3 ms·
> Adverse impact, problematic enough, does not imply something was made with racist intent. It shows that the intent continues to be racist. This disparity is
by jakelazaroff 7y ago
> Adverse impact, problematic enough, does not imply something was made with racist intent.
It shows that the intent continues to be racist. This disparity is ongoing, not historical; if it's truly not racist, why not bring the amount of possession charges in line with usage?
- fuzz4lyfe 7y agoSo sickle cell anemia is racist? You can't tell the intent of something by the impact alone.
- dictum 7y agoSickle cell anemia wasn't imposed via law.
- celticmusic 7y agoare you arguing that it cannot be racist unless it's law? So if I start throwing around racial epithets it's not racist because it's not law?
- DuskStar 7y ago> It shows that the intent continues to be racist. It shows the impact, not the intent, continues to be racist. It doesn't really say anything about intent, at least without a lot more data. If white and black usage differ in kind somehow - say, pot brownies vs smoking on the street (I have no idea if there is a racial disparity here) - it could lead to a difference in police involvement without any racial discrimination.
- celticmusic 7y agoindeed, and as another poster pointed out, it could also be because police monitor high crime areas more strictly, and so the arrests related to marijuana tends to reflect that fact.
- CompanionCuuube 7y agoSo gun control is racist? You can't tell the intent of something by the impact alone.
- mieseratte 7y agoIncidental arrests arise from higher police presence in minority’s neighborhoods due to higher instances of major crime in those neighborhoods. If I go fishing for redfish I’m going to end up catching a lot more saltwater fish incidentally. Doesn’t mean I hate freshwater fish, that just means in not fishing in an area where I’m going to find many freshwater fish.