fact about crime rates?

Nothing, I suppose. Just like there's nothing wrong with pointing out that it's a statistical fact that every time there's a thread about someone getting raped or a cop killing a black person, you're there trying to find ways to blame the victim. It's almost like there's some sort of pattern.

I did not say they are inferior or that their flaws are "built in". But is is a fact that blacks have a significantly higher crime rate. We should all be able to agree that that is a problem that should be fixed.

It's also a fact that Derec has a significantly higher posting rate of victim blaming while giving the suspects the benefit of the doubt. We should all be able to agree that that is a problem that should be fixed.

I am doing no such thing.

No, you're not. You're just repeatedly pointing out that black people are more likely to commit crime whenever a thread about black people comes up, man. It's like all these other people don't *get* you; you just want to share facts about black people that in no way reflect on your personal beliefs about black people!

Most of them are. That doesn't change the fact that among those that aren't, blacks are overrepreseneted. Why should that fact be censored lest one be accused of racism?

It shouldn't, under normal circumstances. It's just that when you do it every goddamn time there's a case of a cop/white guy mistreating a black person, *and* use it as some sort of argument to justify the cop/white guy's behavior; it forms the kind of pattern that only people *obsessed* with race can exhibit.

 

[dismal]

Why couldn't the cops in this case just approach the suspect, ask for ID, and detain without going into full-blown take-down guns-drawn mode? (I know, that's a lot of hyphens)

Well, apparently it turns out the cop is black. So is the police chief.

Maybe it had something to do with their race.

 

[ronburgundy]

Where does it say it was a week before?

And as long as blacks commit a disproportionate share of crimes a disproportionate share of blacks will genuinely "fit the description". Instead of blaming the police, perhaps Charles Blow should blame the black crime rates.

I hate to burst that big black bubble of yours, but crime is much more closely correlated to socioeconomic status than to race.

How all this plays into what is or is not reasonable to expect in law enforcement reactions to black suspects is another issue, but it is a fact that race and crime are highly related and this is only partly due to aspects of current income or SES.

Blacks are 3-5 times more likely to commit all forms of violent crimes (and more likely to be the victim of violent crimes since criminals usually target same-race victims), and the strong correlation remains even after controlling for personal income, and features of neighborhoods, such as median income in the community, % of renters or owners, % of vacant retail or residential space, number of low paying retail jobs, divorce rate, unemployment rate, avg length of time people of lived in the area. The sizable relation between race and crime, independent of these factors holds up whether the variables are measured at the level individual persons, physical neighborhoods, or racial-groups overall. As one would expect, SES plays a larger role in property crime disparities (burglary/theft), than violent crime disparities (murder, assault, rape, armed robbery).


https://webfiles.uci.edu/hippj/johnhipp/hipp_crim_2007.pdf
http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittTheChangingRelationship1999.pdf
http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3226952/Sampson_RacialEthnicDisparities.pdf?sequence=2


Of course, such analyses do not factor in historical SES, meaning the wealth/income of ones extended family and ancestors, lack of rights, and inequality under the law (thus lack of respect for law) going back to and including slavery itself which is in a sense the lowest level of SES there is. Race disparities in crime that are not due to immediate economic and community circumstances are likely to cultural/attitudinal/psychological factors shaped by those historical contingencies.

 

[Mumbles]

Why couldn't the cops in this case just approach the suspect, ask for ID, and detain without going into full-blown take-down guns-drawn mode? (I know, that's a lot of hyphens)

Well, apparently it turns out the cop is black. So is the police chief.

Maybe it had something to do with their race.

Depends. Would the cop have pulled a gun on a white kid who "fit the description" of a burglar and ordered him to lie on the ground? If not...then their race doesn't matter.

And somehow, I'm kinda doubting he would.

 

[dismal]

Well, apparently it turns out the cop is black. So is the police chief.

Maybe it had something to do with their race.

Depends. Would the cop have pulled a gun on a white kid who "fit the description" of a burglar and ordered him to lie on the ground? If not...then their race doesn't matter.

And somehow, I'm kinda doubting he would.

But since black people can't be racist you appear to be suggesting there are non-racist reasons to point guns at black suspects and not white ones.

What reasons are those?

 

[Mumbles]

Depends. Would the cop have pulled a gun on a white kid who "fit the description" of a burglar and ordered him to lie on the ground? If not...then their race doesn't matter.

And somehow, I'm kinda doubting he would.

But since black people can't be racist

You're probably thinking of Billie Holiday. I'm the Prinny.

 

[dx713]

But since black people can't be racist

You're probably thinking of Billie Holiday. I'm the Prinny.

And even by those sociological definition, nothing prevents the unable-to-be-racist from being bigoted.
(There's even another sociological term for it: internalized racism)

 

[dismal]

You're probably thinking of Billie Holiday. I'm the Prinny.

And even by those sociological definition, nothing prevents the unable-to-be-racist from being bigoted.
(There's even another sociological term for it: internalized racism)

If you can't be a racist how can you be guilty of "internalized racism"?

 

[Derec]

But since black people can't be racist

You're probably thinking of Billie Holiday. I'm the Prinny.

Billie Holiday and J.R. Dobbs.

 

[Mumbles]

You're probably thinking of Billie Holiday. I'm the Prinny.

And even by those sociological definition, nothing prevents the unable-to-be-racist from being bigoted.
(There's even another sociological term for it: internalized racism)

1) Actually, given that his actions were using state power against an oppressed group with prejudice , he's simply be the exception that proves the rule.

2) Regardless, I'm not Athena, and I tend to stick to the dictionary definition - by which, any person can be racist.

3) Reread the article - his complaint is that his Yale-enrolled son was ordered to the ground at gunpoint by a cop who falsely assumed that he must be a criminal, based on "he fit the description." Clearly, that cop wasn't thinking correctly regardless of why, meaning that any wrong move could have gotten him shot and killed.

 

[dismal]

And even by those sociological definition, nothing prevents the unable-to-be-racist from being bigoted.
(There's even another sociological term for it: internalized racism)

1) Actually, given that his actions were using state power against an oppressed group with prejudice , he's simply be the exception that proves the rule.

2) Regardless, I'm not Athena, and I tend to stick to the dictionary definition - by which, any person can be racist.

3) Reread the article - his complaint is that his Yale-enrolled son was ordered to the ground at gunpoint by a cop who falsely assumed that he must be a criminal, based on "he fit the description." Clearly, that cop wasn't thinking correctly regardless of why, meaning that any wrong move could have gotten him shot and killed.

"Black people can't be racist" is not the sort of rule that can have exceptions that prove the rule.

Once you have an exception you are left with "black people can be racist" which is the opposite of the rule.

 

[KeepTalking]

This particular story has little to do with race at all, as far as I can tell. The issue for me is with a police officer immediately drawing a gun on a person suspected of a non-violent crime.

 

[Mumbles]

Why couldn't the cops in this case just approach the suspect, ask for ID, and detain without going into full-blown take-down guns-drawn mode? (I know, that's a lot of hyphens)

Also, this would be the proper way to handle the situation. Hell, back when I was in college I was questioned in almost this way (except the two police identified themselves by name, rank, and department before asking any questions), and I was a near-perfect match in a pretty nasty beating.

 

[dismal]

Why couldn't the cops in this case just approach the suspect, ask for ID, and detain without going into full-blown take-down guns-drawn mode? (I know, that's a lot of hyphens)

Also, this would be the proper way to handle the situation. Hell, back when I was in college I was questioned in almost this way (except the two police identified themselves by name, rank, and department before asking any questions), and I was a near-perfect match in a pretty nasty beating.

When I was in college a guy went into the fraternity house when it was closed on some break setting off some sort of silent alarm, went to sleep in his own bed, and was woken up with 3 cops pointing guns in his face.

 

[ronburgundy]

As the author/father of the article said, he'd have no problem if his son was stopped and questioned. It was the pointing of a gun that was the problem.
The fact that the reported crime was a non-violent "burglary" (which means property theft without any weapons, threats, or contact at all with the victim), pulling a gun on a suspect was overkill even if there was good reason to suspect he was the perp.
IF the reported crime was armed assault, rape, etc., then a drawn weapon becomes more reasonable, and the question is then whether the cop had good reason to suspect the person was the perp.

It is an unfortunate mathematical fact that members of a minority group more plausible suspects for a crime committed by a member of their minority group, than majority group members are a plausible suspect for a crime committed by a majority group member. The number of people in an area the who could fit the basics of the perp description directly determine the plausibility that any individual who fits these features is in fact the perp.
Only about 6% of Yale students are black and if it is like most Universities, those blacks are 2:1 female (the female:male college student ratio is generally higher for blacks than other groups). That means that only 2 in every 100 students at Yale is a black male. Which means that if 50 people were on the street in the immediately vicinity where the perp was expected to be, this guy was likely the sole black male, making the probability that he was the perp much higher than if the perp was reported as white and he was 1 of 25 white males in the cops sight range.

IF cops respond to a crime where the reported perp is white in a nearly all black neighborhood, you can bet that they'd highly suspect and stop the one white guy walking down the street near the scene.

The cop didn't assume "all blacks look alike" , because he likely had no info on what the perp looked like other than being a college aged male with some general clothing description. Thus, this guy fit all the features that the cop had, and was the only one who did, and the probability of a person with those features being in that crime vicinity but having nothing to do with it were not very high (again, due to the only 2% of black males on the entire large campus.

In sum, it requires zero racism (just accurate knowledge of frequencies and probabilities) for the cop to have thought it was a reasonable (though still very non-certain) probability that this guy was the perp. Thus, it made perfect sense for him to approach the guy and question him in a manner that was reasonable given this plausibility and within the context of the nature of the crime, which it seems would not include immediately drawn a weapon on him. The fact that he suspected and detained the kid is not an indication of racism. The manner in which he interacted with him may have been racist, and was excessive and life threatening regardless of its motive.

 

[Mumbles]

Also, this would be the proper way to handle the situation. Hell, back when I was in college I was questioned in almost this way (except the two police identified themselves by name, rank, and department before asking any questions), and I was a near-perfect match in a pretty nasty beating.

When I was in college a guy went into the fraternity house when it was closed on some break setting off some sort of silent alarm, went to sleep in his own bed, and was woken up with 3 cops pointing guns in his face.

Well, that was extremely stupid on the cops' part. Why do you need to point *three* guns at a person who is asleep?

ETA: What's your point?