Portland police halt minor traffic stops, citing disparity

[Metaphor]

Numerous studies of policing have shown that there is police bias in traffic stops and other policing.

Black people are more likely to be ARRESTED, TRIED AND CONVICTED than white people which is different than being more likely to commit legal offenses.

Yes, it's different, but your bias has to be extreme to imagine that differential rates of criminal activity doesn't lead to the increased arrests and convictions.

Well, lucky police officers who can quit their job and no longer be subjected to relentless assaults on their character. Makes you wonder why black people don't just quit being black, don't it?

No, it's not lucky. Portland could have chosen differently. Portland decided to throw her police officers under the bus. Now her murder rate has skyrocketed and her police officers are quitting en masse. No doubt this chaos and bloodshed won't be enough to sway her voters to do anything different. So be it. Democracy is the theory that the people know what they want. And they deserve to get it--good and hard.

It must be hard to see clearly with that light bouncing off the mirror directly into your eye.

I'm not the one pretending that there is no racial disparity in crimes committed. Next you'll be telling me that men and women commit murder at the same rate, but men are just arrested, tried, and convicted more often.

 

[TomC]

Why were the police making all these completely superfluous traffic stops to begin with? I don't recall assenting to being detained without a pressing reason.

What makes you think that the stops are completely superfluous? Perhaps you're biased?
Tom

 

[Politesse]

Why were the police making all these completely superfluous traffic stops to begin with? I don't recall assenting to being detained without a pressing reason.

Most countries with roads and cars tend to police them.

I don't need someone to pull me over for non-safety related reasons. Traffic stops are themselves serious road hazards often resulting in injuries to those involved, usually of the officer themselves. Send me a bill if you're that worried about my tags. If you have enough information to know that my tags are allegedly expired, then you have my address as well. My lawyer can handle things from there.

 

[Politesse]

Why were the police making all these completely superfluous traffic stops to begin with? I don't recall assenting to being detained without a pressing reason.

What makes you think that the stops are completely superfluous? Perhaps you're biased?
Tom

The police made it clear in their statement that they weren't ending all traffic stops, just unnecessary ones.

Portland Police Chief Chuck Lovell said while officers are being directed to halt pulling drivers over for low-level traffic violations, they will still use their judgement if the violation is an immediate threat.

For example, a car driving at night without lights, although a minor infraction, would be considered an immediate safety issue and could be pulled over.

Wheeler noted these changes are also being done in part because of the police bureau's limited staffing and resources.

If there's a viable threat, they're still pulling people over. If there's no threat to public safety, then the stop was always superfluous, and needlessly dangerous.

I am absolutely and unashamedly biased, in favor of Constitutional law, which is supposed to protect us from being unreasonably detained and robbed. The fact that police carved this "exception" to those laws specifically to justify their persecution of Blacks is not particularly surprising if you know anything about the history of American policing, but no one should ever have been content with their overreach whatever the reasons for it. I'm not.

The maintenance of a police force is not described by the Constitution at all. Our personal rights are.

 

[laughing dog]

On the contrary, I already explained the evidence: black people are three times more likely to be stopped for traffic violations than white people.

That is bootstrapping.

There could be many of a million different influences. Black people have less income and wealth than white people in America, and people with lower economic means are bound to be more likely to not fix things on their car that need fixing.

Ok.

Blacks are more likely to commit legal offenses than white people, and a traffic violation is a legal offense.

No, blacks are more likely to be arrested for committing legal offenses. We don't know the actual rates of offense. N

The black population has a younger age profile than the white population, and perhaps younger people commit more traffic violations (I suspect they do, especially speeding).

Do you have data to support your claim about the age profile by race?

Why is it reasonable for you to assume that the black-white traffic violation difference is due to cop bias?

I didn't. Please read and think with more care.

Yes - police officers are quitting because Portland has let the lunatics run the asylum. Police officers are quitting because the city of Portland treats them like shit. Police officers are quitting because of the relentless assaults on their character--like the assumption that they are biased against black people when handing out traffic violations.

Did you pull these reasons out of your ass or do have you surveyed the officers who have left?

You can't see your own prejudice, laughing dog, even when it's staring you in the face.

I find your accusation extremely ironic. It is certainly possible I don't see my own prejudice. Please enlighten me about what you are talking about, so that I can see it.

Nope. You haven't connected the dots. How does the data show that whites are worse drivers? Step me through it, because I cannot figure it.

Of course I connected the dots. And, of course you cannot figure it out.

Trausti posted a link to a data source that showed the share by race of fatalities from traffic crashes. He used the fact that the share of black fatalities rose by 23% as an argument that maybe blacks were worse drivers. I pointed out that the share of black fatalities was much lower than the share of white people. And then I wrote If this data shows anything (emphasis new) it shows whites are worse drivers. Note the conditional.

In first response to your obtuseness, I added that I don't think that data shows anything. If anything, that data by itself, shows whites are worse driver.

Using additional data to make an argument does not rebut anything I observed about Traust's argument, because Trausti did not include any other data.

 

[TomC]

The police made it clear in their statement that they weren't ending all traffic stops, just unnecessary ones.

I don't suppose that the fact that the police didn't say that will impact your opinions.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

The police made it clear in their statement that they weren't ending all traffic stops, just unnecessary ones.

I don't suppose that the fact that the police didn't say that will impact your opinions.
Tom

Literally quoted them...

Perhaps instead of casting vague personal aspersions, you could explain your point (presuming you have one).

 

[TomC]

The police made it clear in their statement that they weren't ending all traffic stops, just unnecessary ones.

I don't suppose that the fact that the police didn't say that will impact your opinions.
Tom

Literally quoted them...

Perhaps instead of casting vague personal aspersions, you could explain your point (presuming you have one).

Show me the word "unneccessary" in the quote.

You won't find it. That's your interpretation of what actually was said.

My interpretation is more like, "Officers are leaving. Homicides are soaring. Small problems will get less attention."
Tom

 

[Politesse]

Literally quoted them...

Perhaps instead of casting vague personal aspersions, you could explain your point (presuming you have one).

Show me the word "unneccessary" in the quote.

You won't find it. That's your interpretation of what actually was said.

My interpretation is more like, "Officers are leaving. Homicides are soaring. Small problems will get less attention."
Tom

Of course he didn't call it "unnecessary", he's a cop. They don't publically admit any of their violence is ever unnecessary unless absolutely forced to.

He said "minor". And then clarified that if there is any real danger caused by a behavior, it will still result in a stop. Clearly admitting that there was no threat to public safety connected to these "minor" offenses in the first place.

If they're stopping people who pose no obvious threat to public safety, that's unnecessary (and should be deemed illegal) no matter what adjective you wish to affix to your particular abuses of power.

 

[TomC]

Who do you think is leaving the Portland Police Department, in general. The best cops or the worst cops?
Tom

 

[Politesse]

Who do you think is leaving the Portland Police Department, in general. The best cops or the worst cops?
Tom

If this question is directed at me, I have no idea, though this announcement suggests that at least some of those remaining have some respect for the rights of Portland's citizens, which speaks well to their character.

 

[TomC]

Who do you think is leaving the Portland Police Department, in general. The best cops or the worst cops?
Tom

If this question is directed at me, I have no idea, though this announcement suggests that at least some of those remaining have some respect for the rights of Portland's citizens, which speaks well to their character.

It was a general question.
But your response seems remarkably obtuse concerning human nature.

The best cops are also the cops who can most easily replace their jobs. Whether it's remaining in public service, but somewhere else, or going into private security, or just something else altogether. This isn't that hard to understand if you take off your blinders.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

Who do you think is leaving the Portland Police Department, in general. The best cops or the worst cops?
Tom

If this question is directed at me, I have no idea, though this announcement suggests that at least some of those remaining have some respect for the rights of Portland's citizens, which speaks well to their character.

It was a general question.
But your response seems remarkably obtuse concerning human nature.

The best cops are also the cops who can most easily replace their jobs. Whether it's remaining in public service, but somewhere else, or going into private security, or just something else altogether. This isn't that hard to understand if you take off your blinders.
Tom

That may be. I don't personally care whether a cop is the "best" or "worst" cop. If they're intending to violate my rights and those of my fellow-citizens, I'm not okay with the "best" cop. If they're doing their job and letting us live our lives, I have no problem with the "worst" cop.

 

[TomC]

It was a general question.
But your response seems remarkably obtuse concerning human nature.

The best cops are also the cops who can most easily replace their jobs. Whether it's remaining in public service, but somewhere else, or going into private security, or just something else altogether. This isn't that hard to understand if you take off your blinders.
Tom

That may be. I don't personally care whether a cop is the "best" or "worst" cop. If they're intending to violate my rights and those of my fellow-citizens, I'm not okay with the "best" cop. If they're doing their job and letting us live our lives, I have no problem with the "worst" cop.

Given the circumstances, which cops do you think are remaining on the police force. The ones who prioritize your perceived rights or the ones who prioritize crime fighting(by whatever means necessary)?
Tom

 

[Politesse]

It was a general question.
But your response seems remarkably obtuse concerning human nature.

The best cops are also the cops who can most easily replace their jobs. Whether it's remaining in public service, but somewhere else, or going into private security, or just something else altogether. This isn't that hard to understand if you take off your blinders.
Tom

That may be. I don't personally care whether a cop is the "best" or "worst" cop. If they're intending to violate my rights and those of my fellow-citizens, I'm not okay with the "best" cop. If they're doing their job and letting us live our lives, I have no problem with the "worst" cop.

Given the circumstances, which cops do you think are remaining on the police force. The ones who prioritize your perceived rights or the ones who prioritize crime fighting(by whatever means necessary)?
Tom

I would prefer a situation in which my rights were not dependent on any individual police officer's personality or level of skill, but rather circumscribed by clear policy and legal bounds.

 

[TomC]

Given the circumstances, which cops do you think are remaining on the police force. The ones who prioritize your perceived rights or the ones who prioritize crime fighting(by whatever means necessary)?
Tom

I would prefer a situation in which my rights were not dependent on any individual police officer's personality or level of skill, but rather circumscribed by clear policy and legal bounds.

I'm sure you'd prefer that.
But reality has a way of intruding on our preferences. And I'm not sure the victims of the current anarchy would agree with you about which rights to prioritize. Maybe if it was your property being looted and vandalized your priorities would shift.

But that's not a response to my question. Which do you think are more likely to leave? The skilled and humane cops or the ones focused on crime fighting?
Tom

 

[Politesse]

But reality has a way of intruding on our preferences.

That truth is exactly why I prefer meaningful structural protections to vague trust in the goodness of authorities. If the law says they aren't allowed to stop me randomly and rob me blind, I at least have the right formal redress if they try to do so anyway.

And I'm not sure the victims of the current anarchy would agree with you about which rights to prioritize. Maybe if it was your property being looted and vandalized your priorities would shift.

They have not legalized looting or vandalism. This conversation is about unnecessary traffic stops, not theft.

And what sort of a life do you think I've led, anyway? I'm not rich, I've had shit stolen from me before. I don't have a house or business to vandalize, but my classroom gets vandalized often enough. I note that the police never once helped me recover any of said stuff, nor do they clean up vandalism, so if the idea is that I'm supposed to value that sort of service over and above my own rights, I have no rational reason to sacrifice something I value in exchange for services that are never actually rendered. There's also the fact that if the police start ignoring (or as per my suggestion, mailing people tickets for) expired plates as opposed to physically arresting them, not only would this not negatively impact their ability to respond to and ameliorate thefts and vandalism, they would in fact have much more time for doing those other things. As the police chief effectively points out, violating citizen's rights is not just morally wrong, it also stretched their existing force thin and wastes enormous amounts of time at the expense of their safety and ours.

But that's not a response to my question. Which do you think are more likely to leave? The skilled and humane cops or the ones focused on crime fighting?

I've answered it repeatedly; I don't care or see any reason to care. Indeed, I'm very doubtful of what sort of metric "best" or "worst" cop would even be measured on. Number of arrests? Most efficient paperwork? Quantity of donuts consumed versus miles per gallon refilled?

 

[TomC]

Well, Portlanders have embarked on a big experiment.

How well does anarchism do in a modern American city? So far the results don't look impressive, but maybe things will turn around over the next couple of years.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

Well, Portlanders have embarked on a big experiment.

How well does anarchism do in a modern American city? So far the results don't look impressive, but maybe things will turn around over the next couple of years.
Tom

What "anarchism"? That's not what the police chief announced.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Is there evidence that the city is discriminating against black people in traffic stops?

Unless you have evidence that blacks are more likely to engage in behavior that generates a traffic stop than people of other races, one would think "6% of Portlanders are Black, he said they account for 18% of traffic stops in the city. " would count as evidence.

If there is, the city should direct its officers to stop discriminating.

LOL - just like that "stop discriminating" and the discrimination stops. Did it even cross your mind that the police officers may not be aware of their bias?

Did it even cross your mind that this might not be discrimination?

Expired plates and broken lights are things which will show a strong economic pattern. As almost always happens supposed "racism" is really socioeconomic.