DOJ tells schools to implement race-based punishments

[Vic]

I could have sworn I said there were exceptions..Oh yes I did, and you quoted it. Thank you!

I'm sure she'd agree (as I do) that the culture you describe is very bad, is real, and that a lot black people are caught up in it. But as for it being a black thing... I don't think she would.
Are there no poor white trash where you live? No trailer parks or "felony flats?" No methheads? No Asian gangs or Russian mafia? I guess not.
It's not a black thing you describe, it's a poor thing.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

MJ was made illegal because of racism. Blacks and immigrant workers (Mexicans) used MJ.

DEA spread fake stories of blacks men raping white women because of MJ.

 

[michal1980]

Meanwhile, arrest records make it much much harder to get jobs, especially good jobs; high arrest rates keep property values down in these areas, so there's no building equity in a home; property taxes pay for most of education costs in America, so these areas are much worse funded than richer suburbs and children get worse educations; and time in jail for non-violent pot arrests break up families and deprive children of parents. Along with a million other effects.

It's a cycle. Poverty leads to crime (sometimes, nonviolent and harmless crime like smoking pot) leads to disproportionate arrests leads to poverty. Someone like you or me, on a good track, gets arrested (where we don't) for having pot because he's in the vicinity of more crime than we are. He gets thrown in jail and fucks his life chances, gets a shitty minimum wage job where he works (if he's lucky) 40+ hours/week and has to get food stamps to survive anyway. Then we P&N posters shit on him from the comfort of our computers for being "lazy" and making "bad life choices" since he has a worse job than us, when the only worse choices he made than us was being born in a poor area. The American Dream!

The real problem is that decades of terror about the communists hiding under the bed has made it impossible to talk about how much we shit on the poor in America without being accused of "class warfare" against the rich. You're right that it's not all racism, and that poverty is the bigger issue. Being classist should be as shunned as being racist, but sadly it's just not. Meanwhile, racism isn't the only underlying force, but it's undeniably a real and systematic factor too, making things worse start to finish.

maybe if they didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't go to jail. and then they wouldn't be poor.

But once again you cannot actually assign blame to the individual, it has to be someone else's fault

 

[Vic]

maybe if they didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't go to jail. and then they wouldn't be poor.

But once again you cannot actually assign blame to the individual, it has to be someone else's fault

Forget blame, some people realize that problems don't go away just because you ignore them.

 

[bradly1101]

They know what bigotry is because they are bigots. They project that others are as bigoted as them. Thus they fear that the bigotry they harbor and pretend isn't there is there in the other will be directed at them. The evil we dent in ourselves mates us fear that others are as evil as we are. And because we act that evil out, eventually they surely will be. We create what we fear.

The herrings can get pretty red.

 

[Geosurface]

So how would you describe a situation where one race is punished more often than another when holding the number of total offenses constant?

Let me take a crack addict.. I mean, a crack at it.

Let's say Group A and Group B both smoke weed exactly the same number of times per week.

However, Group B is getting arrested for possession of marijuana more often than Group A. At first it seems like this is clear discrimination and racism in how the police conduct themselves... but then we consider some other factors:

Turns out, Group A is usually pretty law-abiding other than when it comes to weed, and perhaps some online piracy. Both activities which take place, for them, either exclusively or damned near exclusively inside the confines of their own home. They have one dealer they visit occasionally, and they ensure that the amount of time they spend out in public while carrying weed from the dealer to their home is as minimal as it can be, and they are extra cautious during that time not to drive erratically or anything. They may even have a dealer who comes to their house, reducing the risks even more. In other words, it would take a very uncommon and unlikely scenario for a police officer to ever be in a position to know about their weed use/possession.

Meanwhile, Group B, on the average, has a very different pattern. They're more likely to have larger quantities of weed, to have other illegal drugs and paraphernalia on their person at the same time as weed, to be a dealer in addition to being a user, to be involved in other criminal activity unrelated to drugs, and much more likely to carry their weed out in public for sustained periods of time, while engaging in behaviors which dramatically increase the likelihood that they will interact with police. Some of those in Group B who are perpetually involved in crime or even in a gang have the practice of wearing clothing which the police have come to associate with that lifestyle, and police have even learned that there are certain mannerisms and postures, behavioral ques, which those who are career criminals engage in routinely. Sometimes the police even know certain individuals within this group by name, and routinely interact with them and know to keep an eye out for them. All of these factors dramatically increase the probability they will be arrested for marijuana possession. Sometimes the cops have nothing else they can hit them with, and sometimes it's one of many charges simultaneously levied against a suspect.

Mind you, Group A has plenty of people who fit the Group B pattern better, and Group B has plenty of people who fit the Group A pattern better, and both groups have plenty of people who don't smoke weed or engage in any other criminal activity at all. But when you "zoom out" and look at these two populations at a macro level, these differences in average behavior are significant and go a long way toward explaining the disparity.

 

[bradly1101]

maybe if they didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't go to jail. and then they wouldn't be poor.

I think it's the other way around. Crime starts with poverty, black, white or brown.

Many whites say that 'they' should pull themselves up, but the opportunities are rarely the same. For that I believe there is shared blame.

 

[michal1980]

I think it's the other way around. Crime starts with poverty, black, white or brown.

Many whites say that 'they' should pull themselves up, but the opportunities are rarely the same. For that I believe there is shared blame.

your just excusing crime.

 

[Geosurface]

Crime starts with poverty, black, white or brown.

Yea?

I will agree with you that there is often a correlation, but you should also note that there are plenty of instances which buck that trend too.

Let me call your attention to West Virginia, Kentucky, Montana, and Idaho in particular.

EDIT: Also, from a cursory glance at the data, it appears crime rates actually went down during the great depression.

 

[berzerker60]

maybe if they didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't go to jail. and then they wouldn't be poor.

But once again you cannot actually assign blame to the individual, it has to be someone else's fault

That's a stupid fucking argument. Everyone does criminal things. Literally everyone has broken some law or another. No one has ever driven who couldn't get pulled over for some infraction or another if a cop followed him long enough. Huge amounts of people consume illegal substances, people download copyrighted shit, people steal from work, people drink and drive, people fudge their taxes, people drink underage and have illegal firearms and set off fireworks without permits and on and on.

In fact, white people commit some of those crimes more than black people do.

Yet black people get disproportionately arrested for crimes that are committed by the same percentage of white people. Sure, we can make up elaborate reasons why that might be the case. But you know don't stop there - you STILL judge the black people for being so dumb as to make the same mistakes as every other human being, as if there IS no difference in arrest rates that defies actual criminality or behavior. Then, when those arrests lead to lives of cyclical poverty, you look down your nose from the sheltered, pampered life you live (here come the protests about what a struggle you've had, you true American frontiersman who walked both ways uphill to 30 hour/day shifts in the mill!).

It would be more acceptable if you were actually interested in breaking the cycle of poverty and crime so that people could have actual opportunity. But no, any time someone suggests something that could help, it's just bitching about how it wouldn't benefit you so it must be wrong. Can't reform absurd drug laws, can't reduce use of background checks in hiring, can't use state or federal funding for schools instead of local so there isn't the disparity based on how rich your areas is, can't find ways to get contraceptives to the poor, can't give any assistance to mothers once pregnant or allow abortions, can't ensure these students have a leg up in getting into universities, can't make sure the richest ('Christian') country on earth makes sure all of its children have some fucking food in their stomachs, can't send advisory letters telling schools not to discriminate in punishments based on race.

No, much better if we just keep 'them' poor, and blame 'them' for being poor, and justify their being poor by circular 'logic' and a hopelessly naive idea that life is a true meritocracy.

 

[nehalem256]

I think it's the other way around. Crime starts with poverty, black, white or brown.

Many whites say that 'they' should pull themselves up, but the opportunities are rarely the same. For that I believe there is shared blame.

Crime starts with poor values. As does poverty quite often. Not exactly a surprise that two things caused by poor values would seem to be correlated with each other.

 

[bradly1101]

Crime starts with poor values. As does poverty quite often. Not exactly a surprise that two things caused by poor values would seem to be correlated with each other.

It sounds like you're saying that poverty is a choice. What about everyone who is born into it? The opportunities are just not the same.

 

[Geosurface]

It sounds like you're saying that poverty is a choice. What about everyone who is born into it? The opportunities are just not the same.

Saying "poverty is a choice" is far too simplistic.

Being born into poverty is not a choice. Descending into poverty and remaining in poverty are usually connected strongly with choices a person makes.

 

[Vic]

Crime starts with poor values. As does poverty quite often. Not exactly a surprise that two things caused by poor values would seem to be correlated with each other.

How shall we lead a child away from their parents poor values?

 

[Vic]

your just excusing crime.

Is it okay to be a grammar Nazi here? I mean, seriously, the difference between the 2nd person possessive "your" and the passive present tense of to be "you are" is like 3rd or 4th grade English, right?
God forbid, you don't put apostrophes on plurals, do you?

 

[Exterous]

Its not 'their policies' its Federal law, has been for 50 years. Or at least that seems to be the line the lefties in here are towing.

And I would think a couple of high profile convictions would be more effective than issuing 'non-binding guidelines' in getting districts to alter their policies.

Whether its been law for 50 years is largely irrelevant as the length of time a law has been in existence does not preclude new, more recent activities that circumvent said law from occurring.

Also - I would much prefer a (relatively) short notice being sent out as opposed to a couple of lengthy (investigations, motions, deposition, trial appeal, appeal, appeal etc) and expensive court cases

And yet the DOJ seems to think it is appropriate to put its nose in even if such rules are enforced fairly.

Only if they have a disparate impact, that is if the negative impact is greater than the value of the goal trying to be achieved + a racial group being impacted significantly more than the others + valid alternative exist to achieve said goal that do not affect one racial group more than another.

 

[Exterous]

Its not 'their policies' its Federal law, has been for 50 years. Or at least that seems to be the line the lefties in here are towing.

And I would think a couple of high profile convictions would be more effective than issuing 'non-binding guidelines' in getting districts to alter their policies.

Whether its been law for 50 years is largely irrelevant as the length of time a law has been in existence does not preclude new, more recent activities that circumvent said law from occurring.

Also - I would much rather prefer a (relatively) short notice being sent out as opposed to a couple of lengthy (investigations, motions, deposition, trial appeal, appeal, appeal etc) and expensive court cases. I think its likely a more efficient application of my tax money than having my federal taxes fight my local taxes

And yet the DOJ seems to think it is appropriate to put its nose in even if such rules are enforced fairly.

Only if they have a disparate impact, that is if the negative impact is greater than the value of the goal trying to be achieved + a racial group being impacted significantly more than the others + valid alternative exist to achieve said goal that do not affect one racial group more than another.

 

[HumblePie]

maybe if they didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't go to jail. and then they wouldn't be poor.

But once again you cannot actually assign blame to the individual, it has to be someone else's fault

That's pretty much my summation to his response of what I previously wrote. It looks like a vicious cycle. Pverty promotes crimes. Crime rates bring cops. Cops find more crime than what is normally reported as they are now actively searching. People get busted and now have a harder time getting out of poverty. Harder time getting out of poverty leads to more crime.

Looks like a vicious cycle, but the catch is this. Don't commit crime regardless of how poor you are. People need self control and to look for other options that aren't criminal in nature.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Modern Progressive thought pattern:


Racism is good and benefits society, as long as it is against races other than my own.



Not at all surprising.

 

[nehalem256]

Only if they have a disparate impact, that is if the negative impact is greater than the value of the goal trying to be achieved + a racial group being impacted significantly more than the others + valid alternative exist to achieve said goal that do not affect one racial group more than another.

Assuming there is no racism, whether overt or secret, why does disparate impact matter?

How shall we lead a child away from their parents poor values?

You have society say those values are wrong. Take for instance single motherhood, an example of a poor value that clearly causes more poverty. Does society in anyway say that making such is a choice is wrong? No, and in fact society pretty much actively encourages it by sending the signal that whatever choice a pregnant teenager makes is AWESOME(you go girl) and throwing money at them.

So if your parents demonstrate bad values. And society lacks the balls to call out those bad values. Is it any wonder kids will not learn good values?

 

[nehalem256]

That's pretty much my summation to his response of what I previously wrote. It looks like a vicious cycle. Pverty promotes crimes. Crime rates bring cops. Cops find more crime than what is normally reported as they are now actively searching. People get busted and now have a harder time getting out of poverty. Harder time getting out of poverty leads to more crime.

Seems to me like it is more likely that the same types of people likely to make poor choices, resulting in poverty, are also more like to make poor choices when it comes to not breaking the law.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Assuming there is no racism, whether overt or secret, why does disparate impact matter?



You have society say those values are wrong. Take for instance single motherhood, an example of a poor value that clearly causes more poverty. Does society in anyway say that making such is a choice is wrong? No, and in fact society pretty much actively encourages it by sending the signal that whatever choice a pregnant teenager makes is AWESOME(you go girl) and throwing money at them.

So if your parents demonstrate bad values. And society lacks the balls to call out those bad values. Is it any wonder kids will not learn good values?

Just to clarify, a major part of promoting single mother syndrome revolves around the liberal modern progressive voting machine.

Internally it's something that they're very proud of... The mothers, grandparents, and children are all far more likely to vote dem to incrase their handsouts and end up permanent members of the handout train. It's a cycle that the modern progressive drools over....

They realize a long-term increase in their voting bloc, have legitimate reasons to increase handouts, it really is the 'perfect cycle'.

 

[shortylickens]

And the excuses for NY, DC, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio, Illinois, Delaware, Indiana and New Mexico?


Sorry for the formatting but you can figure it out.

http://blackboysreport.org/national-summary/black-male-graduation-rates

White Guilt. They'd rather let them slide thru than teach them. They refuse to fucking learn, cuz at home they are taught school is the white mans system and needs to be mocked and derided. (They dont actually use those words).
So instead of trying to teach people who might sue if you actually challenged their brains, they write em off.
This current idea cannot help at all and will likely make things worse all over the nation.

 

[michal1980]

That's pretty much my summation to his response of what I previously wrote. It looks like a vicious cycle. Pverty promotes crimes. Crime rates bring cops. Cops find more crime than what is normally reported as they are now actively searching. People get busted and now have a harder time getting out of poverty. Harder time getting out of poverty leads to more crime.

Looks like a vicious cycle, but the catch is this. Don't commit crime regardless of how poor you are. People need self control and to look for other options that aren't criminal in nature.

I pretty much agree with everything you said. IMHO its also why using just plan statistics is misleading. If you have more cops in an area because there is more crime, your going to catch more criminals. So while arrests might look racists when you are looking at the just the numbers. In reality more criminals are just being caught in an area. The question to really ask, is why certain area's have more criminals? Right now, the only answer the left has is 'poverty'... maybe its time to look beyond just that.

 

[nehalem256]

Just to clarify, a major part of promoting single mother syndrome revolves around the liberal modern progressive voting machine.

Well, that and typical feminist male hatred.

Internally it's something that they're very proud of... The mothers, grandparents, and children are all far more likely to vote dem to incrase their handsouts and end up permanent members of the handout train. It's a cycle that the modern progressive drools over....

They realize a long-term increase in their voting bloc, have legitimate reasons to increase handouts, it really is the 'perfect cycle'.

Sounds like for all the liberal whining about the "cycle of poverty" they are the ones that make sure it continues.