Racism, pure and simple...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ZZZzzzzzzz, Apr 29, 2007.

  1. Study: Minorities more likely to be searched, arrested
    Story Highlights
    • Justice Department study shows blacks, Hispanics victims of police force
    • Police more likely to search and arrest blacks, Hispanics than whites
    • Blacks have long complained about treatment "driving while black"
    • Report echoes findings of 2002 report

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- Black, Hispanic and white drivers are equally likely to be pulled over by police, but blacks and Hispanics are much more likely to be searched and arrested, a federal study found.

    Police were much more likely to threaten or use force against blacks and Hispanics than against whites in any encounter, whether at a traffic stop or elsewhere, according to the Justice Department.

    The study, released Sunday by the department's Bureau of Justice Statistics, covered police contacts with the public during 2005 and was based on interviews by the Census Bureau with nearly 64,000 people age 16 or over. (Read the full reportexternal link)

    "The numbers are very consistent" with those found in a similar study of police-public contacts in 2002, bureau statistician Matthew R. Durose, the report's co-author, said in an interview. "There's some stability in the findings over these three years."

    Traffic stops have become a politically volatile issue. Minority groups have complained that many stops and searches are based on race rather than on legitimate suspicions. Blacks in particular have complained of being pulled over for simply "driving while black."

    "The available data is sketchy but deeply concerning," said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau. The civil rights organization has done its own surveys of traffic stops, and he said the racial disparities grow larger, the deeper the studies delve.

    "It's very important to look at the hit rates for searches -- the number that actually result in finding a crime," Shelton said. "There's a great deal of racial disparity there." He called for federal legislation that would collect uniform data by race on stops, arrests, use of force, searches and hit rates.

    "This report shows there are still disturbing disparities in terms of what happens to people of color after the stop," said Dennis Parker, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's racial justice project.

    He also said better reporting is needed.

    Like the 2002 report, this one contained a warning that the racial disparities uncovered "do not constitute proof that police treat people differently along demographic lines" because the differences could be explained by circumstances not analyzed by the survey.

    The 2002 report said such circumstances might include driver conduct or whether drugs were in plain view.

    Traffic stops are the most frequent way police interact with the public, accounting for 41 percent of all contacts. An estimated 17.8 million drivers were stopped in 2005.

    Black, Hispanic and white motorists were equally likely to be pulled over by police -- between 8 percent and 9 percent of each group. The slight decline in blacks pulled over -- from 9.2 percent in 2002 to 8.1 percent in 2005 -- was not statistically significant, Durose said, and could be the result of random differences.
    The raw numbers

    The racial disparities showed up after that point:

    --Blacks (9.5 percent) and Hispanics (8.8 percent) were much more likely to be searched than whites (3.6 percent). There were slight but statistically insignificant declines compared with the 2002 report in the percentages of blacks and Hispanics searched.

    --Blacks (4.5 percent) were more than twice as likely as whites (2.1 percent) to be arrested. Hispanic drivers were arrested 3.1 percent of the time.

    Among all police-public contacts, force was used 1.6 percent of the time. But blacks (4.4 percent) and Hispanics (2.3 percent) were more likely than whites (1.2 percent) to be subjected to force or the threat of force by police officers.

    People interviewed described police hitting, kicking, pushing, grabbing, pointing a gun or spraying pepper spray at them or threatening to do so. More than four of five felt the force used was excessive, but there were no statistically significant racial disparities among the people who felt that way.

    Two years ago, the Bush administration's handling of the 2002 report and its finding of racial disparities generated considerable controversy.

    Departing from normal practice, the earlier report was simply posted on the statistics bureau's Web site without any press release announcing it.

    The bureau's director at the time, Lawrence A. Greenfeld, appointed by President Bush in 2001, wanted to publicize the racial disparities, but his superiors disagreed, according to a statistics bureau employee.

    Greenfeld told his staff he was being moved to a new job following the dispute, according to this employee, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to reporters.

    This time there was a press release.

  2. "--Blacks (9.5 percent) and Hispanics (8.8 percent) were much more likely to be searched than whites (3.6 percent)."

    Considering that blacks and hispanics are way more likely to carry illegal weapons and drugs, I think the numbers are fine.

    Now go back into your hole ZZZ, you fucking troll.
  3. rockerz71

    rockerz71 Guest

    police may be more likely to search vehicles that are stopped in high-crime areas which often have high percentages of non-white residents
  4. Actually the data hints at REVERSE RACISM.

    Police have been emasculated by charges of "profiling."

  5. EricP


    Wow, cool that you were able to draw "pure and simple" conclusions that even the authors were unable to identify.

    The players of the NBA are over 80% African American => Racism, pure and simple!!

    Average test scores are consistently lower for inner city schools for students of all races => Economic discrimination, pure and simple!!

    Asians score higher than white, blacks and hispanics on college entrance exams => Racial favortism in test question development has got to END!!

    Murder victims in the US are disproportionately black (and committed by other blacks) => Obvious discrimination by the racist murderers and should be outlawed!!

    Attractive people of all races are more likely to be booked for modelling and/or acting positions => Appearance discrimination sucks!!!

    This country must come to its senses and mandates that all jobs, test scores, arrests, loan applications and new puppies are randomly assigned to ensure that no group be deemed 'favored' or 'unfavored' by the system.

    Take the 'average' inner city, 45 year old white guy. I'll bet he pays a higher 'average' interest rate on his mortgage than the 'average' 45 white guy in a nice suburban neighborhood. Discrimination, pure and simple? No, more than likely, the typical white guy in the inner city has a poorer credit rating than the typical white guy in the nice suburban neighborhood.

    Averages are what they are, an average. They cannot be used in isolation to conclude whether discrimination is the cause for any discrepancy.

  6. I can understand that no one cares about investigating the possibilty that whites are perhaps being kept out of the NBA or NFL because of "racism", but I can't work out why no one is making a fuss over how racism is keeping Hispanics and Asians out. I mean, surely, it would have to be racism, right? That's the only reason there are so few black coaches and quarterbacks, so obviously racism is preventing Hispanics and Asians from claiming their "rightful share" of positions in those sports. Surely no one would be racist enough to suggest that blacks might have any innate advantages when it comes to basketball or football, right?
  7. ZZzz, I'll tell you what is "racism, pure and simple". The Duke rape case. Every good liberal was nigh on certain that the students were guilty. That's because in the fantasy world liberals imagine, whites go around raping and otherwise oppressing and tormenting blacks every day of the week. So it was only natural that liberals judged the players guilty or saw overwhelming likelihood of their guilt.

    Back in the real world, anyone familiar with crime statistics would have been extremely skeptical of the black stripper's claims. That's because white on black rape simply hardly ever happens.

    As a recent American Thinker article explains:

    The data come from the Bureau of Justice Statistics http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvusst.htm

    It's indeed simple. In the liberal world, white = evil and guilty. Evidence be damned.
  8. Introduction of Duke rape case by Specr8cist.

    Straw man, plain and simple.

  9. A strawman? Do you even know what a strawman is?

    This is just an example of what "racism, pure and simple" actually looks like. I don't see how one can avoid that conclusion. The players were "guilty" because liberals believe that whites do this sort of thing all the time. At a minimum, it is exactly as racist as what you believe police are doing. However, police actually have rock solid statistical reasons for profiling blacks and hispanics. Liberals profile whites based on nothing but pure fantasy.
  10. Here are some responses to this study from actual cops posted on a "racist" forum:

    And a good one:

    Yes, it certainly seems to, doesn't it?
    #10     May 1, 2007