Traveling while Black or Latino.

[techs]

EDIT: UPDATED LINK:

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...cks_and_latinos-2.html



http://www.onnyturf.com/blogs/...post_comment_request=y

http://www.nyclu.org/node/1605

http://www.nyclu.org/files/NYPD_012408.PDF

From todays New York Sunday News (they don't put it on the website til tomorrow so I posted some links about how this information was forced out of the New York Police Department).

Simply put blacks and latinos make up 49 percent of the subway ridership in New York City.
Last year blacks and latinos made up 88.3 percent of all random stop and frisk incidents in New York City.
That right 88.3 percent.

The actual number of stop and frisks:
White (non-latino) 2,186
Asian 395
Blacks and latinos 23,909


While the chances of being stop and frisked are very low for even black and latinos due to the huge ridership of the NY City subways, the numbers are so astounding I am literally in shock

 

[1prophet]

What is the racial breakdown of the NYC Police dept?

What is the racial breakdown of the officers making the stops and frisks?

 

[ProfJohn]

Find some stats on subway crime and get back to us.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: techs
I am literally in shock

So go lay on your bed, elevate your feet, and never post again.

 

[alchemize]

In other news, Businessmen and Moms aren't muggers, and the sky is blue.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: techs
While the chances of being stop and frisked are very low for even black and latinos due to the huge ridership of the NY City subways, the numbers are so astounding I am literally in shock

Then you truly do need to just stay in your white suburb with that computer shop and not try to think about life in the real world.

 

[ProfJohn]

From the NY Times 2001
link

Of the crime victims, he said, 40 percent were black, 31 percent were Hispanic, 19 percent were white and 9 percent Asian. Of the suspects identified by victims, 60 percent were black, 28 percent were Hispanic, 8 percent were white and almost 3 percent were Asian. Of those stopped on the street by the police and searched, 49 percent were black, 32 percent were Hispanic, 16 percent were white and 2 percent were Asian. Of those arrested, 55 percent were black, 31 percent Hispanic, 9 percent white and 3 percent Asian.

So according to this 81% of suspects were either black or hispanic.

If the stats are similar today then it seems like the police are following the crime stats pretty good.

If only 8% of crimes are committed by white then why should 50% of people frisked be white?

 

[ProfJohn]

From last April
link

Though blacks, 24 percent of New York City?s population, committed 68.5 percent of all murders, rapes, robberies, and assaults in the city last year, according to victims and witnesses, they were only 55 percent of all stop-and-frisks.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Looks like PJs got this one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Like always it looks like PJs got this one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

Fixed

 

[techs]

Here's the link to the actual story:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new...cks_and_latinos-2.html

And I noticed the fascists jumped right in to defend the end of our Consitutition.
Nice going, guys.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Finally it looks like PJ got one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

Fixed

:thumbsup:

 

[Double Trouble]

Looks like they are doing a pretty good job. If around 85% of the crimes are committed by people within those groups (whatever they are), then what's wrong with that percentage of checks & frisks being done on that group? It would be no different if it was whites, asians, arabs, whatever.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Finally it looks like PJ got one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

Fixed

:thumbsup:

At least I am doing 100% better than techs



And Techs, what is with the fascist BS?
I spent years in retail, you learn quickly to identify who might be stealing from you and who is not. I imagine the cops with all their training are just doing the same thing.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: tagej
Looks like they are doing a pretty good job. If around 85% of the crimes are committed by people within those groups (whatever they are), then what's wrong with that percentage of checks & frisks being done on that group? It would be no different if it was whites, asians, arabs, whatever.

Yeah, my grandmother was a "criminal" in 1938 in Germany when she was stopped and frisked (and beaten).

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: tagej
Looks like they are doing a pretty good job. If around 85% of the crimes are committed by people within those groups (whatever they are), then what's wrong with that percentage of checks & frisks being done on that group? It would be no different if it was whites, asians, arabs, whatever.

Yeah, my grandmother was a "criminal" in 1938 in Germany when she was stopped and frisked (and beaten).

Well I was stopped, not frisked and beaten when I was 14. What has that to do with anything? Yep, nothing and neither does what the Nazis in Germany did. When blacks or any other group are stopped, frisked and beaten because the state has declared them enemies by virtue of birth I'll have a fit too.

This is a situation about real crimes, not some state sanctioned thought crime scenario. As I said, when they start beating blacks because they are black and nothing more, I'll be one of the first to call them what they are.

 

[beyoku]

I think all white boys and men should be checked and frisked before going to school or malls. I don't want to be caught in a mass shooting.

 

[Dari]

What's the point of this thread?

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this thread?

To point out the high statistics that certain ethnicities are more likely to eat our babies.

 

[xeemzor]

Halt the presses! A statistically poorer people committed more crimes than a richer demographic! OP, you aren't telling us anything we didn't already know.

 

[Rio Rebel]

When you see the world in black and white, and you happen to belong to the group that rarely gets stopped, racial profiling makes perfect sense.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Looks like PJs got this one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

Nope, I'd say it's still pretty racist. After all, there is no reason at all to think that the specific person being stopped did anything at all wrong, the way it's being justified is that people who have the same skin color have committed some crimes. In other words, the only suspicion the police have is based on skin color...how is that not racist?

The problem with your argument is that you're taking an abstract idea and trying to use it to justify treatment of specific people. From a totally practical standpoint, if the ONLY goal is to search people most likely to be doing something wrong, then searching people belonging to groups more likely to commit crimes makes sense (this extends beyond racial profiling, though). But that's NOT the only goal, because we don't live in a police state...and everyone is innocent until proven guilty. You're trying to use statistics to justify treatment of individuals, and that just isn't compatible with a free society. In other words, the fact that black people in NYC represent a disproportionate percentage of criminals does not mean the police are entitled to treat Jim Smith any different just because he happens to be black.

Personally I'm surprised that this argument comes up as often as it does. I mean, it's one thing to debate the effectiveness of various police methods...that's fine. But I'm pretty surprised at the number of people who are implicitly arguing, as you are, that police efficiency should be the ONLY factor taken into account.

 

[Socio]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Looks like PJs got this one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

I agree, it looks like the cops are just playing the highest odds to keep crime rates down as best they can.

 

[Fox5]

I'm Puerto Rican and I get frisked by the bouncers every time I go to the local college bar at night. At first I assumed they just did it to everybody, but after talking with people, even regulars there, none of them say they've ever been frisked. Sigh, I get the full pat down and everything, gotta empty my pockets, remove my jacket, spread my legs, etc.

Maybe it's a result of going to school in an area that 95% white. And most of the remaining 5% is made up of asians/indians who people never suspect anyway.
Or maybe it's just the bouncers' way of telling me I don't meet the dress code.

 

[wetech]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Looks like PJs got this one right. If a crime is probably being committed by blacks and latinos it makes sense as to why they are doing just what they are. It isn't racism. It's not being stupid.

Nope, I'd say it's still pretty racist. After all, there is no reason at all to think that the specific person being stopped did anything at all wrong, the way it's being justified is that people who have the same skin color have committed some crimes. In other words, the only suspicion the police have is based on skin color...how is that not racist?

The problem with your argument is that you're taking an abstract idea and trying to use it to justify treatment of specific people. From a totally practical standpoint, if the ONLY goal is to search people most likely to be doing something wrong, then searching people belonging to groups more likely to commit crimes makes sense (this extends beyond racial profiling, though). But that's NOT the only goal, because we don't live in a police state...and everyone is innocent until proven guilty. You're trying to use statistics to justify treatment of individuals, and that just isn't compatible with a free society. In other words, the fact that black people in NYC represent a disproportionate percentage of criminals does not mean the police are entitled to treat Jim Smith any different just because he happens to be black.

Personally I'm surprised that this argument comes up as often as it does. I mean, it's one thing to debate the effectiveness of various police methods...that's fine. But I'm pretty surprised at the number of people who are implicitly arguing, as you are, that police efficiency should be the ONLY factor taken into account.

So are you against all random searches?