Crime comes from criminals. Some of them are black. Crime doesn’t come from black people. The vast majority of black people are not criminals, and are not violent. Disparities in crime statistics are not an indictment on black people – most black people have nothing to do with this. When you indict “black crime”, or imply that it’s black people who need to change, you’re indicting mostly innocent people. This is always wrong.
It’s just that it’s a wrongheaded indictment- although it is. These statements also justify mistreating a lot of people, up to and including throwing them in jail or killing them.
The per capita rate of violent crime is not the same across all racial groups. Trying to say, “A greater *overall *number of total crimes is committed by whites” is a skillful statistical distraction.
This is irrelevant. A statistical disparity exists. This disparity doesn’t justify any different treatment of black people (or anyone else) by the police.
As is often the case, this issue boils down to shifting the blame.
One side says, “If there were less crime committed by black people, fear of black people would go down.”
The other side says, “If there were less prejudice by society, fear of black people would go down.”"
This “definition” is nothing but invented nonsense.
Affirmative Action provides opportunities for people who would not otherwise have such opportunities. In the realm of school admissions, people with lower test scores have been provided opportunities not reflected by those scores. However, particularly in employment, the opening of an opportunity to a qualified member of a minority does not stop being Affirmative Action just because they were qualified. It simply means that the opportunity to demonstrate their qualifications would not have occurred without AA.
One may make the argument that AA lets in too many unqualified applicants, but declaring that that is the definition of AA is utterly false.
I don’t care about how people feel. I care about how people act. It’s wrong to treat black people differently. It’s wrong if you’re a cop or not.
Further, and as has been said many, many times here, the negative feelings of society (including fear) long predates crime statistics. When these feelings arose, we can confidently say that white-on-black crime was far more common than the reverse.
While I’ll always be happy to call on criminals to change their behavior, the vast majority of black people do not bear one iota of blame for any negative feelings towards black people. It’s incumbent on those who mistreat black people to change, period.
I ***hope ***- but am not optimistic - that everyone in this thread can agree on the following statements:
-
The police should not use lethal force in situations that do not require it - regardless of race or skin color.
-
The police should use lethal force in situations that do require it - regardless of race or skin color.
I’m sure that all things being equal, a police officer is more likely to be in danger when encountering a black person than a white person. So what? Why are law-abiding black people supposed to put up with being treated differently, just because *other *black people have done something wrong? If police officers aren’t willing to put their lives in slightly more danger by first trying all practical alternatives to lethal violence, then they should pick a less demanding career.
But they didn’t suggest that. They suggested that due to proposed law, someone would get hired because of “racial quotas”. AFAIR, racial quotas were never enacted, were they?
I think it is great politics to be against racial quotas, yes. I believe both Republicans and Democrats are against them now.
No. Most murders and robberies are, though. For violent crimes, about 40% are committed by blacks.
The question is to what degree is it reasonable for a cop to have a heightened sense of fear/suspicion of a black person? I’ve stated several times that I think skin color is a factor. But one that can be overridden by other cues, like dress. The fact that this discussion arises after incidents like the two you mentioned is truly baffling. Martin was killed in self defense as he was banging Zimmerman’s head into the concrete. Brown just roughed up a store clerk, stole some smokes and was rushing a cop after tussling with him.
You seem to want to have the discussion with the basic understanding that, as a group, black males are no different than males of any race. But the statistics prove that to be true only in Unicorn Land. The question here, is does the increased level of crime that black males participate in align with the increased degree to which they wind up being killed by the police? I don’t think anyone knows the answer to that. Ialso think that assuming that it should be 8X is an overly facile conclusion.
To no degree. To act differently because someone is black is wrong.
If so, this is wrong.
As a group, black males are mostly decent, law abiding people. In any case, treating people differently because of the racial group they belong to is wrong (as well as foolish). Cops don’t increase their risk by a single iota if they treat everyone the same regardless of race. And, in the long run, they greatly increase their risk by treating individuals that belong to one race worse.
I’m sure everyone can agree with such tautological statements.
In a perfect world, yes. But we don’t live in a perfect world, where males of all colors break the law equally as often. So, I think it better to say that for a cop, "To act differently because someone is black is unfortunate. But, given the propensity for that one group to be more violent than others, understandable.
I don’t mean to minimize the problem with the word "unfortunate. But it is definitely that. I think everyone would like it if that were not the case. But I think it is more reasonable to have black males be less violent than to is to have cops ignore reality.
And again I’ll add, that skin color is just one cue, there are others that can override it, like dress.
No it’s not. It doesn’t help cops, and it only makes the situation worse. It doesn’t put them at risk to treat every race the same. There is an appropriate level of wariness – that level of wariness should be applied to all races.
It is unfortunate, as well as foolish, counterproductive, damaging to society, and many other negative adjectives.
Most black males are non-violent. It doesn’t help in any way to treat them differently – it only can hurt – so there’s no reason for cops not to treat everyone the same.
Your rebuttal is what is nonsense.
For an individual to benefit from affirmative action, they must be part of a minority that the AA is trying to help. Correct? Correct!
And if that individual benefitted from the AA, a more qualified candidate must have gotten bumped. Because if the beneficiary of AA did not have lesser qualification, then he, or she, got the job without AA coming into play.
You keep repeating this as if it’s all that matters. It’s not. Black males, as a group, are WAY more violent than, say, White males. That is a fact. And one that is fairly well none, especially, I’d say, by those in law enforcement. So, to expect a cop to not have a higher sense of apprehension when stopping a black male is odd in the extreme. It goes against human nature.
This is the part that’s wrong. In many cases, they wouldn’t have gotten the job in the first place, because the employer never would have considered hiring them.
Doesn’t matter. Most black males are non-violent. Individuals should not be judged or treated differently at all based on the group they belong to.
The good cops already treat everyone the same. Further, I’m not worried about how people feel – it’s how they act that should change (in these cases). They can feel anything they want – but black people should not be treated any differently. Again again again – cops risk nothing whatsoever by treating everyone the same. It harms no one. And they make the future worse, including risking the safety of future cops, by treating black people worse.
It’s a simple assertion – black people should be treated the same as white people. On its face, nearly everyone agrees with this assertion. Why should it be different for cops? No one loses.