6 ms·

Unconscious racial bias comes up a lot in these issues. Yet I am at a loss to see a mechanism by which we could even begin to remedy it. What steps could propos

Unconscious racial bias comes up a lot in these issues. Yet I am at a loss to see a mechanism by which we could even begin to remedy it. What steps could proposed programs take?

pg_is_a_butt 11y ago
nice try, hitler. no, we're not going to eliminate all other races just so you don't have to feel guilty about your own ignorance. oh wait, that's what everyone wants? well, i guess that's democracy. welcome to WW3. your drone pilot station is D12-7B. please let your commander know when you need a new drone or an ammo reload. lunch is 11-2.
streptomycin 11y ago
Lots of ideas come to mind. Probably all bad ideas, but ideas nonetheless: * Judges and juries are only allowed to be the same race as the defendant. * Increase/decrease the sentencing guidelines by X% for a certain race. 20 years max for a certain offense for Race Y, 15 years max for Race Z. * Preferentially give better public defenders to people of certain races, or maybe just give them money to hire non-public defenders. * Pick some small percentage of cases, say 5%. For people of Race Z, just let them go free 5% of the time. Don't even have a trial. * Give nicer prison accommodations to people based on race. Similarly, make early release requirements less stringent for people based on race. * For people of the privileged race, randomly arrest some innocent ones and try your best to pin the crime on them. Like I said, these are all bad ideas, but they would counteract unconscious racial bias.
- wernercd 11y ago
  I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." ... I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. ... Except for black people... who are innocent without capable of being guilty. And Chinese who deserve a 10% increase in jail-time for being better at math. White people deserve a minimum sentence of 5 years, hard labor, for millenia of whiteprivildge.
- buckbova 11y ago
  > Judges and juries are only allowed to be the same race as the defendant. So if a white cop shoots a black person and is arrested for it, the judge and jury should all be white? Sounds about right. They do say "jury of your peers", so a jury of white cops would be ideal in this case.
  - streptomycin 11y ago
    Good point. Change that one to: * Judges and juries are only allowed to be people of the disadvantaged race No more white judges or jury members would shake things up a bit.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  The reason those are all bad ideas is that they're all attempting to treat the symptom rather than the problem. If the problem is that people are dumping alkali waste into the reservoir, your suggestion is to ignore that and then dump in acid to even it out. Making the pH neutral isn't the same thing as making the water clean. We have to solve the underlying problem.
  - streptomycin 11y ago
    Solve the underlying problem? Babies exhibit racial bias. We're going to need some serious genetic engineering applied to the brain to solve the underlying problem. I don't think that's happening any time soon. Your solution is to ignore this and instead offer a platitude so you don't have to think about an actual solution. I'm not saying I know the perfect solution, but I'm pretty sure it's not a platitude.
    - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
      If you ask "why" up the chain enough times you eventually end up at some immutable law of nature. But that's completely missing the point. Fixing the cause rather than the symptom doesn't mean you have to go study evolutionary biology. "Babies exhibit racial bias" doesn't inherently lead to mass incarceration and murder. There is a whole system of causes between one and the other. And as for an actual solution, the top voted comment has already provided it. You can't have bias in drug cases or police shootings if there are no drug cases or police shootings. End the war on drugs and mandatory minimum sentences. Demilitarize the police.
      - streptomycin 11y ago
        The problem we're discussing isn't that there are too many minorities imprisoned for drug crimes. The problem is systemic disparate impact throughout the entire criminal justice system. Getting rid of drug crimes does nothing to solve that, because you see the same pattern in basically every type of crime. Legalizing drugs would reduce the number of crimes, but not the racial bias. You could just as easily "solve" the problem of racial bias by getting rid of any class of crimes. Like, let's legalize speeding because more blacks are pulled over for speeding than whites. Great. But the fundamental problem of inequality still remains in every other area of the criminal justice system. Also, how do mandatory minimum sentences lead to more bias? Wouldn't that lead to less bias, since it removes biaased human judgement from part of the process? Otherwise you'd probably see whites getting more lenient sentences than they already do.
candu 11y ago
If we accept that unconscious bias is a fact, the only real solution is to eliminate the possibility for unconscious bias. To fully do this, you'd need an environment in which all parties are mutually identity-blind. Some kind of virtual courtroom where everyone assumes a "neutral" avatar and speaks through a synthesized voice (again, "neutral") might approximate this. How would you get there from here? First, you'd need a prototype and substantial basic research - not within the criminal justice system - supporting up the hypothesis that this reduces bias. Next, you'd need to beef up security, accessibility, etc. before slogging through the procurement process. You'd then test it on a small handful of actual cases, thereby gathering data to support a wider rollout. In the meantime: not sure. The very least we could do would be to make sure everyone involved receives some "unconscious bias training" (e.g. make it a mandatory part of court proceedings).
- jquery 11y ago
  Part of the point of jury-of-your-peers trials is so people can use their biases to make subjective decisions based on their life experience. The tone/inflection/appearance of the defendant plays into all of that. What you are suggesting would eliminate that. Why have juries at all, then?
  - malka 11y ago
    Yes. Why having easily manipulable group of people, instead of professional judges that are used to lawyers and criminal BS ?
    - jquery 11y ago
      "Juries are often justified because they leaven the law with community norms." "Discussions among juries could lead to more thorough consideration of all aspects of the case." (see: 12 Angry Men) "Occasionally jurors find the law to be invalid or unfair, and on that basis acquit the defendant, regardless of the evidence presented that the defendant violated the law. This is commonly referred to as "jury nullification of law" or simply jury nullification." "It may be more difficult to corrupt 12 jurors than one or several judges." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury

Unconscious racial bias comes up a lot in these issues. Yet I am at a loss to see a mechanism by which we could even begin to remedy it. What steps could proposed programs take?

pg_is_a_butt 11y ago

nice try, hitler. no, we're not going to eliminate all other races just so you don't have to feel guilty about your own ignorance. oh wait, that's what everyone wants? well, i guess that's democracy. welcome to WW3. your drone pilot station is D12-7B. please let your commander know when you need a new drone or an ammo reload. lunch is 11-2.

streptomycin 11y ago

Lots of ideas come to mind. Probably all bad ideas, but ideas nonetheless: * Judges and juries are only allowed to be the same race as the defendant. * Increase/decrease the sentencing guidelines by X% for a certain race. 20 years max for a certain offense for Race Y, 15 years max for Race Z. * Preferentially give better public defenders to people of certain races, or maybe just give them money to hire non-public defenders. * Pick some small percentage of cases, say 5%. For people of Race Z, just let them go free 5% of the time. Don't even have a trial. * Give nicer prison accommodations to people based on race. Similarly, make early release requirements less stringent for people based on race. * For people of the privileged race, randomly arrest some innocent ones and try your best to pin the crime on them. Like I said, these are all bad ideas, but they would counteract unconscious racial bias.

wernercd 11y ago
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." ... I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. ... Except for black people... who are innocent without capable of being guilty. And Chinese who deserve a 10% increase in jail-time for being better at math. White people deserve a minimum sentence of 5 years, hard labor, for millenia of whiteprivildge.
buckbova 11y ago
> Judges and juries are only allowed to be the same race as the defendant. So if a white cop shoots a black person and is arrested for it, the judge and jury should all be white? Sounds about right. They do say "jury of your peers", so a jury of white cops would be ideal in this case.
- streptomycin 11y ago
  Good point. Change that one to: * Judges and juries are only allowed to be people of the disadvantaged race No more white judges or jury members would shake things up a bit.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
AnthonyMouse 11y ago
The reason those are all bad ideas is that they're all attempting to treat the symptom rather than the problem. If the problem is that people are dumping alkali waste into the reservoir, your suggestion is to ignore that and then dump in acid to even it out. Making the pH neutral isn't the same thing as making the water clean. We have to solve the underlying problem.
- streptomycin 11y ago
  Solve the underlying problem? Babies exhibit racial bias. We're going to need some serious genetic engineering applied to the brain to solve the underlying problem. I don't think that's happening any time soon. Your solution is to ignore this and instead offer a platitude so you don't have to think about an actual solution. I'm not saying I know the perfect solution, but I'm pretty sure it's not a platitude.
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    If you ask "why" up the chain enough times you eventually end up at some immutable law of nature. But that's completely missing the point. Fixing the cause rather than the symptom doesn't mean you have to go study evolutionary biology. "Babies exhibit racial bias" doesn't inherently lead to mass incarceration and murder. There is a whole system of causes between one and the other. And as for an actual solution, the top voted comment has already provided it. You can't have bias in drug cases or police shootings if there are no drug cases or police shootings. End the war on drugs and mandatory minimum sentences. Demilitarize the police.
    - streptomycin 11y ago
      The problem we're discussing isn't that there are too many minorities imprisoned for drug crimes. The problem is systemic disparate impact throughout the entire criminal justice system. Getting rid of drug crimes does nothing to solve that, because you see the same pattern in basically every type of crime. Legalizing drugs would reduce the number of crimes, but not the racial bias. You could just as easily "solve" the problem of racial bias by getting rid of any class of crimes. Like, let's legalize speeding because more blacks are pulled over for speeding than whites. Great. But the fundamental problem of inequality still remains in every other area of the criminal justice system. Also, how do mandatory minimum sentences lead to more bias? Wouldn't that lead to less bias, since it removes biaased human judgement from part of the process? Otherwise you'd probably see whites getting more lenient sentences than they already do.

candu 11y ago

If we accept that unconscious bias is a fact, the only real solution is to eliminate the possibility for unconscious bias. To fully do this, you'd need an environment in which all parties are mutually identity-blind. Some kind of virtual courtroom where everyone assumes a "neutral" avatar and speaks through a synthesized voice (again, "neutral") might approximate this. How would you get there from here? First, you'd need a prototype and substantial basic research - not within the criminal justice system - supporting up the hypothesis that this reduces bias. Next, you'd need to beef up security, accessibility, etc. before slogging through the procurement process. You'd then test it on a small handful of actual cases, thereby gathering data to support a wider rollout. In the meantime: not sure. The very least we could do would be to make sure everyone involved receives some "unconscious bias training" (e.g. make it a mandatory part of court proceedings).

jquery 11y ago
Part of the point of jury-of-your-peers trials is so people can use their biases to make subjective decisions based on their life experience. The tone/inflection/appearance of the defendant plays into all of that. What you are suggesting would eliminate that. Why have juries at all, then?
- malka 11y ago
  Yes. Why having easily manipulable group of people, instead of professional judges that are used to lawyers and criminal BS ?
  - jquery 11y ago
    "Juries are often justified because they leaven the law with community norms." "Discussions among juries could lead to more thorough consideration of all aspects of the case." (see: 12 Angry Men) "Occasionally jurors find the law to be invalid or unfair, and on that basis acquit the defendant, regardless of the evidence presented that the defendant violated the law. This is commonly referred to as "jury nullification of law" or simply jury nullification." "It may be more difficult to corrupt 12 jurors than one or several judges." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury