Whites more likely than blacks to be shot by police in violent crimes


prisonchaplain

Recommended Posts

I wondered if blacks were really shot by police more than whites.  Well, yes they are.  A black man is 3.5 times more likely to be shot by police than a white man. However, when comparing based on the racial make up of violent crimes, a white man is actually 1.3 to 1.7 times more likely to be shot than a black man.  Why?  Police who work black neighborhoods are aware of the politics, and are likely more cautious about using lethal force. Also, police who work in high crime areas are more experienced in dealing with potentially violent situations, and are slowier in resorting to lethal force.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

One of the principles I learned in history is that perception is often more important than reality.  Imagine being part of a community that believes deeply that law enforcement is against them.  These are hard, frustrating times.  Kudos to those spiritual leaders who serve these communities.  Props too for the law enforcement officers who do not give up or give in--but continue to serve, despite the hostile and sometimes unfair accusations lobbed their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
3 hours ago, David13 said:

It's amazing how distorted some people's point of view can become.  In spite of any reality.

dc

Ironically, I think everyone thinks that about those who disagree with them.  Myself included. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
6 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

I wondered if blacks were really shot by police more than whites.  Well, yes they are.  A black man is 3.5 times more likely to be shot by police than a white man. However, when comparing based on the racial make up of violent crimes, a white man is actually 1.3 to 1.7 times more likely to be shot than a black man.  Why?  Police who work black neighborhoods are aware of the politics, and are likely more cautious about using lethal force. Also, police who work in high crime areas are more experienced in dealing with potentially violent situations, and are slowier in resorting to lethal force.

PC, it pains me to disagree with you.  But on the other side of the fence what I see is that sometimes officers can be more likely to use lethal force with blacks because of their implicit bias (or in some cases blatant racism, but I don't think that is always the case.)  The link I will share is a perfect example of what I think happens.  The video is only 5 minutes long, well worth 5 minutes IMO...but here's the synopsis:  a police officer follows a black man into a gas station.  The black man, unaware apparently, steps out of his vehicle, and the officer asks him for his license etc.  As the man is reaching into the vehicle to get it, the officer panics and shoots him.

The black guy on the ground can be heard saying, "Sir you told me to get my license, I was just getting my license."  

Then you hear the police officer telling his side of the story...which leaves you shaking your head because it doesn't match what is seen on the video at all.

Finally, some sort of expert explains that likely the officer was not lying, but really believed his version of the events....the problem the expert says is implicit bias.  He mentions another case where he feels this happened...it was years ago (Malcolm Gladwell shares that story in detail in one of his books, and comes to the same conclusion...implicit bias.)  

So here's the article with the video: http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/10/listen_sc_cop_who_shot_man_while_reaching_for_his_wallet_tells_his_side/

Studies have shown that people are quicker to shoot a black target than a white target: 

More about implicit bias (relating to blacks being shot)

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/racialbias.pdf

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/08/study-shows-racial-bias-shootings

Edited by LiterateParakeet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

PC, it pains me to disagree with you...

I'm not sure anything you said disagrees with PC's post.  You're both right.  

He was pointing out overall statistics.  You were pointing to individual cases.  They're not mutually exclusive.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
21 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm not sure anything you said disagrees with PC's post.  You're both right.  

He was pointing out overall statistics.  You were pointing to individual cases.  They're not mutually exclusive.  

I appreciate that, as I said I don't like to disagree with PC. But he feels that police more cautious and less likely to use lethal force in black neighborhoods and I believe it is the opposite. I believe police are more likely to get spooked and use lethal force on blacks as with Philandro and Alton (the two most recent deaths). I think this has to do, often, with biases that they may not even be consciously aware of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I appreciate that, as I said I don't like to disagree with PC. But he feels that police more cautious and less likely to use lethal force in black neighborhoods and I believe it is the opposite. I believe police are more likely to get spooked and use lethal force on blacks as with Philandro and Alton (the two most recent deaths). I think this has to do, often, with biases that they may not even be consciously aware of.

Are you sure it's not reality bias?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I appreciate that, as I said I don't like to disagree with PC. But he feels that police more cautious and less likely to use lethal force in black neighborhoods and I believe it is the opposite. I believe police are more likely to get spooked and use lethal force on blacks as with Philandro and Alton (the two most recent deaths). I think this has to do, often, with biases that they may not even be consciously aware of.

Yes.  I will grant you the judgment-by-stereotype exists.  The more you adhere to the stereotype, the more the stereotype gets reinforced in society.  Therefore, people like Sterling who has a loooooonnng rap sheet and continues to have the attitude of no respect for authority will make it harder for people like Castille to break out of the stereotype.

The problem with the internet is that singular cases become talked about like it is endemic.. a perception fanned by the electioneering efforts of government riding on a narrative to pad their agenda and appeal to voters.  So you end up with one side chanting Black Lives Matter and the other side chanting Blue Lives Matter... guess what - both are EXACERBATING THE PROBLEM!

I liked your other thread.  Let's discuss this on the basis of the 2nd Amendment.  That's a heckuvalot better discussion because the 2nd Amendment is color-blind.

People are racists.  That's not gonna change.  Heck, I'm Filipino and even with all us brown-skinned pacific islanders we have our own "caste system" of discrimination - the mestizos versus the morenos, the tagalogs versus the bisayas... even the Black people have their own discrimination with Beyonce's lighter skin of higher value than Lupita's darker skin.  The whites have their own with the Polish versus the Italians, etc.  It is an instinctive mortal condition that is deeply tied to Survival Instincts.

Fighting racism by racist methods is, therefore, only going to end up with bad results.  Yes, People are Racists.  The American Rule of Law is not.  So, junk the Black Lives Matter, Blue Lives Matter, All Lives Matter... DUMP IT ALL.  That's exacerbating the problem.  Rather, unite behind a color-blind concept... THE RULE OF LAW MATTERS.  That means, strict adherence to the Constitution, highly competent justice system, respect for law enforcers, and PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, among others.  Miscarriage of justice is fought, people leading a life of crime is fought, police brutality is fought, defiance of authority is fought, jugements-by-youtube-video is fought, all without deference to any race, creed, or color.

It starts with Me and You!

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

I agree that we all are racist to some degree. What we disagree about the American rule of law. It is unfair to blacks. The book The New Jim Crow by Michelle Aexander, an attorney, gives plenty of examples. That's not racism, it's simply the facts as they are. Saying Black lives matter is not racist, it's simply a way of saying, stop killing innocent black people. 

Just because I see this differently than you do does not.make me more racist. A difference of opinion is not racism.

Edited by LiterateParakeet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I agree that we all are racist to some degree. What we disagree about the American rule of law. It is unfair to blacks. The book The New Jim Crow by Michelle Aexander, an attorney, gives plenty of examples. That's not racism, it's simply the facts as they are. Saying Black lives matter is not racist, it's simply a way of saying, stop killing innocent black people. 

Just because I see this differently than you do does not.make me more racist. A difference of opinion is not racism.

Give me a statute - any statute, state or federal - that is racist.  I'll give you one - Affirmative Action.  That's racist.  So what we do - we fight to change that statute.  A judge ruling is not the Rule of Law.  If a ruling is racially biased, then it's a miscarriage of justice.  You fight for JUDICIAL COMPETENCE... not THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS UNFAIR TO BLACKS.  It is not.  Just like Black People are Criminals.  They are not.  Mormons eat green jelo.  They don't.  It's a stereotype.  Fighting a stereotype by applying a stereotype LEADS YOU NOWHERE.

You see it differently because you insist on seeing in color and applying individual cases to generalizations.  I insist on breaking generalizations by seeing individuals.  A difference of opinion is not racism.  An opinion based on racial generalization is employing racist methods.  Filipino kitchens smell like vinegar - okay, racial generalization... but harmless, not necessarily racist.  Cops kill innocent black people - racial generalization, can be harmful as it promotes defiance of authority.  Muslims are terrorists - same thing, can be harmful, you understand that one, I'm sure.

A judgment based on a youtube video showing one tiny cross-section of the entire event due to a racial bias is just as UNJUST as a Judge or Jury coming down with the wrong verdict due to a racial bias.

 

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Just because you don't believe it doesn't change the facts that blacks are more likely to be pulled over, more likely to get sentenced, more likely to get higher bails etc. Those are facts.

Affirmative action is a good thing. It is necessary because of racism. It's a shame that we need a law to give minorities fair chance, but unfortunately we do...thats why it's there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Just because you don't believe it doesn't change the facts that blacks are more likely to be pulled over, more likely to get sentenced, more likely to get higher bails etc. Those are facts.

Affirmative action is a good thing. It is necessary because of racism. It's a shame that we need a law to give minorities fair chance, but unfortunately we do...thats why it's there. 

I'm not going to argue your statistic because it doesn't matter to my message.  One more time... applying racist methods to solving racial problems - like Affirmative Action - is not going to solve racism.

So, let's say... Blacks are more likely to be pulled over.  Okay.  Sure.  What's your solution?  Cops should stop pulling over blacks?  Cops should pull over more whites?  No.  That's a racist method to solving a racial problem.  Rather, the solution is - Why is that person getting pulled over?  Is the cop incompetent (you can be a blooming racist and still be competent at your job, by the way)?  ADDRESS JOB COMPETENCE.  Was there a traffic violation?  ADDRESS RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY.  None of which are racist methods.

Do you see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

PC, it pains me to disagree with you.  But on the other side of the fence what I see is that sometimes officers can be more likely to use lethal force with blacks because of their implicit bias (or in some cases blatant racism, but I don't think that is always the case.)  The link I will share is a perfect example of what I think happens.  The video is only 5 minutes long, well worth 5 minutes IMO...but here's the synopsis:  a police officer follows a black man into a gas station.  The black man, unaware apparently, steps out of his vehicle, and the officer asks him for his license etc.  As the man is reaching into the vehicle to get it, the officer panics and shoots him.

The black guy on the ground can be heard saying, "Sir you told me to get my license, I was just getting my license."  

Then you hear the police officer telling his side of the story...which leaves you shaking your head because it doesn't match what is seen on the video at all.

Finally, some sort of expert explains that likely the officer was not lying, but really believed his version of the events....the problem the expert says is implicit bias.  He mentions another case where he feels this happened...it was years ago (Malcolm Gladwell shares that story in detail in one of his books, and comes to the same conclusion...implicit bias.)  

So here's the article with the video: http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/10/listen_sc_cop_who_shot_man_while_reaching_for_his_wallet_tells_his_side/

Studies have shown that people are quicker to shoot a black target than a white target: 

More about implicit bias (relating to blacks being shot)

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/racialbias.pdf

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/08/study-shows-racial-bias-shootings

A lot of it has to do with technique.

When the cop asks you to get your license, in any case, black or white, you should say to the cop, calmly, well, my license is in there on the seat (in the glove box) I'll have to dig around in there to get it.  Then let the cop say ok, or let him get it.

Particularly if you can tell the cop is antsy or agitated.

Instead of just doing it, tell them what you are going to do.  Then let them approve or not.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Just because you don't believe it doesn't change the facts that blacks are more likely to be pulled over, more likely to get sentenced, more likely to get higher bails etc. Those are facts.

Affirmative action is a good thing. It is necessary because of racism. It's a shame that we need a law to give minorities fair chance, but unfortunately we do...thats why it's there. 

No, affirmative action is racism.  Racism is a bad thing, not a good thing. 

Let's get our agenda straight here.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, David13 said:

A lot of it has to do with technique.

When the cop asks you to get your license, in any case, black or white, you should say to the cop, calmly, well, my license is in there on the seat (in the glove box) I'll have to dig around in there to get it.  Then let the cop say ok, or let him get it.

Particularly if you can tell the cop is antsy or agitated.

Instead of just doing it, tell them what you are going to do.  Then let them approve or not.

dc

Yes. Not going to argue with this. I agree with it 100%

But it's extremely sad that some cops will assume people to do this.

How many people are already aware of how they ought to handle the situation? How many people will simply do what the cop says without wondering with what specific technique they should follow instructions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Only if I am the one with reality bias. 

The example from "the root" link you provided does not match the narrative you gave in your post.

  • Your description does not match the narrative in the article.  And the article was written in a very unclear manner.  The video might clear it up, but it's been removed.
  • You said that the man was 'apparently' oblivious to the officer.  'Apparently' to whom?  Again, I can't see the video.  but let's stick a pin in that for a moment until you can find another link to the same video.
  • The citizen was in his car and ordered to get out?  Or did he get out on his own?
  • The citizen already had his wallet or he was told to get it

Remember a few things on the cop's side -- mind you, I do believe he was wrong in this case.  But I'm giving some examples of why he could easily have been led to believe something was wrong despite the innocence?

  1. Traffic stops are among the most dangerous things a police officer can do because there is NO warning about who the guy is or what he's about.
  2. When a cop stops you, you are supposed to remain in the vehicle.  Why would he get out and stare at the officer?  
    1. If he was unaware of the officer, why did he pull his car over?
    2. If he was stopped at a gas station and got out of the car, what was he doing if he wasn't doing this for the officer?
    3. If he was stopping to get gas or something from the mini-mart, why did he not bring his wallet with him when he exited the car?  Most people have their wallets on their person especially if they're about to make a purchase.
  3. A cop asks the man for his ID.  Ok.
  4. The man then reaches into the car???  It was a reasonable thing for a cop to believe he had his wallet on his person.  It would have been less common under these circumstances to assume he didn't.
  5. Did the man tell the officer what he was doing?

I was stopped for speeding a few years ago.  I remained in the car and I kept both hands on the wheel.  This is what you do.  Did this man not know that was the protocol?  Why not?

The police officer had no idea what race I was as he got out of the car, so his behavior had nothing to do with race.  But he did not approach my vehicle very closely.  He walked out into the next lane to give himself a wide angle view of me and my hands.  He remained there as we exchanged several sentences and my hands remained on the wheel.

He was finally satisfied that I meant him no harm and he approached the vehicle.  Prior to that time, I was a suspect who had broken a law.  That's all.  Race had nothing to do  with it.

Now, let's push this another step.  Say I had gotten out of the car.  The officer would immediately put on the suspicion glasses because of that action alone regardless of what race I was.  In fact, I was stopped when I was a teenager and I began to open the car door.  The officer immediately put his hand on his weapon and directed me to remain in the vehicle.  I complied.

The officer asked for his ID.  The officer would have assumed that he had the ID on him.  If it were me, I'd say, "It's inside the vehicle.  Just give me a sec."  That would give him the 1/2 second to reply, "Do it slowly".  And he would still be suspicious, but not trigger happy.

So, the guy got out of the vehicle and he went back into the vehicle.  Neither of these was done with proper protocol.

Do not try to change this around and say, "well, he's not legally required to..."  It's not about that.  It's that there are certain protocols that are simply practical, proper, and make sense to keep everyone safe.  He didn't follow them.  Doing so could easily have put the officer on edge more than would have been necessary.

What if "the Black culture" doesn't teach these protocols?  What if they just don't think about them because of certain social attitudes?  It isn't the direct racism of the cop involved (although that is the case sometimes).  It is that there are certain behaviors that lend themselves to misinterpretation due to the dangerous nature of traffic stops and a cop's job in general.  And those behaviors are more common among Blacks because of a different culture.

This is what I mean by "reality bias".  That's just a term I'm making up.  I don't know if it is a common usage.  There are real behaviors that really do indicate danger to a cop for a very real reason.  But these same behaviors, less common among the innocent, can also be misinterpreted as danger when they had no malicious intent.  Are Blacks more prone to these behaviors?  Could that be the explanation?  What would be the solution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
44 minutes ago, David13 said:

No, affirmative action is racism.  Racism is a bad thing, not a good thing. 

Let's get our agenda straight here.

dc

Just because we disagree does not mean I am the one who is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

@Carborendum I only have a minute, so I will come back and give a more detailed response later...but in the meantime, the video is still there. I just checked it. I watched the first 10 seconds to be sure. It works just fine.  There is a picture at the beginning of the article, but if you scroll down the video is in the body of the article. It would help our discussion if you could watch it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LiterateParakeet said:

@Carborendum I only have a minute, so I will come back and give a more detailed response later...but in the meantime, the video is still there. I just checked it. I watched the first 10 seconds to be sure. It works just fine.  There is a picture at the beginning of the article, but if you scroll down the video is in the body of the article. It would help our discussion if you could watch it.

I can't explain it.  The video doesn't work for me.  You can view it.  I can't.

Is it possible it's one of those that can only be viewed from Windows 10?

EDIT: Yup, I just checked.  It's only viewable by an apps-based OS.  I can't see it from here.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I appreciate that, as I said I don't like to disagree with PC. But he feels that police more cautious and less likely to use lethal force in black neighborhoods and I believe it is the opposite. I believe police are more likely to get spooked and use lethal force on blacks as with Philandro and Alton (the two most recent deaths). I think this has to do, often, with biases that they may not even be consciously aware of.

@LiterateParakeet Could it be that police in diverse, or in mostly white areas, will be more likely to shoot when encountering a black suspect, as opposed to those who work in and "know" the black neighborhoods?  My struggle is the BLM implies that officers are targeting black men.  They don't say it, but they imply that there is some grand racist conspiracy amongst all law enforcement to execute black men. As a result, the community really believes police mean them harm, and are dangerous.  What a way to live!  Then you get people going out and executing white police, in what they believe is justified retaliation.  Scary stuff.

After viewing the articles you linked, my sense that police EXPERIENCED in working black neighborhoods are less likely to shoot. The psychology article, in particular, highlighted that once officers were familiar with the program, the racial bias disappeared. It makes sense that humans tend towards hyper-vigilance when faced with the unfamiliar.

Again, I don't deny the sense of anger and distrust in the black community against law enforcement. The terrible reality is that every time a white officer kills a black suspect, it re-affirms that distrust.  And yet, there will always be these incidents.  The article in my OP highlights the reality that officers experienced in working black neighborhoods, and overall shooting statistics, suggest that white men are more likely than black to be shot.  HOWEVER, this takes into account the higher percentage of blacks actually involved in violent crimes--not the general population of blacks in society.

 

Edited by prisonchaplain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Just because you don't believe it doesn't change the facts that blacks are more likely to be pulled over, more likely to get sentenced, more likely to get higher bails etc. Those are facts.

And the fact is that Blacks are more likely to commit crimes, including traffic crimes, resulting in their being pulled over more often, and sentenced more often, and likely to be multiple offenders leading to higher bail, etc., than are Whites (who are more prone to each of the above than Asians).

Crime is not a result of racism. No White guy forced a Black guy to deal drugs, or rob a convenience store, or kill his pregnant girl friend, or abandon her and their child. No White women forced a Black woman to have her fifth illegitimate child. No White preacher taught Black women to pray to Jesus that the police would not catch them while they were robbing a store.

Blacks commit a hugely disproportionate number of crimes. There are many reasons and even more theories as to why this is so, but "so" it is, and it is undeniable (well, it's irrefutable, there are those who deny it, but they cannot show it to be anything but the truth).

So, when Blacks get arrested in greater numbers (proportionally, and absolutely), it's not racism, it's their crimes. When they get shot by police more often (in absolute numbers — proportionally Whites get shot more often, as mirkwood demonstrated), it's because they "see" the police more often.

I blame it on the racism of Democrats who treat Blacks as less-than-human, not able to support themselves, not able to make decisions for themselves., for giving them "welfare" to keep them shackled to the plantation, and for encouraging them to destroy their families. There are other reasons, of course, but this is the biggie as far as I can tell.

If you truly want to see fewer Blacks killed by cops (and, more importantly, by other Blacks), work to end welfare. They're just as capable as any other group of earning a living for themselves.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
19 hours ago, anatess2 said:

So, let's say... Blacks are more likely to be pulled over.  Okay.  Sure.  What's your solution?  Cops should stop pulling over blacks?  Cops should pull over more whites?  No.  That's a racist method to solving a racial problem.  Rather, the solution is - Why is that person getting pulled over?  Is the cop incompetent (you can be a blooming racist and still be competent at your job, by the way)?  ADDRESS JOB COMPETENCE.  Was there a traffic violation?  ADDRESS RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY.  None of which are racist methods.

Do you see?

The answer is to treat people, all races, fairly and that is not what's happening.  Here is an example:

"it has been found that while black and white Americans smoke marijuana at similar rates, blacks are arrested 3.7 times as frequently for marijuana possession. These numbers were picked to reflect the 3.7:1 ratio of black to white arrests for marijuana possession. 100 is 10% of 1,000 and 74 is 37% of 200, so these numbers would represent an arrest disparity equivalent to that noted in the example above." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kim-farbota/black-crime-rates-your-st_b_8078586.html

19 hours ago, David13 said:

A lot of it has to do with technique.

When the cop asks you to get your license, in any case, black or white, you should say to the cop, calmly, well, my license is in there on the seat (in the glove box) I'll have to dig around in there to get it.  Then let the cop say ok, or let him get it.

 

David, can you see the video I shared with Carb?  That is just one example, of many, of a black man following the directions of a police officer and getting shot.  I'll post a youtube video of it below.  

16 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I can't explain it.  The video doesn't work for me.  You can view it.  I can't.

Is it possible it's one of those that can only be viewed from Windows 10?

EDIT: Yup, I just checked.  It's only viewable by an apps-based OS.  I can't see it from here.

Okay, I'll post a shorter youtube version that is just the dash cam in my next post....the officer's story is in the article.  You can see the difference I'm talking about. 

16 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

@LiterateParakeet Could it be that police in diverse, or in mostly white areas, will be more likely to shoot when encountering a black suspect, as opposed to those who work in and "know" the black neighborhoods?  My struggle is the BLM implies that officers are targeting black men.  They don't say it, but they imply that there is some grand racist conspiracy amongst all law enforcement to execute black men. As a result, the community really believes police mean them harm, and are dangerous.  What a way to live!  Then you get people going out and executing white police, in what they believe is justified retaliation.  Scary stuff.

After viewing the articles you linked, my sense that police EXPERIENCED in working black neighborhoods are less likely to shoot. The psychology article, in particular, highlighted that once officers were familiar with the program, the racial bias disappeared. It makes sense that humans tend towards hyper-vigilance when faced with the unfamiliar.

Again, I don't deny the sense of anger and distrust in the black community against law enforcement. The terrible reality is that every time a white officer kills a black suspect, it re-affirms that distrust.  And yet, there will always be these incidents.  The article in my OP highlights the reality that officers experienced in working black neighborhoods, and overall shooting statistics, suggest that white men are more likely than black to be shot.  HOWEVER, this takes into account the higher percentage of blacks actually involved in violent crimes--not the general population of blacks in society.

PC, I do agree with some of what you said here, just not all.  I agree that some police that are experienced in working in black neighborhoods are less likely to shoot for the reasons you mentioned. I do believe there are some fine men on the force that really care about their communities and want to protect and serve.  And I agree that living in fear of the police is a terrible way to live (that is part of my point actually.)   I also understand and agree at least partially that our perceptions of the world can color how we see things. 

Where we differ slightly, is that I believe that as too many incidents show, that black people have a real and valid reason to fear the police.  I don't think the police are racist (I mean not by and large, though I do think there are some racist officers, I give them the benefit of the doubt that most are decent people.)  However the perception that you talked about goes the other way as well.  Because officers perceive blacks to be "more dangerous", "more likely to commit crimes" etc, they see what they expect to see as well.

And then of course we have other issues at play here as well....ghettos, poverty, mental illness, stress....all play into this as well.  

It is so complicated, I don't even know where to begin to solve it all.  I agree with you on another point.  I really appreciate all those that are working to uplift and strengthen the people in these communities.  

11 hours ago, David13 said:

Well, it certainly does in this case if your agenda is that racism is wrong. 

No, you just misunderstand me.  Misunderstanding does not make you right either.  We're just going to have to disagree and leave it at that.  

9 hours ago, LeSellers said:

And the fact is that Blacks are more likely to commit crimes, including traffic crimes, resulting in their being pulled over more often, and sentenced more often, and likely to be multiple offenders leading to higher bail, etc., than are Whites (who are more prone to each of the above than Asians).

Lehi, if only it were so simple as you imply.  But it isn't.  Michelle Alexander, an attorney, wrote a book called The New Jim Crow that addresses most of what you said here.  I don't expect you to read it, only to say there is another, well-documented opinion quite the opposite of yours.  So instead of an entire book I'll just share this:

Black Crime Rates: What Happens When the Numbers Aren't Neutral

Edited to add:  Lehi, I changed my mind...I'm going to give you a more personal response, but it's too long to post here.  I'll put it in another post and tag you.  

Edited by LiterateParakeet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...