You Do the Math

26 05 2014

Portland, Oregon


Kids banned from playing outside?

(STLMoms) – Imagine being banned from playing outside your home. That’s the reality facing some families in Portland, Oregon.

An apartment complex there is posting fliers is notified residents that kids living there are not allowed to play outside.

The flier state that “residents will not be permitted to play in gardens or landscape area except where specifically permitted.”

But families living there say there are no designated areas for kids to play. However, the complex does have designated areas for dogs.  The property manager says the new “no play” policy is for safety.

Well, “safety” in a round about way.

Let’s see if you can put all the pieces together like I have.

If you need some hints:

1.  Consider which blog you’re reading

2.  Consider how I’ve categorized this blog post

3.  Don’t mind the first comment in the original article.

Eric the Know-Nothing

28 04 2014

Washington, D.C.

They already do this, Eric.

It’s called the National Crime Victimization Survey.  The results of it are compared to data for stops, searches, arrests, convictions and incarcerations to see if there is some statistically significant disparity.  Year in and year out, the results are that there is no disparity between racial differences in NAMs being involved in the criminal justice system that can’t be explained by the fact that they commit more crime.

Of course, I think Holder does know this, but he’s only keeping the race fires alive.  Which is fine by me, because sometimes actions lead to opposite but unequal reactions.

Ballpark Village: No Blacks Allowed

27 03 2014


This was just one item in my midweek run-down earlier today, but I think I’m going to move it into its own separate post.

Ballpark Village has essentially put up a “No Blacks Allowed” sign, and has essentially become a Sundown Town.

“But blogmeister, it doesn’t say anything about race.”

Even if there wasn’t an obvious hint here, it’s easy to read between the lines.

But they make it really easy.

Notice that an MBE (Minority Business Enterprise) will provide the security and hired guns to enforce these rules. That’s battlespace preparation slash a preemptive strike for when the racial profiling accusations are inevitably made.


BPV walks it back some.

Smart Cop

3 12 2013



In the long run, they were telling the truth.

But I still won’t blame the cop.

Because the cop paid attention and noticed things.

I’m also not blaming the cop for his calling out her parents for their questionable parenting.  Even though this turned to be exactly as advertised, I wouldn’t let any 13-year old daughter of mine go on a long road trip only in the company of a 22-year old and a 29-year old of any color.

Christmas Comes Early

29 11 2013


In a few weeks, the BCS college football teams will be announced.  A few days later, the dork in Orlando with a fax machine will release a report about the race disparities in graduation rates at those schools and their sports programs.

But the dork in Orlando with a fax machine need not wait — Here’s an early gift for him:

Black NFL players arrested nearly 10 times as often as whites

A police officer in Cincinnati watched a large black man get into his car and turn on the engine after being told it was illegally parked.

The officer thought the man was trying to avoid a parking ticket and told him to stop. So the man — Matthias Askew, at the time an NFL player — stopped his Cadillac Escalade, got out and was arrested in a scuffle with several officers. Police used a stun gun on Askew four times, alleging he resisted arrest.

A judge rejected the police account and cleared Askew of all charges.

“They tased him simply because he was a big black man, not because he did anything to make them fear for their safety,” Askew’s former attorney, Ken Lawson, told USA TODAY Sports about the 2006 incident.

For many black players in the NFL, it’s a familiar scene. Of 687 NFL player arrests since January 2000, Askew’s was one of 294 that came in a traffic stop, according to a USA TODAY Sports investigation. In a league in which 66% of the players are black and 31% are white, black players were arrested nearly 10 times as often as white players (260 to 28), accounting for 88% of those NFL traffic-stop arrests.

That percentage is consistent with the overall NFL arrest numbers: Of the 687 total player arrests in the USA TODAY Sports database that spans 14 seasons, 607 involved black players — 88%, a disproportionate rate sociologists attribute to several social factors in the black population at large, including a disproportionate rate of poverty and single-parent backgrounds. Those factors also include profiling, civil rights experts and NFL players say.

So the poverty of black NFL players (minimum NFL salary for the 2013 season:  $420,000 for rookies graduated up to $940,000 for 10+ year vets) is the cause of their being arrested way more often than their white colleagues.

However, the disproportion isn’t as severe as it seems, especially from the headline.  First off, of the 687 total arrests, 607 are black, and 80 are non-black, which doesn’t necessarily mean white.  But that leaves a raw disparity of 7.6 times, not 10 times.  But don’t forget that while 88% of arrests are black, 66% of players are black, and on the flip side, 12% of arrests are non-black while 34% of players are non-black.  If my methodology is correct, (607/80)/(66/34)=3.9, meaning that a black NFL player is “only” about four times more likely to be arrested than a non-black player.  Again, most of the non-blacks are white, but it also includes a few Hispanics and Polynesians.   I put “only” in quotes because in the universe of black-white and black-nonblack crime disparities of this statistical nature, that’s pretty low in terms of a multiple number in disfavor of blacks.  That means that just on that alone, a black NFL player is better behaved than blacks in general, or whites in the NFL are somewhat more criminal than whites in general, or a little of both.

Then there’s another factor:  Arrests for what crimes?  You can be arrested for murder, or you can be arrested for having a little bit of weed.  It is my estimation that black NFL players who are arrested are arrested for crimes that tend not to be as serious as the kind of crimes that blacks in general are arrested for.


For comparison, in the 2011 NFL season, the average player salary was $1.9 million, while the median was $770,000.  So a few very high paid players blew the curve for the average, and it’s probably still that way.


Of the arrests made only as a result of traffic stops, 260 were black, 28 were white, in a league that’s 66% black and 31% white.  (This is where the “nearly 10″ in this headline comes from, examining only arrests as a result of a traffic stop and only black and white players.  Still, 260/28 = 9.3, closer to 9 than 10.)  This means looking at traffic stop arrests alone and only black and white players alone, (260/28)/(66/31)=4.36.  That’s a disparity not much higher than all arrests of NFL players in general, (keep in mind that that 3.9 figure is blacks more likely than all non-blacks, not just whites alone), and still way less than the typical black-white crime disparity.


I tweeted Brent Schrotenboer, the author of this article, to ask him of the 80 non-black arrests, how many were white, and he tweeted back to me that number is 64.

So (607/64)/(66/31)=4.45.  Still not that bad from the black perspective.

Also, even though these are risky statistics for their insignificant 3% of all players, but blacks are 1.7 times more likely to be arrested than players who are neither black nor white, (in NFL parlance, mostly Hispanic or Polynesian), while they are in turn 2.6 times more likely than whites to be arrested.

Blacks < Others < Whites.  Where have we seen that pattern before?

Guess Who’s Not Coming to Dinner

6 08 2013


The most relevant part tells all:

The Bar Louie late night dress code required “all hats face forward, no excessively baggy clothing, no large chains worn outside, no sleeveless shirts for men, no large white t-shirts, no sweat pants, and no sunglasses”.

IOW, look human.

But some people would rather keep it real and do they thangs.

Everybody Does It

18 07 2013

Los Angeles

And sometimes, the people who think it’s wrong actually embrace it.

But It’s Just a Social Construct

8 07 2013

San Jose, California

And it has no biological basis in reality.  Haven’t you heard?


What I’ve Always Suspected

28 06 2013

New York City


NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg: Police stop minorities ‘too little’

NEW YORK (AP) – Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s remark that police “disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little,” as compared with suspects’ descriptions, is prompting criticism from police reform advocates and some mayoral candidates.

Bloomberg made the comment Friday on WOR-AM. City lawmakers voted Thursday to make it easier to bring racial profiling claims against police.

Eighty-seven percent of the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers stopped, questioned and sometimes frisked in recent years were black or Hispanic. These groups comprise 54 percent of the city population.

Bloomberg says the appropriate comparison isn’t to the population, but to the suspects’ descriptions. More than 90 percent of killing suspects are described as black or Hispanic.

The group Communities United for Police Reform calls Bloomberg’s view misinformation, noting that most stops aren’t spurred by descriptions.

That’s what I’ve always suspected.  The NYPD are deliberately SQFing a few extra whites and Asians than they otherwise would want to just to keep the civil rights jackals at bay.  OTOH, the case could be made that the differential between those SQFed being 87% b+H and murder suspects (a good proxy for those who commit all sorts of violent crime) being 90%+ b+H is statistically insignificant.

But this is like the death penalty:  Black groups complain of its “racism,” but the truth is that whites who are convicted of first degree murder are more likely, perhaps as much as twice as likely, actually to be executed than blacks who are convicted of first degree murder.

I Thought We Were Making Progress

14 05 2013


And the St. Louis County Police Department was getting better, too.  Until now.

Why fire him, when he was merely performing a valuable public service?  That being trying to prevent South County’s major shopping and entertainment venues from becoming too vibrant.

The Gap Gap

21 01 2013


Lots of laughs, but we get an admission of something we already knew:

In arrests, minority youth were nearly 85 percent more likely to be arrested than white youth statewide, the study found. But researchers said that number is likely much higher because counties count Latinos as white in their record keeping. Latino is an ethnicity, not a race.

Sarah Veele, one of the researchers from the Washington State Center for Court Research, said there isn’t a federal or state requirement for local agencies to track ethnicity in their juvenile-arrest data, so Latinos are put in the “white” category.

Which also means that white youth crime is far less bad than it seems, if Hispanics are counted as white.  Therefore, the black-white gap is even higher than reported.

Be warned, though:  This only applies to “bad” factors.  Hispanic crime victims are counted as Hispanic.  It’s only when it comes to crime perpetrators and welfare recipients are Hispanics counted as white, in order to make whites “seem” worse.


Once minority and white youth get to sentencing, the disparities begin to even out, Veele said, because judges usually follow sentencing guidelines.

“What we’re seeing is that the disparities are occurring earlier, such as arrests, referrals to juvenile court, and as you get deeper the outcomes are relatively comparable,” Veele said.

“The disparities occur earlier” because blacks commit more crime than Hispanics who in turn commit more crime than whites.  That’s why, genius.

But the admission that sentencing is relatively equal shouldn’t be glossed over.  The reason I want you to pay attention to that is that we’ll often get loaded research about how blacks and Hispanics often get “longer” sentences for supposedly the “same” crimes, when we know they’re not the same crimes and they’re not the same circumstances.

“The problem really starts early,” Gonzalez said. We need to look at “the link between juvenile justice, kids incarcerated and the achievement gap in schools. Most of the kids who end up in the juvenile system have some sort of contact with school discipline beforehand.”

Hooray.  The achievement gap in schools made an appearance.

In Pierce County, African-American youth are 2½ times more likely to be arrested.

More than whom?  It says it above:  More than “whites,” a category in which Hispanics are lumped in.  Yet another gap.

But to Gonzalez, the data backs up what he hears from kids.

“They don’t feel they’re trusted or respected by law enforcement,” Gonzalez said. “An officer is more likely to arrest a student of color rather than ask questions and talk things out.”

Yeah, because, you know, cops are hired to be chatty conversationalists, not to enforce the law.  That’s the problem with cops:  Unlike those students’ public school teachers, they really don’t care about the kids’ feelings or self-esteem at all.

I’ll Take Manhattan

4 09 2012

UMSL and New York City

KMOX Radio:

Study: Stop, Question, Frisk Doesn’t Reduce Crime

Despite claims by city officials, local researchers say the police tactic of stopping, questioning and frisking ‘suspicious’ people on the street had no impact on New York City’s two-decade long reduction in crime.

University of Missouri-St. Louis criminologists Richard Rosenfeld and Robert Fornango recently completed the first in-depth study of SQF, looking at statistics on a precinct-wide, year-to-year basis from 2003 to 2010, “If there are effects, what our analysis suggests is that they are probably very localized and dissipate pretty rapidly over time.”


He says what’s known so far certainly shows that New York City officials are wrong to credit the program with contributing to the decline in crime, “We couldn’t find evidence that stop, question and frisk was associated with year-to-year changes of crime at the precinct-level. It seems to me, given the available evidence, it’s a stretch for officials to attribute a decade-long crime drop that is city-wide to this program.”

As for St. Louis, Rosenfeld says he would recommend the city’s police department not adopt SQF but stick with its current tactic of using intelligence-driven patrols in high crime areas.

Of course two beancounter/criminologists affiliated with a university wants the major police department in their metropolitan areas to use “intelligence-driven” tactics.  Guess who specializes in that.  By “intelligence-driven,” Profs. Rosenfeld and Fornango don’t mean police having stool pidgeons on a string, they mean CompStat foolishness.

As far as this business about precinct-level versus city-wide, what that means it that SQF done in New York’s ghettos are barrios won’t reduce crime within the ghettos and barrios, but it will wind up reducing crime outside the ghettos and barrios, i.e. in the parts of the city that aren’t black and Hispanic, such as much of Manhattan and Staten Island.  What I mean by that is that if NYPD SQFs N’Deshawntavious in Harlem, it won’t result in N’Deshawntavious not jacking Shitavious in Harlem, but it will result in N’Deshantavious not robbing Abraham in the Upper East Side or Giovanni on Staten Island.

I’ve said it before here.  SQF isn’t going anywhere.  Democrat politicians might huff and puff to placate black preachers and Hispanic rabble rousers, but they won’t blow the house down because SQF keeps Jews in Manhattan safe, and Jews in Manhattan write big checks to Democrat politicians, think tanks, Super PACs, 527s and other affiliated interests, while blacks and Hispanics in Harlem, the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens are only expected to vote Democrat.  Democrats can’t do without money, but they can still win New York State even if a lot of blacks and Hispanics in New York City stay home on election day.

Logic Handicapped

11 06 2012


NYC mayor defends “stop and frisk” at black church

NEW YORK (Reuters) – New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg took his defense of the police department’s “Stop and Frisk” program to one of Brooklyn’s highest crime communities on Sunday, championing the program from the pulpit of a black church in Brownsville.


After Bloomberg left, the church’s 90-year-old pastor, Bishop A.D. Lyons, said he supports efforts to get guns off the streets, but he expressed frustration with what residents say is an unnecessarily aggressive implementation of the stop and frisk program in Brownsville.


“We have a lot of police who don’t want to be in Brownsville, and they have an attitude when they come into Brownsville and you’ve got to deal with that,” Lyons said. “They walk by you, and they won’t speak, and they have an attitude. I’ve been trying to get them to come into the sanctuary and just show up, show that we’re friends.

“I’ll agree that a lot of it is blacks carrying guns,” Lyons said. “But we’ve got to respect them, even if they are carrying guns.”

Earth to Bishop A.D. Lyons:  You can’t “get guns off the streets” (i.e. out of the hands of criminal blacks) without people with badges and police power searching criminal blacks for guns then confiscating them if they find them.

Do you think a cop is going to grind about having to patrol the ghetto?  I wonder if their “attitude” is merely a reaction to, and nowhere near as bad as, the same attitude some of the residents have for cops.

When Some People Say Jump (New York Story #3 Today)

8 06 2012


Here’s another think piece for you. From the Associated Press out of New York: “Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Monday proposed cutting the penalty for public possession of a small amount of marijuana, a change in state law that would defuse some criticism of the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk policy in minority communities. With three weeks remaining in the legislative session, Cuomo said his bill to reduce the criminal misdemeanor to a violation with a fine up to $100 would save thousands of New Yorkers, disproportionately black and Hispanic youths, from unnecessary arrests and criminal charges.

“‘There’s a blatant inconsistency. If you possess marijuana privately, it’s a violation. If you show it in public, it’s a crime,’ Cuomo said. ‘It’s incongruous. It’s inconsistent the way it’s been enforced. There have been additional complications in relation to the stop-and-frisk policy where there’s claims young people could have a small amount of marijuana in their pocket, where they’re stopped and frisked. The police officer says, “Turn out your pockets.” The marijuana is now in public view. It just went from a violation to a crime,'” and that’s not good.

“New York City prosecutors and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, whose offices handled almost 50,000 such criminal cases last year, endorsed [Cuomo]‘s plan. Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the bill largely mirrors the city police directive issued last year for officers to issue violations, not misdemeanors, ‘for small amounts of marijuana that come into open view during a search.'” Now, you heard about this, I’m sure, in the context: Here’s Doomberg who wants to stop you from being able to buy anything over 16 ounces (if it’s a Coke or a Pepsi or a 7-Up or whatever), but he wants to relax the penalties on small amounts of marijuana.

But that’s not the point here. Reading you the details here, I wonder how many of you caught something. This law “disproportionately affects” blacks and Hispanic youths, and the Police Commissioner said that his office handles 50,000 such criminal cases last year, and it’s just not worth it. It’s not that big a violation. Let’s take this from just a misdemeanor and get rid of that. Just call it a violation and move on.

Yeah, I caught something.

Why are we adjusting the law based only on the sensitivities of young blacks and Hispanics?

Using that logic, we should repeal murder laws, because young black and Hispanic men commit almost all murders in New York City.

I approve of the actual policy mentioned here, but not because of anything related to blacks and Hispanics.


I’m Surprised They’re Not Grinding Over Stop-and-Frisk, Too (New York Story #2 Today)

8 06 2012

Muslims to NYPD:  Quit picking on us.  We never do anything wrong.

This is about the NYPD’s aggressive anti-terrorist programs, which include spying and keeping files.

I doubt stop-and-frisk will work on Mohammed al-Terroristiqua — He’s unlikely to turn up an incendiary device in his pockets.

The Gang’s All Here

1 06 2012


Group calling for changes to Missouri’s racial profiling law

The Missouri Attorney General’s Office released statistics today in accordance with the state’s racial profiling law, and a group of local police chiefs and community activists are calling for changes to the way the data is collected and used.

In 2000, the state began requiring the attorney general to gather and report the data, but nothing more, according to a press release from the Anti-Defamation League.

The group, which also includes the American Civil Liberties Union, St. Louis County Police Department and Missouri Immigrant and Refugee Advocates, would like to see the statute changed to more adequately address what they refer to as “bias-based policing.”

So we have “community activists” (i.e. Obamas), the ACLU, the “Internationally Accredited” Keystone Cops, various “immigrant” and “refugee” advocates, and the ADL all wanting something.

Whatever it is, I want the complete and polar opposite.

What they really want is for blacks, Hispanics and South Asian or Arab Muslims to be exempt from criminal law.

Feeding Time for the Class Action Vultures

17 05 2012

A Federal trial level judge in New York City has given class action status to a lawsuit against the NYPD for “stop and frisk.”  (BTW, I’m waiting for the porn flick with that title.)

Of course I don’t want them to succeed.  But we might win our ultimate fight sooner than we would otherwise if they do.  If the NYPD has to repudiate S&F, black and Hispanic crime will shoot through the roof in that city.  Don’t forget that much of the national news media are perched in that city.

More Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire

8 05 2012

And it’s not even Christmas.

Our fancy new scanners won’t catch these new and improved hot pants.

Oh well, I guess racial profiling is our only remaining option.

ACLU Director Admits

13 04 2012

“I’m not exactly a strict disciplinarian as a parent.”

Of course, she can’t be.  She’s no Ann Romney.  She’s a REAL woman, one that would rather bitch about the cops picking on her son as an outgrowth of her job rather than instilling some discipline in her son as part of her parental duties.

One You Use Black, You’ll Never Go Back

3 02 2012


Smugglers allegedly used black drivers to avert suspicion at border

Five people are charged in a plot to employ African Americans, mostly from Compton, to avert suspicion when bringing illegal immigrants across the border.

In the calculus of cross-border human smuggling, Maria Lopez-Diaz allegedly concluded that black instead of brown equals green.

The 60-year-old Compton woman, prosecutors say, tried to cash in on racial profiling by operating a human smuggling ring that hired mostly African American drivers who didn’t speak a word of Spanish to ferry small groups of immigrants from Mexico to Los Angeles.

In the end, the alleged venture failed. Authorities announced charges Thursday against Lopez-Diaz and four others, including conspiracy and transporting and harboring illegal immigrants. Lopez-Diaz, two family members and a driver were arrested by agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol.

Using blacks from Compton?  Sure, because authorities are never suspicious of them.

Irony:  The blacks involved in this scheme were importing cheaper direct competition to the kinds of jobs blacks have or used to have.

Go Go Gadget Eyes

18 01 2012

NYPD deploying terahertz radiation goggles in order to see who is packing without having to pat anyone down.

This should put an end to accusations of racial profiling, for the cops won’t actually have to accost anyone, just call up their Inspector Gadget glasses.  More than that, it should actually be pie in the face of the people that constantly bitch about racial profiling, for the racial composition of people carrying will closely match the criminal conviction stats.  The argument that “the NYPD is ignoring all those white people packing heat” will fall flat.  After all, who will you believe?  The civil rights crowd, or the cops’ lying bionic eyes?

But I said “should” in the above paragraph, because this is New York City, where nothing is too good for certain protected minorities.  The NYPD will probably only use this technology against Tennessee housewives with CCW permits visiting the 9/11 Memorial.

“Nominal Utility”

15 12 2011

Code words for items that are popular with low class blacks and Hispanics.

What’s the matter, L.A. City Council?  Trying to turn Venice Beach into SWPL territory?  Hell, most beach front in Los Angeles County is that way already.

Letter “P”

5 12 2011

Michigan Daily:

Students talk racial profiling in DPS alerts

The issue of racial profiling in University crime alerts took center stage at a University town hall meeting on Friday.

University students and Ann Arbor residents gathered at the University Law School to discuss the relation of safety, campus climate and diversity on campus. The event — chaired by Rackham student David Green, the political action chair of Students of Color of Rackham — focused on racism and social justice at the University, with an emphasis on racial profiling.

One of the key issues discussed was the use of racial descriptions in the University’s Department of Public Safety crime alerts. Of the 22 crime alerts released by DPS between Jan. 1, 2011 and Nov. 9, 2011, 12 incidents occurred off campus and nine took place on campus, according to data released by DPS. Of these 22 alerts, 11 specifically identified the skin color of the suspect as white, five as black, one as darker skinned, one as hispanic, one as tan, one as olive and two had no race information.

Philosophy Prof. Elizabeth Anderson said information about race is not needed in crime alerts because it doesn’t add any information to the description.

“There is no value added in the description (of race),” Anderson said. “It reinforces the legitimacy of spreading stereotypes and damages the reputation of black men.”

Even though half of those “crime alerts” were looking for white men.  Why include gender?  It adds no value to the description, and it also reinforces the legitimacy of spreading stereotypes and damages the reputation of men.  Were these suspects wearing any peculiar kind of  clothing?  Don’t say that, either, for the color or brand name might beget stereotyping.  Why even say that the incident was a crime?  After all, we all know the word “crime” is racist dog whistling for “black.”

This makes me so glad that police run police departments, and that philosophers don’t.

DPS Chief Greg O’Dell then addressed the crowd and pointed out that the University must adhere to federal requirements when issuing crime alerts. The guidelines mandate the inclusion of “all information that would promote safety and that would aid the prevention of similar crimes,” the guidelines state.

Just wait until Eric “My People” Holder hears about that.

In relatively short order, the only description of a crime and/or criminal suspect that political correctness will allow is:  At some time on some day, one or more people behaved in some fashion toward another person or group of people.  If you have any information about this incident, please call your city’s department of welfare health care and self-esteem at (insert phone number).  To include anything else would be to stereotype black men.

It’s Just a Little Pot

17 11 2011


A little pot is trouble in NYC: 50k busts a year

NEW YORK (AP) — As the nation’s biggest city deals with threats of terrorism and a variety of violent crimes, carrying a little bit of marijuana is still a big deal.

There are more arrests for low-level pot possession in New York City — about 50,000 a year — than any other crime, accounting for about one of every seven cases that turn up in criminal courts.

It’s a phenomenon that has persisted despite more leniency toward marijuana use — the state loosened its marijuana-possession laws more than 30 years ago.

Critics say the deluge has been driven in part by the New York Police Department’s strategy of stopping people and frisking those whom police say meet crime suspects’ descriptions. More than a half a million people, mostly black and Hispanic men, were stopped last year — unfair targets, critics say. About 10 percent of stops result in arrests.


But many New Yorkers, mostly black and Hispanic men, say they’re being targeted in the name of keeping the city safe.

Duh, Sherlock.  That’s the point.  Maybe there’s a reason why black and Hispanic men are targeted in order to make the city safe.

Gabriel Sayegh, the New York director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a group critical of the national war on drugs, said the department benefits from the arrests.

“Every year, they’re bringing 50,000 people into their system,” he said. “A significant portion of whom have not been arrested before.

Even if the cases ultimately get dismissed, as most first-time marijuana-possession arrests do, police net names, fingerprints and other information for law-enforcement databases, he noted.

Also, I would bet that a fair percentage of people frisked for small amounts of pot have warrants for more serious offenses.  And, even if the pot is all they have, I’m sure their fingerprints will come in handy eventually.  Nail N’Deshawntavious for “just a little pot” at 17, and you have his prints on file for when he commits his first murder at 19 and there are fingerprints on the gun that the NYPD retrieves.  Just a few minutes of computer work nets them a suspect.

Earlier this week, a Chicago politician proposed to make possession of up to 10 grams of marijuana a summary offense, like a parking ticket, with a potential $200 fine, rather than a misdemeanor that carries possible jail time.

Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy didn’t endorse the ordinance but has signaled he’s open to it.

“With minor possession, it would be in everybody’s interests to free up officers,” said department spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton.

Yeah, “free up officers” to pick on the REAL criminals in Chicago, Tea Partiers, legal handgun owners and people who have given money to Sarah Palin PAC.

You Terrorist You

21 07 2011

Alex Jones gets it half right and half wrong in the overall scheme of things, but he’s on “right” mode today.  Save he thinks the motivation is politial doctrine — I happen to think the motivation is racial.

This is what happens when you elect a man President who “wrote” in one of “his” books that white people should become destitute and powerless because black slave labor made the United States the industrial and economic superpower that it used to be.  Except the inconvenient truth is that, in spite of my Southern partisanship, the United States didn’t become industrial and economic superpower until slavery was repudiated, and never could have become one if it were not.

O.B.A.M.A. — One Big Awful Mistake America

Et Tu, Obama?

11 07 2011

Daily Beast:

Just 48 hours before his premier gun-fighting agency took a public flogging in Congress last month, Attorney General Eric Holder sent a memo that escaped much public notice but left federal prosecutors with an unmistakable message.

People who buy guns at U.S. shops with the intent of secretly transferring them to someone else–a tactic known as “straw buying” that is at the heart of the Mexican border violence–should face new, stiffer prison sentences, Holder declared.

“We encourage every district to carefully review recent enhancements to the Sentencing Guidelines that are aimed at straw purchasers,” said his memo, which was personally initialed by Holder.

Fine.  But here’s the hangup — It’s really hard to demonstrate enough probable cause for straw purchasing to get the legal right to arrest someone for it.  Proving it in court is even harder.  I doubt the number of convictions for straw purchasing every year is very high.  Therefore, these “tougher sentences” are just a PR smokescreen, and a distraction from F&Fgate.

A new reporting requirement that federally licensed gun shops report any person who tries to buy two long-arm weapons near the Mexican border over a five-day period.

“Reporting?”  Then what, Obama and Holder’s ATF will go ahead and let the guns walk south into Mexico.  More razzle dazzle em distractions.

About that — isn’t this racial profiling?  That’s Obama’s and Holder’s DOJ’s party line in its lawsuits against state level immigration crackdowns.  They don’t want you to report illegal aliens who are apprehended near the Mexican border, in fact, you even noticing sneaky Hispanic looking people near the Mexican border heading north is, five, six, seven, eight…RACIST.

It’s Like an Old Familiar Score

12 06 2011

Or a broken record.

Daily Mail:

True cost of drugs: More than half of inmates currently in U.S. federal prisons were convicted of narcotics offences

More than 50 per cent on inmates in U.S. federal prisons were jailed for drug offences, shocking new figures show.

The statistics from the Federal Bureau of Prisons, an agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, reveal that out of a total inmate population of 215,888, 102,391 (that’s 50.8 per cent) were jailed for drug offences.


The Washington DC-based Justice Police Institute, in its 2009 paper ‘Pruning Prisons: How Cutting Corrections Can Save Money and Protect Public Safety,’ said: ‘The number of people in state prisons for drug offences has increased 550 per cent over the last 20 years. A recent JPI report found that the amount spent on “cops and courts” – not rates of drug use — is correlated to admissions to prison for drug offences.

‘Counties that spend more on law enforcement and the judiciary admit more people to prison for drug offences than counties that spend less. And increases in federal funding through the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Grant Program have promoted increases in resources dedicated to drug enforcement.

‘As crime continues to fall in many communities, law enforcement will have more time to focus on aggressive policing of drug offences; this can be expected to lead to even higher drug imprisonment rates and crowded jails and prisons.

‘According to FBI reports, 83 per cent of drug arrests are for possession of illegal drugs alone. And regardless of crime in a particular jurisdiction, police often target the same neighbourhoods to make drug arrests, which can increase the disproportionate incarceration of people of colour.’

The new figures are sure to ignite the debate over whether drug offenders need more treatment instead of being dealt with through the traditional judicial system.

The National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers concluded after a two-year study that national standards must be developed to deal with drug offenders, and the role of drug courts should be reduced in favour of more treatment programmes

The figures come after a report earlier this year that showed that African Americans are eight times more likely to face jail for petty drugs crimes than whites convicted of the same offence.

The report, by the Illinois Disproportionate Justice Impact Study Commission, found 19 per cent of black defendants accused of minor drug-possession crimes in the state were sent to prison, compared to just four per cent of white defendants.

You know how I would ordinarily react to this kind of story, right?  Okay, so I don’t need to repeat it.  A hint for those who don’t know — Prior record, plea deals, victimless crime are my stock responses.

I will add these things:

First, the “Justice Policy Institute” deliberately conflates the population and crowding of county jails, when the initial headline and story was about Federal prisons.

Second, it is far from a logical argument to state the percentage of Federal prison inmates being in Club Fed for “drug crimes” as an argument why drug crimes shouldn’t be crimes.  Sure, there’s a good logical case to be made for such, and a case with which I partially agree.  But to say that drugs should be legalized just because more than half of Federal prison inmates are there for what seem to be “drug crimes” is as stupid as saying that if there were only one prison in Missouri, and 99% of its inmates were in for murder, that murder shouldn’t be a crime.

Now, I’m already starting to imagine the confused e-mails I’ll get, asking, “what do you mean, prior record, plea deals, victimless crime?”  I guess that means I better explain again why these are extenuating circumstances that means that two different people could get very different punishments for the same (“apparent”) criminal conviction:

*  Prior record.  The longer is a person’s previous criminal conviction history, the longer a bid he’ll get for a given conviction.  Now, during the criminal trial heard by the petit jury, talking about the defendant’s prior rap sheet is strictly prohibited, and for good reason — In order not to bias the jurors.  It’s the jurors’ jobs to examine the prosecution’s evidence based on its merits and logic, sans any holes of credibility the defense can punch in it, and after all that, if 12 out of 12 jurors can agree beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did it, then the defendant did it.  After a guilty verdict, then the defendant’s priors can become an issue.

*  Plea deals.  Sometimes, in order to wash their hands of a difficult case, prosecutors will plead down a long set of criminal charges down to charges that would be more easy to prove in court, and the defendant’s incentive is to shorten his prison bid.  Therefore, a lot of people in prison for what seem to be only “drug crimes” really did a lot more.

*  Victimless crime.  Crimes that have a human victim (not counting murder, where the human victim is unable to testify), are problematic for prosecutors in certain jurisdictions, because the human victim is often unwilling to testify, either because of fear of gang retribution, or becuase they have fallen to “stop snitching” ghetto propaganda.  If City P.D. brings in N’Deshawntavious because they caught him dealing weed, and he also has warrants out for assault with a deadly weapon and rape, often times the City D.A. will plead the case down to dealing weed, and drop the ADW and rape, with the understanding and pre-negotiation that the sentence will be on the high side if not the maximum for dealing weed.  The reason is that the ADW has a human victim and the rape has a human victim who, for various reasons I just stated, plus very sensitive and personal ones, may not want to testify in court.  The drug crimes have no human victim, and are therefore far more easy to prove.

There, better?

Wayshul Pwofiwing, Wascawly Wabbits

1 06 2011

A Racial Profiling Two-Fer in the local and statewide media today.

First, Channel 5:

Report: Mo. black drivers stopped more frequently

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) – Black motorists were more likely than others to be stopped by Missouri police last year.

An annual report released Wednesday by the attorney general found that black drivers were 69 percent more likely than white motorists to be pulled over in 2010.

Police also were more likely to arrest black and Hispanic drivers and search their vehicles. However, searches of the vehicles of white motorists were more likely to turn up contraband. The statistics compare the racial demographics of Missouri’s driving-age population to racial characteristics of motorists in the nearly 1.7 million traffic stops, 112,000 searches and 84,000 arrests last year.

Attorney General Chris Koster says the findings are not conclusive evidence of racial profiling. He says the report can be used to trigger conversation between police and their communities.

I have a theory that might explain what we can conclude from these statistics, but I’m holding back because it might be perceived as politically incorrect.  It might also lead my good buddy over at St. Louis is Full of Racists to think that the title of his blog is correct.

Second, from The Maneater, Mizzou’s student paper:

Racial profiling initiative making way to 2012 ballot

A local group called the Missouri Prevent Racial Profiling Initiative is working to get a measure on the November 2012 ballot that would require law enforcement agencies to take steps to prevent racial profiling.

According to the ballot initiative platform, the steps could include providing information about traffic and pedestrian stops to the Missouri Attorney General, implementing a complaint process and requiring corrective action for violators.

Current law already requires an annual report on racial profiling to be given to the Missouri Attorney General. Additionally, law enforcement conducts required classes on a biennial basis to sensitize officers and to prevent any overt or unjustified cases of racial profiling.

“We have a man who comes every two years to hold interactive classes where we are encouraged to ask questions,” Columbia Police Department spokeswoman Latisha Stroer said. “It’s great how he makes it fresh and relevant each time.”

Stroer said it isn’t a large enough issue to warrant a spot on the ballot.

Mary Still, D-Columbia, said she believes racial profiling is still an issue. Still was on the Attorney General Office staff for 12 years and helped to collect information for previous reports and to write the previous law concerning racial profiling.

“I very much feel that this is an issue,” she said. “I think more people just need to be sensitive to the kind of problem it is. Unless you’re a minority, you don’t necessarily see the problems others face.”

But she said she doesn’t think the legislation would pass, pointing out that many don’t see it as an issue.

“Recognize that you may not experience profiling, but it does happen,” she said.

Still said the representatives likely wouldn’t support it because they are not necessarily looking at the problem from the perspective of a minority.

To qualify for the ballot, the initiative required signatures from registered voters equal to 5 percent of the total votes cast in the 2008 governor’s election from six of Missouri’s nine congressional districts. The group collected more than the 90,000 signatures needed to put the measure to a statewide vote. The measure was certified May 16.

Still indicated that if the ballot did go through, a “huge undertaking” would ensue.

“There’s definitely a big uphill battle to get this ballot through,” she said. “Don’t expect it to pass.”

That means that our state has at least 90,000 morons fairly evenly distributed around the state.  It does not appear to me that this measure would require anything substantially more than what is already occurring — More semi-useless data trolls that only tell us what we all know anyway.  As it is, the data that are already gathered annually changes nobody’s minds or conclusions.  More data means more insomnia cures.  Only wild card here is the part about “corrective action for violators” — Translation:  A trip to sensitivity training, and I bet that Mary Still and/or the University of Missouri have a direct financial incentive therein.

One more thing:  Missouri law allows all car windows to be tinted at 100% light blockage, save the driver and passenger side front windows, which can only be tinted at 65%.  How can cops tell the race(s) of the driver or any of the passengers?  You might say “ghettomobile,” but even that’s not a certain clue any more — You might pull over a tricked out ghetto hooptee and see people inside that look like this.

“Just to Even Out the Stats”

24 04 2011

Northwest Indiana Times:

Preckwinkle: Criminal justice system racist

CHICAGO | In the winter of 2008, then presidential candidate Barack Obama asserted that blacks and whites “are arrested at very different rates, are convicted at very different rates and receive different sentences for the same crime.”

Speaking Tuesday at the Fairmont Hotel during an event sponsored by the Executives Club of Chicago, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle echoed that assertion about Cook County’s criminal justice system.

“Nobody talks about institutional racism, but what kind of a criminal justice system has an outcome where 70 percent of the people are African-American and the rest are Latinos.”

Preckwinkle described Cook County jails as “entirely black and brown people. … This is in a county where a third of our population is African-Americans, a third Latino, and a third white and Asian.”

This is an easy problem to solve, Miss Prickwinkle.  If blacks and Hispanics don’t like being the disproportionate patrons at Crook County’s Graybar Hotel, then they should commit fewer crimes.  In fact, to end the racial disparity problem, then they should reduce their crime rate to the same low level as whites and Asians.

Ted Pierson, co-chairman of the National Alliance Against Racism and Political Repression, a Chicago area civil rights organization, agreed with Preckwinkle.


Pierson said there is a racial discrepancy in offenses and who is held.

“We’ve found that whites actually commit more drug offenses than African-Americans, but African-Americans are locked up while whites are taken to the station and released to their parents,” he said.

We’ve been through this before.  However, there’s an angle that even my brilliant mind missed, an angle that has been a topic of discussion on AR this weekend.  The reason many black and Hispanic gang-bangers seem to get really long prison bids for “drug crimes” compared to whites who get punished a lot more leniently is because the black and Hispanic gang bangers have a lot of their crimes pled out of existence and pled down to “drug crimes.”  The reason for that is that a drug crime doesn’t have a human victim that is too scared to testify in court out of fear of reprisal or doesn’t want to testify in court because of “stop snitching.”  Therefore, the prosecutors and the lawyers for the black and Hispanic gang banger defendants plea down to “drug crimes,” and they are given prison bids on the long end of what is legally permissible for the given “drug crimes,” under the sentient awareness of everyone involved that the defendant really did a lot more.

While Preckwinkle expressed concern over this issue she also said that beyond the bully pulpit of her office, she has little power to affect change; most of the decisions fall to judges and probation officers.

“People are in jail because judges put them there,” she said.

I’ve never been to jail or prison, other than a tour as an outsider as part of a Citizens Police Academy.  All that means, in the fucked up FUBAR mindset of Miss Prickwinkle, is that some judge must be giving me a pass.  My never having committed a crime serious enough to warrant arrest, prosecution or incarceration must have nothing to do with it.

Second City Cop takes this up.  One commenter makes this point:

You can not go around locking up whites for no reason just to even out the stats. Major high crime cities account for most murders and violent crimes. Whites are the minority in these cities. Let our people go. We can not even drink water from the same fountain in without being shot at. The white sheep are not responsible for the new babies mama style fatherless children. There are so many churches in the poor neighborhoods and nobody gets married.

I disagree, unfortunately.  While you can’t “go around locking up whites for no reason just to even out the stats,” you can move the goalposts around depending on which race has the ball.  What I mean by that is that to fend off liberal bitching and lawsuits, you can lock up a white man for any ticky-tack offense, while giving non-whites a pass on all but the most serious offenses, “just to even out the stats.”  I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that that kind of thing is happening in a city as liberal and full of civil rights loudmouths like Chicago.  While the percentage of whites in the Crook County Jail are small, I bet most of them are in there on average for far less serious offenses than the blacks and Hispanics who are raping them.

A few more interesting tidbits from the MSM article:

Preckwinkle said she believes that because a small number of offenders committed high-profile crimes while on electronic monitoring, judges have been weary of approving that remedy for defendants in their courts.

She said that judges fear their name will be plastered all over the media if that happens in their court, causing them to lose in their next election. Preckwinkle said she supports the idea of having retired judges making electronic monitoring decisions.

This is one reason why I rarely link to media that publish the name of sitting or retired judges in good standing, relating to something they do in a case over which they are presiding.  My recommendation is that for all but the Federal and State Supreme Courts, we can know that a particular person has been nominated or approved for the judgeship, or is running for re-election or re-election either against another person, or in a Missouri Plan yea/nay retain/reject scheme, but the names of judges involved in actual proceedings aren’t released.  Personally, I think criminal defendants’ names shouldn’t be released unless and until there is a guilty verdict or plea.

John Lott, author of the book “More Guns Less Crime,” challenged the idea that the nation’s drug laws were biased against African-Americans in a piece for the libertarian Cato Institute, published in March 2009. In it he suggested penalties for drug offenses were set up “because the lives of many blacks were being destroyed by blacks and people thought that they could help by having large penalties on those involved with crack (cocaine).”

Black politicos and civil rights leaders wanted the harsh crack-powder punishment disparities in the 1980s, precisely because crack was affecting blacks.  It didn’t take them long to discover that the perpetrators of crack crimes were also heavily black, so it barely took a decade for the civil rights industry to do an about-face and demand the disparity be undone.  President Obama signed Federal legislation in that stead last year.

A 1994 study by Stanford University professor Joan Petersila of about 11,000 inmates in California concluded that sentencing relied heavily on prior criminal record, seriousness of the offense and the presence of a gun, while race played a negligible role.

It might be too much to ask, and too big a study to undertake, but I bet people like Miss Petersila would also find that there is a high correlation between sentencing relative to the legal maximum for the crimes to which the defendant pled guilty, and other criminal charges the defendant was facing at about the same time, or even the suspected crimes for which the defendant was simultaneously arrested in addition to the one(s) to which they pled guilty.  “The presence of a gun” usually stems from gun crime multiplier laws, endorsed by the NRA as a political ploy to head off further gun control.  Most liberals are against gun crime multipliers, for the same reason, and because of the “disparate impact” on favored minorities.

Poor England

19 10 2010

Jesse Jackson is in London, bitching about racial profiling.  Meanwhile, Michael Savage still can’t get into England.

Hasn’t that country suffered enough?

Meanwhile, if it’s UK racial profiling you want, then get a load of this.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,645 other followers