Racial bias of the Baltimore Police

[Loren Pechtel]

You realize it's possible to stick the clearance labels on different items?

I realize you believe that's the only possible explanation. And I realize why you believe that.

Do you?

The point is that you didn't rebut the notion that she had changed labels. Moving clearance tags is one way people cheat stores. Thus saying she had simply purchased clearance merchandise doesn't prove she wasn't shoplifting.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ok, now you've found a racist lieutenant. For the department to have zero racists would be a shock--you haven't shown a systematic problem.

READ THE REPORT!!!

The DoJ wants to find discrimination--thus I treat their report on it with skepticism. I'm looking for actual facts, not merely things that can be spun as discrimination.

You keep obsessing with that boilerplate--yet it's reasonable to put high probability things in boilerplate! You're obsessing about the ratio of those arrested--yet given the racial makeup of the area the numbers aren't out of line.

 

[Trausti]

There's a former Baltimore cop who's blogged on the DOJ report. Some supportive, some not so.

Picture a seven-year-old on a bike. From pp. 86-87 of the report:
Allegations of BPD’s unreasonable use of force against juveniles are not new. BPD has a history of problematic encounters with youth that pre-date the period of our review. For example, in 2007, officers arrested a seven-year old child for sitting on a dirt bike during an initiative to confiscate dirt bikes.

It became a minor scandal: A cop grabbed a 7-year-old off his bike for no reason right in front of his mom! Well that's how the false narrative grew. The paper somehow left off the seemingly important detail that it was a motorized bike. That kind of matters, doesn't it?

Long story short: 7-year-old is rolling down the street on a illegal motorized ATV. The keys are in the bike. Yes, that's what (some) 7-year-olds in Baltimore ride motor bikes with with parental encouragement. A cop sees what is going on and about to happen and does, well, what mom should have done. He takes the kid off the bike. Nobody is hurt. But mom-of-the-year files a complaint against the officer saying police assault her kid. She then (naturally) files a lawsuit for money. But the city (and this isn't natural) doesn't settle. The case goes to court, and the city wins hands-down.

http://www.copinthehood.com/search?updated-max=2016-08-13T19:57:00-04:00&max-results=12

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ok, now you've found a racist lieutenant. For the department to have zero racists would be a shock--you haven't shown a systematic problem.

The system that hired this Lieutenant and managed to not fire him for this behavior should be considered... what, exactly?

"One bad apple spoils the barrel." That phrase used to mean something.

It's called unions.

 

[Arctish]

READ THE REPORT!!!

The DoJ wants to find discrimination--thus I treat their report on it with skepticism. I'm looking for actual facts, not merely things that can be spun as discrimination.

You keep obsessing with that boilerplate--yet it's reasonable to put high probability things in boilerplate! You're obsessing about the ratio of those arrested--yet given the racial makeup of the area the numbers aren't out of line.

Did you read the report and find a paucity of actual facts, or are you fabricating excuses for not reading it by supposing it isn't factual enough to suit you?

 

[RavenSky]

READ THE REPORT!!!

The DoJ wants to find discrimination--thus I treat their report on it with skepticism. I'm looking for actual facts, not merely things that can be spun as discrimination..

READ THE REPORT!!! Until you do, you have nothing of any value to add on this topic.