11 ms·

Honestly, I was blind to police racism against blacks. Until I watched this video. ---------------- This is a shocking video: https://www.wral.com/ace-perry-

• sieabahlpark 6y ago
  Absolutely you should be ticketed for going under the speed limit by a far enough amount. You're more dangerous to everyone than safe if you don't align with the flow of traffic. 5mph isn't enough to give a ticket.
  • StavrosK 6y ago
    > 5mph isn't enough to give a ticket. Apparently it is just enough to harass a minority though.
  • woofyman 6y ago
    There are usually posted minimum speed limits.
    • vkou 6y ago
      Those minimum limits are never 5 miles under the maximum speed limits.
    • rat87 6y ago
      In what state? I've never seen minimums. Just the speed limit
      • throwaway_jobs 6y ago
        Florida does...but I think most states have minimums on highways/interstates.
        • uncletaco 6y ago
          Alabama doesn't (or hardly does) but I've seen it in Texas and New Mexico
      • 1337shadow 6y ago
        In Spain it's half the speed limit.
  • js2 6y ago
    This was harassment and a fishing expedition. 65 in a 70 isn't even close to being suspicious on its own. And if he had been "operating a motor vehicle on the highway at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic" the cop would have said that, but he didn't. https://nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu/slow-driving/ https://nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu/slow-driving/
  • reactspa 6y ago
    I agree, if a minimum limit is posted. E.g., I remember on some highway it said max 75mph, and min 40mph. 65 in a 70 is just prudence though.
    • mywittyname 6y ago
      65 in a 70 is doing an indicated 70 in a lot of cars. The speedos in most cars read high past 50mph or so. You can test this for yourself with a GPS app on your phone.
  • grecy 6y ago
    I have a 2011 Jeep Wrangler (so it's not even 10 years old). If there is even a slight incline, and I put my foot on the floor, it will not hold 60mph. Without an incline it will physically not go 80mph. Should I get a ticket for going to slow? I thought that's what the slow lane is for.
    • hedora 6y ago
      You probably should get it looked at. Depending on what it is, it might be dangerous, or burning tons of gas. Min speed limits are usually 45. These days, if I’m not in a hurry, I go slow (55-60) in the slow lane because CO2 (20-25% lower emissions than the normal 70MPH around here). However, I also support ticketing for going below the rate of traffic in the fast lane. Examples: 64 in a 65, or even 70 in a 65, but only if there are a bunch of cars behind you, and a big gap in front.
      • outworlder 6y ago
        > Min speed limits are usually 45. Where? That depends on the jurisdiction. That also may depend on what kind of road we are talking about.
      • grecy 6y ago
        There's nothing wrong with my Jeep, it just has the older V6 engine that is notorious for being underpowered.
    • AmericanChopper 6y ago
      Slow drivers usually have to keep right, even then they can only get tickets if they’re unreasonably obstructing the flow of traffic. Most places also have speed limits for vehicles towing trailers. I think it’s 55 where I live.
    • toomanybeersies 6y ago
      Even my 1982 Datsun truck with a 1.6 L engine could (barely) hold 60 uphill. I suppose your Jeep is somewhat heavier, but that still doesn't sound right.
  • admax88q 6y ago
    No you should only be ticketed if you're driving dangerously. Speed alone is not enough of a determining factor. If nobody else is on the road go as slow as you want, if its wet or dark you probably shouldn't always be going the maximum allowable speed.
• throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  That sequence of events is a pretty run of the mill fishing stop. Cops learn how to do that "20 questions" (as I like to call it) routine in training as far as I know. It's designed trip you up into making conflicting statement. Good officers don't tend to make those kinds of stops and when they do it's pretty much a "oh no visible drug paraphernalia, here's a warning and be on your way" and the bad ones don't cut you a break for being white. That said, it's well documented that blacks get singled out for fishing more but the officer probably treats everyone that way. With that in mind, this is almost certainly a driving while black stop. The fact that he was stopped without a traffic violation as a pretext for fishing (usually they at least wait for you to go 5-over or touch the yellow line or something) leaves no other plausible explanation for why the officer pulled over a clean late model car and then proceeded to act like a jerk.
  • throwaway_jobs 6y ago
    Not only is it run of the mill questioning it is very specific to a driver in a rental. Where are you going/where you coming from? That shirt is that the company you work for? Where is the office? How long do you have the rental? the questions combined with the stop suggest the cop was suspicious of drug trafficking because of a rental on the highway going under the speed limit (As you say fishing). Maybe race played a factor but odds are he pulled the rental over under that pretext before knowing the drivers race.
    • etrabroline 6y ago
      https://patch.com/massachusetts/beaconhill/criminals-use-rental-cars-to-escape-identification https://patch.com/massachusetts/beaconhill/criminals-use-ren... There's a video of looters in Manhattan driving a Rolls Royce, obviously rented. There is no reason that nerds on the internet would know anything street smart like that.
      • rtkwe 6y ago
        So the real problem is it's slightly inconvenient [0] to catch people using rentals to commit crimes and that justifies randomly bothering anyone in a rental car? [0] They can still go get the records any time after all.
• throwaway_jobs 6y ago
  I don’t know if it’s fair to call the cop here a racist, it’s possible sure, but it’s likely the officer didn’t know the guys race before pulling him over. Police, especially in small towns, are notorious for targeting out of towners (the way a racist cop might target a race they don’t like). Here you have to understand the training/experience of highway patrol. Here we have a rental and it was traveling below the speed limit...a highway cop might immediately think drug trafficking (again not knowing the race, something you probably never thought without the training and experience), And being under the speed limit gives him the right to make the stop (but what he really wants to do is check up on his suspicion). This would explain the questions about the job and where the driver was going to/coming from. Maybe I missed something but there are hundreds of thousands of stops everyday, many like this one are ridiculous...I’m not sure how much attention this really deserves nor if the officer (who shouldn’t have made the stop to begin with) deserves to be labeled a racist (especially because now a days that is tantamount to being fired and losing your livelihood as well as all the targeting him and his family would endure). Maybe a potential policing solution would be something akin to jury duty where citizens are selected to shadow officers on every shift, maybe require a mismatch Of the officer/citizen pairing Based on race/sex.
  • andrewem 6y ago
    By this logic, what speed DOESN'T justify a police officer stopping a driver? Under is somehow suspicious according to your thinking, over is obviously illegal, and who can travel at precisely the speed limit all the time so they never go over or under?
    • throwaway_jobs 6y ago
      > Under is somehow suspicious according to your thinking Read my comment, where did I say this was suspicious? What I said in regards to the stop is: > there are hundreds of thousands of stops everyday, many like this one are ridiculous >shouldn’t have made the stop to begin with The law on police stops is very clear you need a violation of a statute or pc...so if there is a minimum and you are under it that is a violation and a cop can stop you...just the same as if you violate the maximum speed statute the cop can stop you. In Florida they even have a “catch all statute” to pull you over if you are driving the exact speed limit if that wasn’t safe based on “conditions of the road” which of course is purely subjective. I’m not arguing for or against the laws in any capacity and the laws are not my logic.
• DenisM 6y ago
  So you did no believe in the systemic police racism, then you saw this video, then you started believing in the systemic police racism. Is this right?
  • outworlder 6y ago
    That's sort of what was stated. They said they "were blind to". It is easy to miss things when they do not affect you personally.
• neallindsay 6y ago
  "You were doing 65 in a 70" was probably a lie also: https://franklywrite.com/2020/06/01/a-white-woman-racism-and-a-poodle/ https://franklywrite.com/2020/06/01/a-white-woman-racism-and...
• vmception 6y ago
  When people say "don't talk to the cops" are they referring to situations like this too? It just seems like not talking is not the way to get a favorable outcome from this circumstance. Like it is a privilege to be able to absorb the potential ticket, that you might be able to get out of like this guy did with a warning. It seems more likely that the cop would create pretexts to escalate the situation by not talking to them.
  • elliekelly 6y ago
    Indeed, I’m reminded of the Attorney who runs “Flex Your Rights” who once saw officers write someone a ticket and waited until after the police were done so he could talk to the person about their rights. His encounter with those same officers a few minutes later was caught on body cam: https://youtu.be/28w6xvRj9EM https://youtu.be/28w6xvRj9EM This is a guy who is arguably as “privileged” as it gets for someone pulled over by the police: highly educated white guy attorney who hadn’t done anything wrong. And he was charged with two (very minor) crimes. It’s easy to give the advice to exercise your rights but it’s difficult in practice when the retaliation by those in authority is so clear.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • jacobush 6y ago
    Tickets should be proportional to income and wealth. Like in Finland. As of now, it's a disproportionate tax on poor people, and the cops know it.
    • missedthecue 6y ago
      I feel like that would make cops target wealthier communities. A simpler solution is that any revenue from traffic tickets goes to the federal government rather than the county or state.
      • eeZah7Ux 6y ago
        Both solution are required together.
• coronadisaster 6y ago
  This is one of the mild videos
• throwaway987788 6y ago
  I don't doubt there is racism but not everything is necessarily racially motivated. I once was pulled over when I did a cross-country road trip. I was given some bs reason that I cut off a semi truck when changing lanes and that my GPS unit in the car was too high and blocking my view. I'm not a POC and the cop asked tons of questions, wanted to inspect my trunk, called the k9 unit, etc. I ended up also getting a warning. Subsequently the cops followed me for miles which felt like they're trying to harass me and find another reason to pull me over. So these things exist regardless of skin color.
  • onion2k 6y ago
    Cops harassing people because they're bored isn't evidence that cops don't harass people of color because they're racist. The two things can, and very evidently do, co-exist. Your attempt to dismiss racism as a factor in police actions is a big part of the reason why the police are able to get away with it so much.
    • etrabroline 6y ago
      Do you have any data that we could use to find out which hypothesis has the most explanatory power? High black crime rates make it difficult to distinguish racial motivations for police suspicion from other motivations. I would love to see arrest rates by race controlled for crime rates.
      • onion2k 6y ago
        You would also need to control for unreported crime in non-black races. If the police ignore minor crimes by some races (eg not arresting white people found with small quantities of drugs) while they do arrest black people for the same crimes, or if the police ignore crime committed in white neighbourhoods and focus their efforts on arresting black people, then "black rates of crime are higher" is a fiction that stems from systemic police racism and isn't provably real. The problem is that you're assuming the system is fair and therefore the statistics that come from it are a reflection of reality. If the system is racist then the statistics will be a reflection of that racism. Until you can demonstrate that isn't the case then using crime statistics as an excuse for police actions will be questionable at best, and actively enabling racism at worst.
• steveeq1 6y ago
  Guys, this might be a shill account. I've noticed a lot of shill/bot accounts on reddit lately. /r/losangeles and and /r/pics are super-super-super anti-cop right now, to the point of ridiculousness. Are there PR firms out there trying to set public perception?
  • taurath 6y ago
    Its the conversation that literally the entire country and the world is having. People are paying attention to this in a real way. I don't think there's anything ridiculous about talking about how common it is to have bad or frightening experiences with police. They're being asked to do literally everything but are armed and trained for anti-violence first and foremost.
    • steveeq1 6y ago
      Yeah, but that's availability bias. That's my point. There's a lot of shill accounts on reddit posting this stuff with plenty of upvotes, but the comments are critical of the piece. These are obviously shill/bot accounts promoting this, probably by some PR firm out there. The thing is, police brutality is heavily promoted on the news right now because, well, it outrages people, that's the point. It generates more ad revenue that way. But if you hear it and see this every day, and someone says the word "police", your mind immediately thinks of "brutality". Not that it doesn't exist, but availability bias makes the issue seem much bigger than it actually is. This is why it's a bias. And to put the danger of racist white police officers into perspective: https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/163/274/fbf.jpg https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/163/274/fbf... Yes, racists are a problem, but not a very big one.
      • taurath 6y ago
        I emplore you, try to listen to the actual arguments being made by BLM. It seems like you're reducing the conversation to a tiny factor, and then claiming everyone else is "shilling". I'll put this to you - people of color are absolutely justifiably fearful of any interaction with the police, and they have to experience it much more frequently. You need a source? Here - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapolis-police-use-of-force.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapoli... Hope you'll read it.
• casefields 6y ago
  That's just basic fishing. Some agencies are notorious for it. For those that drive to Mammoth, they'll know there's the town of Bishop. After cruising freeway speeds for hours on end, the speed limits drop dramatically fast. They're easy to miss. At night that tiny town will have cops hidden and ready for speeders, but also cars that look suspicious. A car filled with young guys is a prime target. I've been pulled over multiple times there, and after finding nothing they let you go.
• thatlongthrow1 6y ago
  Via Reddit: -sunnydaze- i called Sampson Co just now, and Deputy Snow told me they promoted the officer [this is where i would post their phone number if the rules didn't tell me not to]