Modern day systemic racism, does it exist?

[RDKirk]

I’m sorry to hear that. I served for eight years myself.

I served 26 years in an intelligence specialty that was interesting, challenging, and important. I got to go to interesting places and had exciting experiences. I still miss it, after more than 20 years retired. I was certainly fortunate...for instance, I did my "Vietnam tour" in Thailand instead of actually being in Vietnam...my father, father-in-law, two uncles, and an older cousin were actually in combat there. But I had maxed out the ASVAB, so I had more options.

It’s a shame there aren’t better ways for those with limited means to secure the benefits and stability offered by military careers.

That's capitalism for you.

 

[BNR32FAN]

George Floyd’s murder was an example of the callous disregard for human life police approach confrontations with suspects, especially Black ones. The accusation was a petty crime, his behavior was that of a scared stoned person at worst, and he was held down by the neck for nine minutes, killing him. How often do you see that happening to white suspects?

No it wasn’t, it was the result of one bad cop who made a bad decision. We have over 600,000 police officers in the US arresting people of all colors everyday and the reason George Floyd’s death came as such a shock to everyone is because it’s a very rare case. This only goes to prove that the vast majority of police officers don’t actually behave that way.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Not to mention the literal arm and leg it may end up costing to serve.

Nothing in this world is free and if a person is going to hide behind excuses they’re not going to accomplish anything in life. You have just as much of a chance of losing an arm or a leg in the military as you do driving a vehicle on the road.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Indeed, it speaks to a toxic culture among police forces when these types of incidents are commonplace and the offending officers are rarely held accountable. Now, when you look at the racial demographics of the neighborhoods they’re deployed in the most, you start to see a pattern. Even if cops aren’t individually racist (which it has been demonstrated that they are in certain jurisdictions), the way that they’re deployed disproportionately affects certain ethnic minority communities. That’s what systemic racism is.

These types of incidents are not commonplace that’s why they’re so shocking to everyone. Data shows that over 10 million arrests take place every year and events such as George Floyd and Timothy Timba takes place once every few years.

 

[RDKirk]

It causes more *reported* crime because there are more police out there to *report* said crimes, which indeed drives up crime statistics. This isn’t controversial. The baseline crime rate might be higher in those places to begin with, but the police presence does exacerbate those numbers. Further, the evidence supporting the idea that more policing leads to less crime is vanishingly thin. The vast majority of crimes prevented by patrols are auto thefts and thefts from vehicles - the kinds of crimes they’re not doing because a cop is right there watching. When it comes to serious crimes like homicide, statistics show it takes 10-17 new police hires to prevent a single solitary murder per year. In a city like Chicago with 600+ homicides in a year, that’s over 10,000 new hires - doubling the size of the entire force - to curb the murder rate. No, the lack of patrols is not the root cause of crime.

If you're trying to argue that there would be as much reported crime in Frisco TX as there is in Dallas city if there were the same number of police, nobody buys that. Neither the police nor the mayor nor any citizens of either city would buy that.

You're trying to argue that more police creates more police incidents. That sounds like a nice point of argument.

But that statistic is not directly related whether the absence or presence of police (proves nothing either way) with whether the residents are actually being victimized by more or fewer criminals, and the victimization of the residents is the important point.

Will fewer police reduce the crime that victimizes the residents? Maybe more police wouldn't reduce the crime that victimizes the residences (but I wouldn't make that argument...having someone respond do a call is better than not having some respond to the call). But having fewer police won't reduce the amount of muggings, burglaries, store robberies, rapes, gang shootings, drug dealing, and such.

We both know that police are not the cause of those crimes.

 

[BNR32FAN]

What do you mean by "the way they're deployed disproportionately?" What is "disproportionate" in this context? Disproportionate by race in terms of the officer-to-citizen? Disproportionate to the crime rate? Do you mean that they have more patrols through areas with less crime than those with more crime...because if they have more patrols through areas with more crime, that would not be disproportionate.

Back in the 80s, one real case of police systemic racism was discovered in Omaha NE (a city with a significant racist history). The police department typically assigned its rookies and "problem" officers to the black North Side, while the favored officers were assigned to the wealthy white West Side. But that was 40 years ago.

In nearly 70 years of being black, I've had five "business" interactions with police. My first, at age 15 1/2, was driving without a license and getting in a fenderbender. The white Oklahoma police officer looked closely at me, decided I wasn't a real troublemaker, took me back home, and left me in the custody of my mother...no further action. The only officers I ever felt disrespected me were two black Washington DC officers, who cuffed and stuffed me on a humbug...and I had been the person who called 911 for their help.

One thing I believe has helped me is something my Army father instructed me about getting along in the military: "If you ever find yourself in trouble...Shut up! Running your mouth is only going to make them determined to find some reason to hammer you. Just shut the <bleep> up."

Dialing 911 is like opening a box of chocolates.

The reason they’re deployed disproportionately is because the crime rate is disproportionate. There’s a perfectly good explanation why houses in the hood have bars on the windows and doors as opposed to other neighborhoods that don’t have them. They’re not there for decoration. My wife wanted to move to Fort Worth because she kept finding places for rent that were low cost. I told her we’re not moving to Fort Worth because the crime is way to high. She kept bugging me about it so I said fine let’s go look at these places. When we got to the house I told her ok now let’s drive down the street a few blocks and you tell me what all these houses have in common. We drove down two blocks and I asked her now what do all of these houses have in common. She said she didn’t know. I said every single house for the last two blocks have bars on the windows and doors. They put those there for a reason they’re not there for decoration. Then I asked her have you ever seen bars on the windows and doors in Mansfield? And she said no. Then I told her that’s exactly why I don’t want to move into Fort Worth because even if your not in a dangerous neighborhood your still not very far from one because the city it littered with them all over. So I wouldn’t say that police deployment is disproportionate I would say that it is proportionate to the local crime rate. People complain about not enough police protection in the hood when something goes bad which is extremely often, then they complain about over policing when it becomes an inconvenience to them. The only people who have to worry about over policing are the people who are breaking the law.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I’d strongly advise against signing several years of your life away for 3 hots and a cot.

Yes I told my daughter that she should join the Air Force because the chance of actually going into combat is extremely low compared to the other branches.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You sound like a great dad. Hope your kids appreciate you.

I just hope they’re smarter than I was at their age and don’t make the same mistakes I made. My oldest daughter is definitely excited to join the Air Force after she graduates high school.

 

[gaara4158]

If you're trying to argue that there would be as much reported crime in Frisco TX as there is in Dallas city if there were the same number of police, nobody buys that. Neither the police nor the mayor nor any citizens of either city would buy that.

You're trying to argue that more police creates more police incidents. That sounds like a nice point of argument.

But that statistic is not directly related whether the absence or presence of police (proves nothing either way) with whether the residents are actually being victimized by more or fewer criminals, and the victimization of the residents is the important point.

Will fewer police reduce the crime that victimizes the residents? Maybe more police wouldn't reduce the crime that victimizes the residences (but I wouldn't make that argument...having someone respond do a call is better than not having some respond to the call). But having fewer police won't reduce the amount of muggings, burglaries, store robberies, rapes, gang shootings, drug dealing, and such.

We both know that police are not the cause of those crimes.

My argument here isn’t about the effect police have on crime or what the root cause is per se, despite my preparedness to get into the weeds on those subjects. If you recall, this discussion has been about systemic racism. Systemic racism doesn’t require any racist actors or laws to enforce explicitly racist rules - it is merely the result of nominally unbiased systems operating the same towards members of all demographics, but whose effects differ along racial lines.

Tying this back in with policing, we established earlier that police are prone to unjustified excessive violence. Now, even assuming there is a perfectly fair reason to deploy more patrols into predominantly Black neighborhoods, the inevitable result is more Black people being exposed to the risk of an unjust police encounter. Thus, while no one’s being racist individually, one racial group suffers more than others as a result of systems working normally. That’s what systemic racism is, despite what reactionary pundits on the Daily Wire might say.

 

[gaara4158]

Nothing in this world is free and if a person is going to hide behind excuses they’re not going to accomplish anything in life. You have just as much of a chance of losing an arm or a leg in the military as you do driving a vehicle on the road.

“Nothing is free” is a poor excuse for the wealthiest nation in the world not to provide health and higher education benefits to all citizens, not just those who join the armed forces. Of course, that’s probably the point. No one would be pressured to join up if they were already being taken care of, and the military-industrial complex demands their labor. By the way, I wonder how the racial breakdown of military enlistment looks? Think it’s proportional to the general population? Hmm…

 

[RDKirk]

If you're trying to argue that there would be as much reported crime in Frisco TX as there is in Dallas city if there were the same number of police, nobody buys that. Neither the police nor the mayor nor any citizens of either city would buy that.

Thus, while no one’s being racist individually, one racial group suffers more than others as a result of systems working normally. That’s what systemic racism is, despite what reactionary pundits on the Daily Wire might say.

That is a recent redefinition of "systemic racism" (not unlike the recent redefinitions of "white privilege" and "racism" itself) created for the purpose of having an argument for a problem that actually has other roots.

Right now, the continued problem of black poverty and crime is not "systemic" anything, it's a matter of culture and whether people can develop the will to change that culture. Trying to guilt the government into infusing constant life support into a dysfunctional culture is not the answer.

We have to stop living in stupid ways that hurt us. Once upon a time--within my own memory--we had genuine systemic racism as an excuse. Today, we simply have to stop being stupid.

 

[RDKirk]

“Nothing is free” is a poor excuse for the wealthiest nation in the world not to provide health and higher education benefits to all citizens, not just those who join the armed forces. Of course, that’s probably the point. No one would be pressured to join up if they were already being taken care of, and the military-industrial complex demands their labor. By the way, I wonder how the racial breakdown of military enlistment looks? Think it’s proportional to the general population? Hmm…

The proportion of black men in the military is about the same as the proportion of the general population. The proportion of black women in the military is about double...but as well, black women are the second most successful demographic in the military, just below white men.

 

[gaara4158]

That is a recent redefinition of "systemic racism" (not unlike the recent redefinitions of "white privilege" and "racism" itself) created for the purpose of having an argument for a problem that actually has other roots.

Right now, the continued problem of black poverty and crime is not "systemic" anything, it's a matter of culture and whether people can develop the will to change that culture. Trying to guilt the government into infusing constant life support into a dysfunctional culture is not the answer.

We have to stop living in stupid ways that hurt us. Once upon a time--within my own memory--we had genuine systemic racism as an excuse. Today, we simply have to stop being stupid.

Culture is downstream of present and historical material conditions. You cannot talk about the material conditions of Black communities without mentioning slavery, Jim Crow, and redlining. If you want to change the culture now, material conditions need to change. If it was institutions and government responsible for the material conditions of the past, why not again enlist them to rectify those conditions now? Seems silly and toxic to suddenly rely on the atomized individual to overcome and eradicate cultural problems centuries in the making. We can do better than that.

 

[Pommer]

George Floyd’s death. Was it the result of discrimination? Did the majority of people say it was?

You’ve already defended the system by throwing ex-Officer Chauvin under the bus,

No it wasn’t, it was the result of one bad cop who made a bad decision. We have over 600,000 police officers in the US arresting people of all colors everyday and the reason George Floyd’s death came as such a shock to everyone is because it’s a very rare case. This only goes to prove that the vast majority of police officers don’t actually behave that way.

So let’s move on to an earlier incident, the murder of Ahmaud Aubrey; initially there were no charges filed against anyone for two months (and then only after public outcry). Mightn’t this, a situation that saw a respected retired former LEO hunt down a black man who had the audacity to be in the wrong neighborhood, be a case of systemic racism?

 

[gaara4158]

That is a recent redefinition of "systemic racism" (not unlike the recent redefinitions of "white privilege" and "racism" itself) created for the purpose of having an argument for a problem that actually has other roots.

No it isn’t. But if you’re not willing to accept that as the definition of systemic racism, do you at least agree that the phenomenon being described actually exists? It seems that you must, otherwise you wouldn’t need to bother nitpicking definitions.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No it wasn’t, it was the result of one bad cop who made a bad decision. We have over 600,000 police officers in the US arresting people of all colors everyday and the reason George Floyd’s death came as such a shock to everyone is because it’s a very rare case. This only goes to prove that the vast majority of police officers don’t actually behave that way.

Indeed...it's strange to see people point to that incident or a few similar ones and say they represent "police culture".

For example, when we look at the gimblers' guild (Gimblers Union Hierarchy) for ethical violations by guild paying members....you'll see that it's only about 1 in every 1000 gimblers who ever get kicked out of the guild for ethical violations.

It would be wrong to suggest, let alone describe, the work culture of the GUH by looking at the 1 gimbler who violated ethical principles instead of the 999 who don't.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You’ve already defended the system by throwing ex-Officer Chauvin under the bus,

Throwing him under the bus?

You don't think we should hold officers accountable?

So let’s move on to an earlier incident, the murder of Ahmaud Aubrey; initially there were no charges filed against anyone for two months (and then only after public outcry). Mightn’t this, a situation that saw a respected retired former LEO hunt down a black man who had the audacity to be in the wrong neighborhood, be a case of systemic racism?

Are we still discussing police or just anything now?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Systemic racism doesn’t require any racist actors or laws to enforce explicitly racist rules - it is merely the result of nominally unbiased systems operating the same towards members of all demographics, but whose effects differ along racial lines.

You're describing systems with "procedural fairness" as systemically racist because they have....disproportionate outcomes amongst various racial groups?

Tying this back in with policing, we established earlier that police are prone to unjustified excessive violence. Now, even assuming there is a perfectly fair reason to deploy more patrols into predominantly Black neighborhoods, the inevitable result is more Black people being exposed to the risk of an unjust police encounter.

Sure, in much the same way a person who has a speeding trap set up on their route to work every day is at risk for getting caught speeding more often than his coworkers who drive a different route.

Thus, while no one’s being racist individually, one racial group suffers more than others as a result of systems working normally. That’s what systemic racism is, despite what reactionary pundits on the Daily Wire might say.

I'm not sure we're even describing a problem anymore...because it sounds like the issue has more to do with your idealized expectations of outcomes than anything police or criminals are doing.

Regardless, sticking with my "speed trap" analogy, I'm curious about what you think a solution would look like? I'd simply tell people to stop speeding and obey posted speed limits. If police see a noticeable change in the number and severity of speeders....we should expect them to reallocate their limited resources.

 

[Pommer]

Are we still discussing police or just anything now?

Feb. 23, 2020: Ahmaud Arbery, 25, is shot three times and killed in the Satilla Shores neighborhood outside Brunswick.

Police arrive within minutes and speak to father and son Travis and Gregory McMichael, as well as William "Roddie" Bryan, at the scene, who detail chasing Arbery and shooting him, believing him to be a neighborhood thief who had stolen from a construction site.

Glynn County District Attorney Jackie Johnson recuses herself from the case since Gregory McMichael was a former longtime investigator for the DA's office.

When Johnson steps aside from the case, it goes to Waycross Judicial Circuit District Attorney George E. Barnhill, who also recuses himself, citing a connection to one of the defendants.

No arrests are made.

 

[gaara4158]

You're describing systems with "procedural fairness" as systemically racist because they have....disproportionate outcomes amongst various racial groups?

I have you on ignore, but somehow I’m seeing this reply, so here’s a rare response from me. Yes. Literally, yes. Don’t look so surprised. This can’t be the first time someone has pointed this out to you.

I'm not sure we're even describing a problem anymore...because it sounds like the issue has more to do with your idealized expectations of outcomes than anything police or criminals are doing.

Regardless, sticking with my "speed trap" analogy, I'm curious about what you think a solution would look like? I'd simply tell people to stop speeding and obey posted speed limits. If police see a noticeable change in the number and severity of speeders....we should expect them to reallocate their limited resources.

Sure, it doesn’t seem like a problem to the one who doesn’t have a multitude of speed traps along his daily commute to work. It is for the one who does. We can discuss what solutions would look like after you admit the problem exists. That is, after all, the subject of this thread.