Skip to main content

View Diary: Stop-and-frisk on trial (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'll keep giving it a go. (0+ / 0-)
    "replied many times with patience.  But you continued arguing.  And you were outright insulting."
    My interactions with others are mostly irrelevant. I admitted I acted pissy and that for watever reasons was because I was insulted myself. Id gladly move on while speaking with you/others.  
    "I'm willing to guess you have no POC friends.  If you did, these statistics would make perfect sense to you, as well as the totally specious reasons behind the stops they experienced."
    You would be wrong. The majority of the people I am friends with and interact with on a daily basis are minorities  due to various qualifiers.
    "You were replied to by no less than five (actually, I believe six) people who disagreed with you, not just the diarist.  Yet you persist in presuming we are all wrong."
    I do not simply believe what others say. Particularly on an internet form where people are obviously going to biased and represent extreme points of view. Quotes and numbers from reputable sources make arguments. Not repeating the same lines over and over again. If I followed your logic and I was on a RW board I was be yelling about how Obama was Osama or something like that.
    You did a good job with that proving that many civil rights organizations were involved with this movement. That however does not prove their concerns legitimate
    I found one line particularly interesting in which I did not have a counter point.

    “How do you account for the fact that cops are stopping and frisking mostly people of color even in neighborhoods that are mostly white? “

    This if true would/should warrant a closer look. moviemeister76’s comment was informative. No one else bothered even to address my point in the slightest. They simply made condescending remarks about going to other areas of the city and that I would get a different perspective. Which was half my point to start with… Different areas of the city have vastly different experiences and populations.

    Now to actually verify that racism is at play they would need to analyze demographic trends in the areas,  race, class etc etc etc. That would be a good rigorous job.  I did not expect that here but at least SOME attempt to look into the numbers and not simply believe whatever your community is telling you, would be a good thing. Instead what happened here is simply mob mentality.

    “I cannot agree with you; I've done my best to back up the diarist's statistics with some others you might find more palatable, or might at least provide substantiating evidence, yet still you refuse to read those statistics as truth.  Still you keep trying to make your false claim.”
    I trust the facts you presented. To me. I agree nearly 300 civil rights groups think this is a problem. I agree 685,000 people 87% were African-american or latino.  These facts by themselves do not prove the program is racist. Those are facts which get people to START to look into a program to see if it was racist.
    “Have you watched the videos?”
    Sorry No  I have not watched the videos. But I’ve been reading the articles people post.
    “And are you really going to cite NY Mag. as a reliable source?”  
    No and I do not need to. The fact that some areas.. In particular the ones at the top of the ACLU’s list are more dangerous…is self evident. I quoted the first source I found with numbers. The reference was icing on the cake and the “fact” is self evident enough that anyone who know NYMAG well enough to question it, should also know the self evidences… or lack their of.

    Let me turn this around. Do you doubt those numbers? Do you doubt that the area’s with the highest rates of “stop and frisk” are vastly more dangerous than other areas of the city?  Picking on NYmag for the sake of it is just diverting attention for the fact it shows. This is insulting unless you actually disagree with the numbers. Which no one has so far (that ive seen).

    “To continue this discussion is fruitless.  For both of us.  You will not hear the answers you want, and I will only grow more frustrated.”
    I will keep giving it a go.  I would honestly like to see the statistics which would show more light in the topic. The honest truth is I do not have time to either prove or disprove them. Plus the "movement" will need to generate these statistics eventually if they want to win a court case.
    “Please do not impugn this diarist's perceptions, statistics, or observations any further.  You are wrong, frankly, and arguing the point further with you is an exercise in futility.”
    Cant do sorry.
    •  I'm done with this. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I'm not going to sit here digging up statistics and examples to satisfy you.

      I disagree with you on every point, and don't understand why we keep having to dredge this up every few days.

      Do your own research, draw your own conclusions.  I'm out.

      "Throwing a knuckleball for a strike is like throwing a butterfly with hiccups across the street into your neighbor's mailbox." -- Willie Stargell

      by Yasuragi on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 06:46:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am doing my own research (0+ / 0-)

        I am interested in the statistics.

        I am not interested in any of the examples. I am sure there are at least singular cases of racism. Those singular examples have no barring at all on the overall status of the program.

        "Do your own research,"

        Id be glad to recommend the same to everyone on this topic.

        Unfortunately next to noone has bothered to do anything close to serious due diligence. People read the headline and that is all they get. they than proceed to parrot the talking points without questioning.

        This is an important topic and is worth far more thought than people are putting into it.

        •  So everyone's wrong but you? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Denise Oliver Velez

          "Throwing a knuckleball for a strike is like throwing a butterfly with hiccups across the street into your neighbor's mailbox." -- Willie Stargell

          by Yasuragi on Sat Mar 30, 2013 at 06:05:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Everyone eh? (0+ / 0-)

            The DKOS community who responds and participates in any particular discussion is hardly a group of diverse viewpoints.  

            As such the community is EXTREMELY vulnerable to "group think" and rather hostile opposing viewpoints.

            Which IMHO is rather not conductive to the "goal of more and better democrats". Shutting down discussion and pushing away people who support the general platform is not a grand idea.

            If my opinion that "Hey I am not sure this program is racist"  was so unique do you really think the NYD would still be supporting it. As well as many of NYC's population

            Or if the general community consensus that"OMG THIS IS SO RACIST" was actually what NYCer's actually think, that the population would not have already demanded the end to the program?

            NYC broke 80%  pro Obama

            40% support stop and frisk

            Meaning at least 20% of Obama supporters in one of the most liberal locations in the united states think the program is a good idea.

            Probably a non insignificant portion of those who are against program are against it for non racial reasons.

            Its probably not a good, smart or reasonable idea to go around launching accusations that at LEAST 20% of Obama's supporters, support racist policies against minorities.  That just does not seem like a reasonable accusation.

            I myself am not even a hardened supporter of the program. I just feel the need to speak out when the community launches into ravenous attack mode without any kind of real information. When that happens someone....anyone needs to speak out.

          •  FYI I found a very good analytic analysis of the (0+ / 0-)



            If you agree with the findings fine.. if you do not agree with the findings.... to have a legitimate argument and opinion you need to find an opposing piece of  analytic research.

            conclusion Yes there is some racism. No it is not the defining characteristic of the program. It seems like the program is no more or less racially biased than the NYD in general.

            Our results using more precise benchmarks do not eliminate the observed racial disparities. However, they do indicate that the disparities are much smaller than the raw statistics would suggest. This result does not absolve the NYPD of the need to monitor the issue,
            but it also implies that a large-scale restructuring of NYPD SQF policies and procedures is
            point contrary to the original author's argument
            "We found that black pedestrians were stopped at a rate that is 20 to 30 percent lower
            than their representation in crime-suspect descriptions. Hispanic pedestrians were stopped
            disproportionately more, by 5 to 10 percent, than their representation among crime-suspect
            descriptions would predict.
            another interesting point
            White suspects were slightly likelier to be issued a summons than were similarly situated
            nonwhite suspects (5.7 percent versus 5.2 percent). On the other hand, arrest rates for
            white suspects were slightly lower than those for similarly situated nonwhites (4.8 percent
            versus 5.1 percent).
            The author's post and the communities reaction are far closer to republican reactionism than the actions of a truly informed population.  

            All of this information is great information, that is absolutely necessarily to make an informed opinion.

            Forming an opinion without this kind of research is a disservice to our duty to become informed voters.  

            •  You found a 2007 "study" commissioned (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              by Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.

              This is 2013, and Ray Kelly still doesn't want anyone from outside his Department to have any oversight, even after the fiasco of the SCU.  

              Police who investigate themselves - bogus.

              Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

              by Denise Oliver Velez on Sat Mar 30, 2013 at 03:13:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  A study which does (0+ / 0-)

                recommend some action be taken is not good for you eh?

                Perhaps there is reason to consider any potential bias in the report. I do not deny that. But when you turn out a report, or an entity which supports your point of view..... I am sure it would be fair to... you know... think your report may be biased as well? No?

                However you know the great thing about doing a professional analysis with statistics etc? If you are wrong it can be proven with math.

                Although I am very glad you bothered to read the report at least far enough to realize that their may be a conflict of interest. I have reason to trust Rand Corp as at least a somewhat independent source of analysis....which is probably why the NYPD went to them in the first place.

                "To date, 32 recipients of the Nobel Prize, primarily in the fields of economics and physics, have been involved or associated with RAND at some point in their career"

                Again forgive me if I trust an organization with those credentials more than I trust some random blogger who  dismisses valid reports without providing any quantifiable and  verifiable  criticisms..    

                Im going to go out on a limb here say you probably knew about the said report before.

                don't you think it is a little biased and...intentionally misinformative.. to present your postings and conclusions as absolute without reference to significant works which counter your points?

                Ps. After spending enough time responding here I decided to re-read the original post. One of your sources  


                cites a source I found very interesting and informative.


                Despite your dismissive attitude to the source I cited. The numerical analysis from my reading at 3am seems very similar in both reports.

                The main difference seems to be

                "Even after controlling for crime, local social conditions and the concentration of
                police officers in particular areas of the City, Blacks and Latinos are significantly "

                "However, they do indicate that the disparities are much smaller than the raw statistics would suggest. This result does not absolve the NYPD of the need to monitor the issue,"

                Either way I found the arguments a little more convincing in the RAND report but Fagan report did make me more receptive. Im glad we have courts to figure this out.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site