DOJ tells schools to implement race-based punishments

[Geosurface]

Well one thing is certain... this diversity stuff is really really hard! It makes my head hurt.

Good thing it's our greatest strength, that definitely makes up for it.

 

[classy]

This clip is perfect for this thread, lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3trbNiJcDMM

I love that movie

 

[Angry Irishman]

Doesn't the DOJ have better things to waste tax payers money on? More big govt bullshit. So much for common sense, the govt will figure everything out for you.

 

[DrPizza]

I have this:



Based on everything I've seen about this story, that detective's reaction exhibited unusual and possibly even unique integrity in the face of this push the Chief and the superintendent of schools were making. If I recall correctly, that was the same detective who ended up blowing the whistle on this as he was losing his job over it, or something along those lines.

In other words, I have every reason to suspect that most of the other officers/detectives were compliant with this agenda, and that this is key to their "reduction" in crime statistics.

I think that just about any reasonable person knows by now that blacks are far more frequently arrested for the exact same crimes that police look the other way for when white people commit them. You ever read that story about the white guy who was tagging buildings in front of the police - he turned him self in, etc. - took him weeks to manage to get arrested. Black guy walks by the police holding a can of spray paint & he's going to be searched in NYC.

Cool, lets do that:
The example admits that the policy implemented has nothing to do with race. There is no *wink wink* treatment of people differently based on race. Yet the DOJ is still claiming it is a violation of the law exactly as I stated.

Now while the rule may be unfair to some students due to transportation issues. The rule would be unfair even if the students being screwed over were a statistically representative racial sampling of the student body. However in that case there would be no issue.

Great! You found the example which describes what "disparate impact" means. NOW, tell me how this would even remotely apply to, say, more black students getting into a fight vs. white students, with a corresponding higher number of suspensions for that behavior. THAT's what you can't do, and that's what you and Michal keep saying that the letter says.

 

[Geosurface]

I think that just about any reasonable person knows by now that blacks are far more frequently arrested for the exact same crimes that police look the other way for when white people commit them.

Okay. Just curious, which do you think is the bigger factor in observed disparities in arrests and convictions or suspensions or whatever:

racism on the part of society or an actual higher level of anti-social behavior committed in some groups than in others?

 

[BUnit1701]

I'm confused. If this is such a large problem, why is the solution sending out guidelines? How about instead the DOJ does its job and prosecute any cases where they can prove there has been a racially motivated disparate impact?

I'll tell you why, because they cant find any that would make it through a courtroom, so instead they send out this letter to scare everyone into conformance with their agenda.

 

[Geosurface]

I'm confused. If this is such a large problem, why is the solution sending out guidelines? How about instead the DOJ does its job and prosecute any cases where they can prove there has been a racially motivated disparate impact?

I'll tell you why, because they cant find any that would make it through a courtroom, so instead they send out this letter to scare everyone into conformance with their agenda.

 

[HomerJS]

Funny conservatives don't have a problem with race based punishment when it comes to pot possession but this they have a problem with.

 

[Vic]

Reactionaries are such drama queens.

 

[Matt1970]

Funny conservatives don't have a problem with race based punishment when it comes to pot possession but this they have a problem with.

What exactly is a race based punishment when it comes to pot possession ?

 

[fskimospy]

I'm confused. If this is such a large problem, why is the solution sending out guidelines? How about instead the DOJ does its job and prosecute any cases where they can prove there has been a racially motivated disparate impact?

I'll tell you why, because they cant find any that would make it through a courtroom, so instead they send out this letter to scare everyone into conformance with their agenda.

Wait, half the conservatives in here are shrieking about the jack boot of the DOJ on a school's neck and now others are saying it is meaningless.

Which one is it?

 

[Vic]

I'm confused. If this is such a large problem, why is the solution sending out guidelines? How about instead the DOJ does its job and prosecute any cases where they can prove there has been a racially motivated disparate impact?

I'll tell you why, because they cant find any that would make it through a courtroom, so instead they send out this letter to scare everyone into conformance with their agenda.

Do you really think that the DOJ would be more successful in the courtroom if they didn't publish their policies beforehand?

Also, of course they are trying to "scare" everyone into compliance. Duh. Good lawyers avoid the courtroom as much as they possibly can.

 

[BUnit1701]

Do you really think that the DOJ would be more successful in the courtroom if they didn't publish their policies beforehand?

Also, of course they are trying to "scare" everyone into compliance. Duh. Good lawyers avoid the courtroom as much as they possibly can.

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.

 

[fskimospy]

What exactly is a race based punishment when it comes to pot possession ?

Google 'black vs white marijuana arrests'.

 

[HomerJS]

What exactly is a race based punishment when it comes to pot possession ?

This

 

[Matt1970]

Google 'black vs white marijuana arrests'.

He said specifically "race based punishment when it comes to pot possession", not arrest count. Arrest and punishment are not the same.

 

[Vic]

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.

Policy describes how the law is interpreted and applied. Believe or not, this is rarely black and white (no pun intended).
To be successful in court, any changes in policy should be announced in advance of any legal action. Otherwise, the districts could be able to successfully argue that they were unaware of their lack of compliance.
And once again, good lawyers seek to avoid the courtroom.

 

[Matt1970]

This

I got it, so what you meant to say was race based arrest record when it comes to pot possession. A race based punishment would have to be a punishment that specifically hurt a certain ethnicity more than another.

 

[fskimospy]

He said specifically "race based punishment when it comes to pot possession", not arrest count. Arrest and punishment are not the same.

If you are arrested more often you are punished more often.

If you would like to look at other race based punishments look at the recent conversation about crack vs cocaine and racial disparities in sentencing for first time drug offenses.

 

[fskimospy]

Policy describes how the law is interpreted and applied. Believe or not, this is rarely black and white (no pun intended).
To be successful in court, any changes in policy should be announced in advance of any legal action. Otherwise, the districts could be able to successfully argue that they were unaware of their lack of compliance.
And once again, good lawyers seek to avoid the courtroom.

And honestly why is success in court the objective here? The real objective is compliance and it is simply bad governance to expect (and punish) certain behavior without making standards clear.

 

[Vic]

He said specifically "race based punishment when it comes to pot possession", not arrest count. Arrest and punishment are not the same.

Police tend to target poor people because they are less likely to be able to afford a lawyer and fight prosecution. I don't think they do it on purpose, it's just the path of least resistance. Going to trial is not only more work for the officer, it also opens them up to review and internal investigation, etc.
Black people are, on average, poorer than whites and being black is an obvious visual symbol. So given the option, all else being equal, they arrest the black guy.
The same thing can be applied in the schools. Poor parents are less likely to complain if their child is subject to discipline or receives a poor grade (as they are less likely to be involved in the child's life period), and so it is easier for the school official to do those to the child with poor parents than to the child whose parents are more well off (and so more likely be involved, and to complain or take action). Black children are, on average, more likely to have poor parents.
The DOJ is informing the districts that this path of least resistance is becoming more resistant.
Is this fucking rocket science or something?
Reading the comments in this thread leads me to believe that none of "conservatives" here have ever spent a single day in business management.

 

[Matt1970]

If you are arrested more often you are punished more often.

If you would like to look at other race based punishments look at the recent conversation about crack vs cocaine and racial disparities in sentencing for first time drug offenses.

That still doesn't make it a race based punishment.

 

[BUnit1701]

And honestly why is success in court the objective here? The real objective is compliance and it is simply bad governance to expect (and punish) certain behavior without making standards clear.

...

What's interesting is that you guys are trying to freak out over policy that has been present in the US since the civil rights act of 1964. It took you nearly 50 years to care?

It would seem you believe the standards have been clear for nearly 50 years. Which is it?

 

[fskimospy]

It would seem you believe the standards have been clear for nearly 50 years. Which is it?

The law has been in place for 50 years, that does not always mean that the interpretation and exact application of the law has been or always will be the same. This is true for basically every law in existence in common law countries, btw.

 

[BUnit1701]

Policy describes how the law is interpreted and applied. Believe or not, this is rarely black and white (no pun intended).
To be successful in court, any changes in policy should be announced in advance of any legal action. Otherwise, the districts could be able to successfully argue that they were unaware of their lack of compliance.
And once again, good lawyers seek to avoid the courtroom.

And this is the problem with our system. Everything is open to 'interpretation'. It is written in English, we all speak English, why does any interpretation need to take place?