If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gothamist)   Cop secretly records his supervisor ordering him to assume young black men are criminals in a) rural Georgia b) small town in Mississippi c) the Bronx   (gothamist.com) divider line 318
    More: Sad, Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack  
•       •       •

13256 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Mar 2013 at 6:36 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



318 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-26 10:31:07 AM

profplump: jasnotron: So you'd spend the budget limiting their first amendment rights ? Seriously their gangster rapper, screw anything that moves and then don't be a dad culture is the main problem.

"Their" culture? Did you give up your US citizenship? Because I'm pretty sure "their" culture is also "your" culture -- and therefore also your responsibility to fix. Outgrouping people and then blaming them for your problems is not a valid solution for any social problem.


Do you share a culture with a West Virignian coal mining family ? Urban culture is different than an Alaskan family that lives out in this the wilderness. Dont be obtuse and try to claim all Americans have the same culture.
 
2013-03-26 01:39:34 PM
jasnotron            2013-03-25 06:30:22 PM  
    
I know they are people and I know stop and frisk is wrong. Its Constitutionally wrong and morally wrong. What I'm saying it that there is a reason for profiling at times. Its a necessary part of police work.


No it's not. That is blatantly wrong. Profiling is a very bad way to police any community and does not work.

We need to stop calling it "profiling" and "stop and frisk" and just call it what it is: Jim Crow. It's not the new Jim Crow. It's the same old "we will treat you differently based on your skin color" Jim Crow.

It was wrong in the 1700's, 1800's, 1900"s and it's wrong now. And may I remind you, it doesn't work. It only makes law abiding people, who would turn in the criminal elements or be more helpful to the police, distrustful and with good reason.

This system does not work.
It is not good policing.
It's just plain racist and wrong.
 
2013-03-26 01:47:40 PM

Hermione_Granger: jasnotron            2013-03-25 06:30:22 PM  
    
I know they are people and I know stop and frisk is wrong. Its Constitutionally wrong and morally wrong. What I'm saying it that there is a reason for profiling at times. Its a necessary part of police work.

No it's not. That is blatantly wrong. Profiling is a very bad way to police any community and does not work.

We need to stop calling it "profiling" and "stop and frisk" and just call it what it is: Jim Crow. It's not the new Jim Crow. It's the same old "we will treat you differently based on your skin color" Jim Crow.

It was wrong in the 1700's, 1800's, 1900"s and it's wrong now. And may I remind you, it doesn't work. It only makes law abiding people, who would turn in the criminal elements or be more helpful to the police, distrustful and with good reason.

This system does not work.
It is not good policing.
It's just plain racist and wrong.


"Profiling" in your case is just stopping people because they fit a "description", for no reason other than to stop them.

Some people might also say "profiling" is like if there was a witness to a murder who said the person they saw was a "Black male around 5' 11"".... does that mean that them stopping black males around 5' 11" in the area of the crime is "profiling", any more than doing the same thing if they saw a 6' 4" white guy and stopping all of them?

But, you could just always have an "open case" with various descriptions you want to "profile", and then you are given your reason to "stop" people.  So, that delineation doesn't even really help if someone is determined to "profile" in general.
 
2013-03-26 01:52:19 PM

MeanJean: Fair enough. Kindly reiterate why targeting black people is justified. I'd normally use the search function to locate the post but your screen name appears well over a hundred times in this thread, so I don't feel like searching for a needle in a haystack.


I was referring to my answer for why more blacks are arrested for smoking pot.  The police don't get called to, for example, my gated neighborhood and go inside to see my neighbor smoking in the living room.  They do, however, respond to the projects on the outskirts of downtown about every 30 minutes (police scanners are interesting) on many nights to investigate gun shots, thefts, robberies, gambling in the breezeway etc.  When they are walking around trying to figure out where the gunshots that someone heard came from they often stumble upon someone in the stairwell smoking pot.  Ta-da!  Racist arrest!  Racist arrest!

Why do I emphasize institutionalized racism over culture? Because I don't believe that black people are anywhere near as stupid, short-sighted, and selfish as you like to make them out to be. But hey, maybe that's because I'm not a racist.

You're resorting to the tactics of the proven liar in this thread.  I didn't make those assertions at any point.  When your argument is weak just call the other person a racist and you win, right?

Again, single motherhood is the biggest cultural issue here.  It's 70%.  That's huge.  It's connected to the future criminality of the children raised in that environment.  What institutionalized racism causes 70% of black mothers to be unwed?

MeanJean: And that is because you're an overprivileged white guy who has never had to deal with institutionalized racism firsthand and would much rather place all the burden on the most powerless, marginalized people in society then (heaven forbid) raise a finger to make the tiniest difference by critically examining institutions.

I really find it hard to believe that a guy who lives in a gated community knows anything about what blacks in the projects experience in their day to day lives. You know about as much about the day to day life of the average black person as a dolphin knows about mountain climbing.

You're selfish, and you are trying to justify your selfishness and lack of concern with the burdens of the poor and minorities with a smokescreen of steaming, self-serving, smug bullshiat.


Lots of assumptions (wrong ones), name calling, and rambling.  Not sure what you were trying to say here other than "whitey is evil, feel sorry for everyone else and their awful plight."
 
2013-03-26 01:54:10 PM

Acharne: Silly Jesus: Acharne: Silly Jesus: So you're shown to be a liar and you flee?  Niiiice.

I am not a liar. It turns out you do not want to have an adult conversation, it's too bad, you were coming around and we were finding common ground.

But, turns out you had no interest and called me a liar, so, I'm done with you. I'm at work, I have spent far too much time on this thread already, and now I've got a guy calling me a liar who just a short time ago was all hoppin' mad at me for calling you a racist, and explaining your racism.

We almost had something.

You lied and it can be demonstrated by simply looking through the thread.  I never said the inflammatory thing that you claimed that I said, and you know it, otherwise you could easily quote it.  You were losing the argument so you made up a racist comment and attributed it to me, and when I called you on it, you were suddenly too busy to carry on the conversation.

Not shocking that someone with your views would be so spineless and resort to such tactics and then run away.

Your Boobies in the thread had 'libby libs'. You then went on to justify the FBI stats as 'totally accurate and totally not biased' and then argued that it is about culture. I think much of those statistics gets used by racists to justify racism. You did it here, don't pretend you didn't. You actually *do* understand this stuff, but you're too goddamn up on a high horse to have a real conversation. I should have known right there I was not dealing with someone worth the time of day. I was not losing the argument, but if you want to 'declare yourself the winner', I cannot stop you. I see you can handle calling others names but cannot take being called a racist. It makes you defensive and frankly, apparently, it makes you smarter since your posts begin to take on a positive narrative.

Frankly, we both failed here. It's not about calling people names that I don't agree with. I called racists racist, and I disagrees with racism. I never lied, I *do ...


Thanks for the apology for making up lies about me and attempting to impugn my character.  Apology accepted.
 
2013-03-26 01:55:05 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Silly Jesus (farkied: Jesus must indeed seem silly to this guy): Single motherhood is the greatest predictor of future criminal activity of the children even when race / income / location etc. are controlled for...and the democratic plantation has made it attractive for 70% of black mothers to be single.

DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD!


The crime rate actually dropped drastically about 15 years after abortions were legalized.
 
2013-03-26 02:00:20 PM

profplump: Silly Jesus: Then you'd have to do away with liberal policies that provide a financial incentive for the father to not stick around and for the government to raise the child.  And that's a non-starter.  That would ruin the modern day plantation model that the democrats have worked so hard to cultivate.  It's done more to harm the black family unit than any republican policy has even come close to.

Exactly what policy are you referring to that only applies to blacks? Because last time I checked the same incentives would be equally available to whites. Which makes it an unlikely cause for the problem you describe. Did I miss a black-only incentive program to destroy families?

Also I think families should be eliminated as method for childrearing in the first place, so I'd fully support a plan that ends all incentives related to any sort of family behavior. If you want to talk non-starter, tell people about your plan to take away their "right" to control "their" children -- economic policy changes, even those related to political power, are cakewalk in comparison.


Read this for starters...

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2011/10/06/polici es -of-left-often-hurt-blacks.html

Minimum wage laws, urban renewal, minority home ownership programs etc. are just a few of the liberal programs that end up harming blacks disproportionately.
 
2013-03-26 02:44:13 PM

Silly Jesus: Thanks for the apology for making up lies about me and attempting to impugn my character.  Apology accepted.


You sound twelve.
 
2013-03-26 02:48:47 PM
Silly Jesus

What institutionalized racism causes 70% of black mothers to be unwed?

Its kinda hard to raise kids with a father if the father has been put in jail by a system that gives him a far longer sentence than his white counterpart.


I didn't make those assertions at any point.

Arguing that  black people are just plain more stupid, irresponsible, and reckless is racist. Period. Its irrelevant whether or not you think its innate or "cultural", its still racist.

I was referring to my answer for why more blacks are arrested for smoking pot.  The police don't get called to, for example, my gated neighborhood and go inside to see my neighbor smoking in the living room.  They do, however, respond to the projects on the outskirts of downtown about every 30 minutes (police scanners are interesting) on many nights to investigate gun shots, thefts, robberies, gambling in the breezeway etc.  When they are walking around trying to figure out where the gunshots that someone heard came from they often stumble upon someone in the stairwell smoking pot.  Ta-da!  Racist arrest!  Racist arrest!

So according to your logic...black people supposedly do more reckless shiat than their white counterparts, and the cops are likely to stumble upon them when investigating other crimes. Therefore, its constitutionally okay to stop and frisk people for no other reason than them being black. Yeah...no.

This debate is going nowhere and you're still a racist. Welcome to my ignore list.
 
2013-03-26 03:41:25 PM

Acharne: Silly Jesus: Thanks for the apology for making up lies about me and attempting to impugn my character.  Apology accepted.

You sound twelve.


I care a great deal what a liar's opinion of me is.
 
2013-03-26 03:42:15 PM

MeanJean: Silly Jesus

What institutionalized racism causes 70% of black mothers to be unwed?

Its kinda hard to raise kids with a father if the father has been put in jail by a system that gives him a far longer sentence than his white counterpart.


I didn't make those assertions at any point.

Arguing that  black people are just plain more stupid, irresponsible, and reckless is racist. Period. Its irrelevant whether or not you think its innate or "cultural", its still racist.

I was referring to my answer for why more blacks are arrested for smoking pot.  The police don't get called to, for example, my gated neighborhood and go inside to see my neighbor smoking in the living room.  They do, however, respond to the projects on the outskirts of downtown about every 30 minutes (police scanners are interesting) on many nights to investigate gun shots, thefts, robberies, gambling in the breezeway etc.  When they are walking around trying to figure out where the gunshots that someone heard came from they often stumble upon someone in the stairwell smoking pot.  Ta-da!  Racist arrest!  Racist arrest!

So according to your logic...black people supposedly do more reckless shiat than their white counterparts, and the cops are likely to stumble upon them when investigating other crimes. Therefore, its constitutionally okay to stop and frisk people for no other reason than them being black. Yeah...no.

This debate is going nowhere and you're still a racist. Welcome to my ignore list.


You're incredibly dense.

I'll return the favor.
 
2013-03-26 04:03:47 PM

MeanJean: Silly Jesus

What institutionalized racism causes 70% of black mothers to be unwed?

Its kinda hard to raise kids with a father if the father has been put in jail by a system that gives him a far longer sentence than his white counterpart.


*shakes MeanJean's hand*

At least we tried. The point I have to make though, is that we were so close. You got him to open up about it better than I did and I applaud you.
 
2013-03-26 04:51:30 PM
Acharne

*shakes MeanJean's hand*

At least we tried. The point I have to make though, is that we were so close. You got him to open up about it better than I did and I applaud you.


Thank you. I'm glad fark has a few sensible people in it. You are now favorited.
 
2013-03-26 05:20:06 PM

dletter: Hermione_Granger: jasnotron            2013-03-25 06:30:22 PM  
    
I know they are people and I know stop and frisk is wrong. Its Constitutionally wrong and morally wrong. What I'm saying it that there is a reason for profiling at times. Its a necessary part of police work.

No it's not. That is blatantly wrong. Profiling is a very bad way to police any community and does not work.

We need to stop calling it "profiling" and "stop and frisk" and just call it what it is: Jim Crow. It's not the new Jim Crow. It's the same old "we will treat you differently based on your skin color" Jim Crow.

It was wrong in the 1700's, 1800's, 1900"s and it's wrong now. And may I remind you, it doesn't work. It only makes law abiding people, who would turn in the criminal elements or be more helpful to the police, distrustful and with good reason.

This system does not work.
It is not good policing.
It's just plain racist and wrong.

"Profiling" in your case is just stopping people because they fit a "description", for no reason other than to stop them.

Some people might also say "profiling" is like if there was a witness to a murder who said the person they saw was a "Black male around 5' 11"".... does that mean that them stopping black males around 5' 11" in the area of the crime is "profiling", any more than doing the same thing if they saw a 6' 4" white guy and stopping all of them?

But, you could just always have an "open case" with various descriptions you want to "profile", and then you are given your reason to "stop" people.  So, that delineation doesn't even really help if someone is determined to "profile" in general.


You are wrong. There is a difference between "racial profiling" which is looking for anyone black or latino and searching someone based on a set of known characteristics like a black male of approximate shade and height. Unless you think every black male is the same height and skin color - that would include everyone from Prince to Will Smith - from Kat Williams to Shaquille O'Neal.

You seem to think that the police only stop the men they're looking for. I'm telling you that they don't. They stop every black male and don't seem to give a shiat whether they have the right ones or not as long as they're stopping black men.

That is racist bullshiat. Period.
 
2013-03-26 05:38:48 PM
And NONE of what you said addresses my original premise of just being HUMAN.

Don't condone the ill treatment of others that you wouldn't accept for yourself.

How farking hard is that? Really?

I get that you probably don't see people of other colors as human, but really, get a farking clue already.
 
2013-03-26 07:01:39 PM

Hermione_Granger: And NONE of what you said addresses my original premise of just being HUMAN.

Don't condone the ill treatment of others that you wouldn't accept for yourself.

How farking hard is that? Really?

I get that you probably don't see people of other colors as human, but really, get a farking clue already.


You seem concerned.
 
2013-03-27 11:37:05 AM

Hermione_Granger: dletter: Hermione_Granger: jasnotron            2013-03-25 06:30:22 PM  
    
I know they are people and I know stop and frisk is wrong. Its Constitutionally wrong and morally wrong. What I'm saying it that there is a reason for profiling at times. Its a necessary part of police work.

No it's not. That is blatantly wrong. Profiling is a very bad way to police any community and does not work.

We need to stop calling it "profiling" and "stop and frisk" and just call it what it is: Jim Crow. It's not the new Jim Crow. It's the same old "we will treat you differently based on your skin color" Jim Crow.

It was wrong in the 1700's, 1800's, 1900"s and it's wrong now. And may I remind you, it doesn't work. It only makes law abiding people, who would turn in the criminal elements or be more helpful to the police, distrustful and with good reason.

This system does not work.
It is not good policing.
It's just plain racist and wrong.

"Profiling" in your case is just stopping people because they fit a "description", for no reason other than to stop them.

Some people might also say "profiling" is like if there was a witness to a murder who said the person they saw was a "Black male around 5' 11"".... does that mean that them stopping black males around 5' 11" in the area of the crime is "profiling", any more than doing the same thing if they saw a 6' 4" white guy and stopping all of them?

But, you could just always have an "open case" with various descriptions you want to "profile", and then you are given your reason to "stop" people.  So, that delineation doesn't even really help if someone is determined to "profile" in general.

You are wrong. There is a difference between "racial profiling" which is looking for anyone black or latino and searching someone based on a set of known characteristics like a black male of approximate shade and height. Unless you think every black male is the same height and skin color - that would include everyone from Prince to Will Smith - f ...


I don't disagree.... I am just saying that they could conveniently have a slew of "Open" cases with 15-20 different combinations of approx heights/weights of "black males" that need to be looked for, which gives them "just cause" (in only the strictest legal sense) to do "racial profiling".
 
2013-03-28 09:25:06 AM
<i>dletter [TotalFark]        2013-03-27 11:37:05 AM


Hermione_Granger: dletter: Hermione_Granger: jasnotron            2013-03-25 06:30:22 PM

I know they are people and I know stop and frisk is wrong. Its Constitutionally wrong and morally wrong. What I'm saying it that there is a reason for profiling at times. Its a necessary part of police work.
No it's not. That is blatantly wrong. Profiling is a very bad way to police any community and does not work.
We need to stop calling it "profiling" and "stop and frisk" and just call it what it is: Jim Crow. It's not the new Jim Crow. It's the same old "we will treat you differently based on your skin color" Jim Crow.

I don't disagree.... I am just saying that they could conveniently have a slew of "Open" cases with 15-20 different combinations of approx heights/weights of "black males" that need to be looked for, which gives them "just cause" (in only the strictest legal sense) to do "racial profiling"</i>

I'm sorry. I'm going to have to write you off as a clueless white person now.
1. You do disagree with what I'm saying. We are not saying the same thing.
2. Racial profiling is bullshiat.
3. The lengths you willing to go to prove it's ok makes you a racist.
4. This is why we can't have real discussions of racism - because white people always want to prove that their racist bullshiat is perfectly fine. It's not by the way.

I'm done.
 
Displayed 18 of 318 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report