Trayvon Martin

[iamshack]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-...new?id=19735432

Oh that is just too rich to even be true!

[lostfan]

He also rescued a baby from an orphanage just before it collapsed and then because he had some extra time he rescued a kitten from a tree.

[StrangeSox]

What exactly would be evidence, in your mind, that racial profiling does reduce crime?

 

Some sort of study that comes to that conclusion. Every one that I know of comes to the opposite conclusion.

 

I agree with you generally about the stopping of marginalization, but you are not facing the actual problem in the first place. We do have all this gun violence. We do have a disproportionate amount of minorities of the male gender committing violent crimes. We do have a gang and drug and gun culture in our ghettos. How does that get solved in the meantime? How do our police officers police those neighborhoods? I would guess that your solution would be to attack this problem at it's root, by trying to improve the situation of those in poverty before they have to make the decision between the straight and narrow and not having food to eat, or a life of crime and possibly becoming rich...but what do we do in the meantime? What do we have our law enforcement folks do?

 

In the meantime, we stop enacting racist policies like S-A-F. That's it. I don't need an alternative beyond that in order to criticize S-A-F. We aren't facing some crime epidemic (we're at 50-year lows), but when you increasingly target a certain community for policing, it means more marginalization, more incarceration and that means more poverty. S-A-F makes things worse now and in the future. There are volumes of writings on this out there and I won't pretend that I, personally, know the sure-path forward. But that doesn't mean I can't tell when we're heading in the wrong direction.

 

tl;dr we stop smashing our hands with the hammer and then we worry about fixing the broken bones.

[iamshack]

In the meantime, we stop enacting racist policies like S-A-F. That's it. I don't need an alternative beyond that in order to criticize S-A-F. We aren't facing some crime epidemic (we're at 50-year lows), but when you increasingly target a certain community for policing, it means more marginalization, more incarceration and that means more poverty. S-A-F makes things worse now and in the future. There are volumes of writings on this out there and I won't pretend that I, personally, know the sure-path forward. But that doesn't mean I can't tell when we're heading in the wrong direction.

 

tl;dr we stop smashing our hands with the hammer and then we worry about fixing the broken bones.

See that premise assumes that people just decided to put in a policy like this for fun. Or because they are racist.

 

Do you really think that is the case?

 

 

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Some sort of study that comes to that conclusion. Every one that I know of comes to the opposite conclusion.

 

 

 

In the meantime, we stop enacting racist policies like S-A-F. That's it. I don't need an alternative beyond that in order to criticize S-A-F. We aren't facing some crime epidemic (we're at 50-year lows), but when you increasingly target a certain community for policing, it means more marginalization, more incarceration and that means more poverty. S-A-F makes things worse now and in the future. There are volumes of writings on this out there and I won't pretend that I, personally, know the sure-path forward. But that doesn't mean I can't tell when we're heading in the wrong direction.

 

tl;dr we stop smashing our hands with the hammer and then we worry about fixing the broken bones.

 

I'd consider a murder a day plus in the City of Chicago a "crime epidemic. The 50 year low stuff is just nonsense. Crime is still a problem. A big problem.

 

 

[iamshack]

Some sort of study that comes to that conclusion. Every one that I know of comes to the opposite conclusion.

Crime up after Stop and Frisks Decline

[Jenksismyhero]

Crime up after Stop and Frisks Decline

 

Give me a link to Slate or The Atlantic or the study didn't happen.

[Jake]

He also rescued a black baby from an orphanage just before it collapsed and then because he had some extra time he rescued a black kitten from a tree.

 

Fixed

[Balta1701]

Crime up after Stop and Frisks Decline

That also reads quite readily as "Crime increases during summer months", which I'm also pretty sure is true. Conveniently, it took me 1 google search to find that the 12% increase in crime is right in line with the 10-13% increase in crime recorded normally during the summer according to FBI statistics.

 

Now let me tell you what I really think about citing the NY Post after their wondrous performance and hyper-attention to accuracy and detail demonstrated during the boston bombings...

[Jake]

Give me a link to Slate or The Atlantic or the study didn't happen.

 

Not that I'm surprised, but that "study" (it's just numbers) reports a seasonal change. That's not analysis, that's just reading off numbers. If it's anything like the municipalities I've studied in my work, crimes usually go up significantly in the summertime anyway. Someone should have taken the time to look at these numbers over a longer span of time instead of just spewing out nonsense

[iamshack]

That also reads quite readily as "Crime increases during summer months", which I'm also pretty sure is true. Conveniently, it took me 1 google search to find that the 12% increase in crime is right in line with the 10-13% increase in crime recorded normally during the summer according to FBI statistics.

 

Now let me tell you what I really think about citing the NY Post after their wondrous performance and hyper-attention to accuracy and detail demonstrated during the boston bombings...

Except the period discussed in the NY Post piece is April 1 to June 30th.

[lostfan]

I'm sure there's a pretty substantial cross-section of people in this country support stuff like stop-and-frisk but they will freak the f*** out about electronic surveillance and the Patriot Act (which actually have far less direct impact on your life individually). Kinda sucks when that shoe is on your foot right?

 

(I didn't name anyone's name on purpose, but a dog tends to holler when it's hit and so on.)

[iamshack]

Not that I'm surprised, but that "study" (it's just numbers) reports a seasonal change. That's not analysis, that's just reading off numbers. If it's anything like the municipalities I've studied in my work, crimes usually go up significantly in the summertime anyway. Someone should have taken the time to look at these numbers over a longer span of time instead of just spewing out nonsense

No one is claiming that it should be published in the New England Journal of Medicine, but aren't most studies just observations about a bunch of data collection?

 

 

[lostfan]

btw since I made that post I'll point out that despite my intense dislike for him, Rand Paul is pretty consistent about this and actually talks about the skewed targeting of blacks from a civil liberties standpoint. Which is more than I can say for... f*** it insert any random Republican's name in here and they'll be just fine.

[Balta1701]

Except the period discussed in the NY Post piece is April 1 to June 30th.

And the most basic thing that they could have done is compare to "April 1 to June 30th of the previous year" which you ought to note...wasn't done.

[Jenksismyhero]

I'm sure there's a pretty substantial cross-section of people in this country support stuff like stop-and-frisk but they will freak the f*** out about electronic surveillance and the Patriot Act (which actually have far less direct impact on your life individually). Kinda sucks when that shoe is on your foot right?

 

(I didn't name anyone's name on purpose, but a dog tends to holler when it's hit and so on.)

 

The difference is that with one you're required to have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity or possible criminal activity, and in the other you have nothing at all.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[Balta1701]

The difference is that with one you're required to have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity or possible criminal activity, and in the other you have nothing at all.

I read this and thought "I can't tell which one is supposed to have the reasonable suspicion and which one is supposed to have nothing at all". Is that defending the patriot act or stop and frisk? I literally cannot tell.

[iamshack]

I'm sure there's a pretty substantial cross-section of people in this country support stuff like stop-and-frisk but they will freak the f*** out about electronic surveillance and the Patriot Act (which actually have far less direct impact on your life individually). Kinda sucks when that shoe is on your foot right?

 

(I didn't name anyone's name on purpose, but a dog tends to holler when it's hit and so on.)

I'm not even saying I support stop and frisk, and I am also on record as saying I could give a s*** about electronic surveillance and the Patriot Act.

 

And to be even more honest, I don't particularly like police officers. I've had my fair share of hassle from them for simply knowing my rights and not putting up with their nonsense over the years. But we have to be realistic, at the same time.

 

It's almost like the rant Jack Nicholson used in A Few Good Men:

 

Col. Jessep: Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

 

There is a bit of truth to that, and I know people will laugh at this example, but that line always strikes a chord in me.

 

We ask these officers to protect us from some of the worst of ourselves, and while it would be wonderful if they could always do it without abusing anyone's civil liberties, I just don't know if that is being realistic. Anyone who's been in that line of fire will attest to the difficulty in performing the duties expected of them while also always doing what those who sit around in leather chairs might tell them they should perform them. It's not that simple. It's very difficult, in fact. Unless I am in their shoes and putting my life on the line every day, I am just not sure I feel particularly comfortable criticizing them when the solution isn't simple.

[lostfan]

I read this and thought "I can't tell which one is supposed to have the reasonable suspicion and which one is supposed to have nothing at all". Is that defending the patriot act or stop and frisk? I literally cannot tell.

Me either. Um I'm going to go ahead and try anyway

 

1. Reasonable suspicion is being black. Not officially, but in practice

2. Reasonable suspicion is communicating with known or suspected foreign terrorists

[Jake]

I read this and thought "I can't tell which one is supposed to have the reasonable suspicion and which one is supposed to have nothing at all". Is that defending the patriot act or stop and frisk? I literally cannot tell.

 

I was just trying to figure out the same thing.

[Jake]

Me either. Um I'm going to go ahead and try anyway

 

1. Reasonable suspicion is being black. Not officially, but in practice

2. Reasonable suspicion is communicating with known or suspected foreign terrorists

 

There was something about algorithms being able to predict whether a given computer user was a foreigner with a very low certainty

[farmteam]

I read this and thought "I can't tell which one is supposed to have the reasonable suspicion and which one is supposed to have nothing at all". Is that defending the patriot act or stop and frisk? I literally cannot tell.

For stop and frisks, the cop still has to have a "reasonable articulable suspicion" that a crime has been/is being/or will be committed.

[Jenksismyhero]

I read this and thought "I can't tell which one is supposed to have the reasonable suspicion and which one is supposed to have nothing at all". Is that defending the patriot act or stop and frisk? I literally cannot tell.

 

Not really defending either, but S-A-F requires some kind of reasonable suspicion. Patriot Act requires some national security threat. IMO it's easier to prove there was no reasonable suspicion, so I don't think they're really the same.

[lostfan]

For stop and frisks, the cop still has to have a "reasonable articulable suspicion" that a crime has been/is being/or will be committed.

That is nice but it's just a fig leaf very often. (Someone criticizing the Patriot Act would say the same thing)

[farmteam]

That is nice but it's just a fig leaf very often. (Someone criticizing the Patriot Act would say the same thing)

Oh I don't deny that. I just meant that "reasonable [and] articulable suspicion" is an actual term of art (some would say standard, lesser than but similar to probable cause) that's needed for stop and frisks.