4 ms·

> the generally agreed upon assumption that blacks make up a disproportionate number of suspects in criminal cases. Do you use "assumption" here to mean "divor

by weberc2 10y ago

> the generally agreed upon assumption that blacks make up a disproportionate number of suspects in criminal cases. Do you use "assumption" here to mean "divorced from data"? Because I'm of the impression that is hardly contested in the field of criminology.

danso 10y ago
I didn't mean it as a derogatory term. I mean mostly that I assume that the data and methodology is sound (because it seems straightforward to calculate). But my main contention is not only if that data justifies targeting blacks disproportionately for stops and frisks, but whether that increased targeting can be implemented in a way that doesn't ultimately lead to a bad feedback situation and/or quotas that lead to arbitrary searching, as the Schoolcraft situation exposed. And there's the question of whether or not it reduces crime, and if it does, does it at a rate that exceeds the rate of increased mistrust in society, the kind of mistrust that often fosters law breaking behavior.
- weberc2 10y ago
  Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. :)
plandis 10y ago
One could also argue: do black communities commit more crime or is it just enforced more in black communities due to more police presence, etc... I'm not aware of any conclusive data that shows that black people are more predisposed to commit crime even if the outcome is higher crime rates in black communities.
- throw_away_777 10y ago
  There is clear and conclusive evidence that black people commit violent crime at a higher rate than white people in the United States [1]. Arguments that arrests are not representative of true crime are not based in sound statistical arguments, for crimes such as murder, there is no plausible argument that police are 6 times as likely to arrest a black criminal for murder than a white criminal. If anything police would investigate murders of white people more seriously as shown by the rate of unsolved murders by state [2], but the magnitude of this effect isn't enough to explain the discrepancy even if you assume that all unsolved murders are committed by white people, as only about 33% of murders go unsolved on average. Given that crime is strongly correlated with poverty, and being black is also strongly correlated with poverty in the United States, it would be very surprising if black people did not commit more crime. [1] http://www.amren.com/archives/reports/the-color-of-crime-2016-revised-edition/ http://www.amren.com/archives/reports/the-color-of-crime-201... [2] http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2013/01/rates-of-unsolved-murder-by-state.html http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2013/01/rates-of-unsolved-murd...

by weberc2 10y ago

danso 10y ago

I didn't mean it as a derogatory term. I mean mostly that I assume that the data and methodology is sound (because it seems straightforward to calculate). But my main contention is not only if that data justifies targeting blacks disproportionately for stops and frisks, but whether that increased targeting can be implemented in a way that doesn't ultimately lead to a bad feedback situation and/or quotas that lead to arbitrary searching, as the Schoolcraft situation exposed. And there's the question of whether or not it reduces crime, and if it does, does it at a rate that exceeds the rate of increased mistrust in society, the kind of mistrust that often fosters law breaking behavior.

weberc2 10y ago
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. :)

plandis 10y ago

One could also argue: do black communities commit more crime or is it just enforced more in black communities due to more police presence, etc... I'm not aware of any conclusive data that shows that black people are more predisposed to commit crime even if the outcome is higher crime rates in black communities.

throw_away_777 10y ago
There is clear and conclusive evidence that black people commit violent crime at a higher rate than white people in the United States [1]. Arguments that arrests are not representative of true crime are not based in sound statistical arguments, for crimes such as murder, there is no plausible argument that police are 6 times as likely to arrest a black criminal for murder than a white criminal. If anything police would investigate murders of white people more seriously as shown by the rate of unsolved murders by state [2], but the magnitude of this effect isn't enough to explain the discrepancy even if you assume that all unsolved murders are committed by white people, as only about 33% of murders go unsolved on average. Given that crime is strongly correlated with poverty, and being black is also strongly correlated with poverty in the United States, it would be very surprising if black people did not commit more crime. [1] http://www.amren.com/archives/reports/the-color-of-crime-2016-revised-edition/ http://www.amren.com/archives/reports/the-color-of-crime-201... [2] http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2013/01/rates-of-unsolved-murder-by-state.html http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2013/01/rates-of-unsolved-murd...