4 ms·

Essentially (with made up numbers): 100 men on a high street, 4 of which are on a watch-list; 2 of which are black. Both black guys get identified, only one of

by OJFord 7mo ago

Essentially (with made up numbers): 100 men on a high street, 4 of which are on a watch-list; 2 of which are black. Both black guys get identified, only one of the others does. Ditto men vs. women, mutatis mutandis.

edgyquant 7mo ago
So it should be improved but sounds like it’s just catching criminals who need to be caught no?
- bondarchuk 7mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_enforcement
  - ap99 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    - text0404 7mo ago
      As a case study, the Trump admin has done all those things (except the littering I guess) so I would say less likely since none of them have gone to prison. The poor and marginalized tend to be incarcerated at much higher rates for lesser crimes than the richer and/or powerful whose crimes are much broader and more impactful on society. The system in question in Essex is broken because it penalizes one race at higher rates than another race which commits the same crimes.
      - edgyquant 7mo ago
        This is just a ridiculous attempt to bring Trump into an unrelated conversation.
        text0404 7mo ago
        No, it was to show how unreliable those criteria are as OP pulled the conversation into racial/cultural determinism. Feel free to tackle the substance of any of my points.
  - edgyquant 7mo ago
    Right so the answer is to improve enforcement not disable it and let more crime go unsanswred
graemep 7mo ago
The problem is that a likely outcome is that they will arrest two white men who are not the ones on the white list. That is discriminatory, at least if it keeps happening so that you get a higher rate of wrongful arrests of one group.