Skip to main content

View Diary: Stop-and-frisk on trial (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm done with this. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Onomastic

    I'm not going to sit here digging up statistics and examples to satisfy you.

    I disagree with you on every point, and don't understand why we keep having to dredge this up every few days.

    Do your own research, draw your own conclusions.  I'm out.

    "Throwing a knuckleball for a strike is like throwing a butterfly with hiccups across the street into your neighbor's mailbox." -- Willie Stargell

    by Yasuragi on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 06:46:05 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I am doing my own research (0+ / 0-)

      I am interested in the statistics.

      I am not interested in any of the examples. I am sure there are at least singular cases of racism. Those singular examples have no barring at all on the overall status of the program.

      "Do your own research,"

      Id be glad to recommend the same to everyone on this topic.

      Unfortunately next to noone has bothered to do anything close to serious due diligence. People read the headline and that is all they get. they than proceed to parrot the talking points without questioning.

      This is an important topic and is worth far more thought than people are putting into it.

      •  So everyone's wrong but you? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Denise Oliver Velez

        "Throwing a knuckleball for a strike is like throwing a butterfly with hiccups across the street into your neighbor's mailbox." -- Willie Stargell

        by Yasuragi on Sat Mar 30, 2013 at 06:05:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Everyone eh? (0+ / 0-)

          The DKOS community who responds and participates in any particular discussion is hardly a group of diverse viewpoints.  

          As such the community is EXTREMELY vulnerable to "group think" and rather hostile opposing viewpoints.

          Which IMHO is rather not conductive to the "goal of more and better democrats". Shutting down discussion and pushing away people who support the general platform is not a grand idea.

          If my opinion that "Hey I am not sure this program is racist"  was so unique do you really think the NYD would still be supporting it. As well as many of NYC's population

          Or if the general community consensus that"OMG THIS IS SO RACIST" was actually what NYCer's actually think, that the population would not have already demanded the end to the program?

          NYC broke 80%  pro Obama
          http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/...

          40% support stop and frisk
          http://blogs.villagevoice.com/...

          Meaning at least 20% of Obama supporters in one of the most liberal locations in the united states think the program is a good idea.

          Probably a non insignificant portion of those who are against program are against it for non racial reasons.

          Its probably not a good, smart or reasonable idea to go around launching accusations that at LEAST 20% of Obama's supporters, support racist policies against minorities.  That just does not seem like a reasonable accusation.

          I myself am not even a hardened supporter of the program. I just feel the need to speak out when the community launches into ravenous attack mode without any kind of real information. When that happens someone....anyone needs to speak out.

        •  FYI I found a very good analytic analysis of the (0+ / 0-)

          program.....

          http://www.nyc.gov/...

          If you agree with the findings fine.. if you do not agree with the findings.... to have a legitimate argument and opinion you need to find an opposing piece of  analytic research.

          conclusion Yes there is some racism. No it is not the defining characteristic of the program. It seems like the program is no more or less racially biased than the NYD in general.

          Our results using more precise benchmarks do not eliminate the observed racial disparities. However, they do indicate that the disparities are much smaller than the raw statistics would suggest. This result does not absolve the NYPD of the need to monitor the issue,
          but it also implies that a large-scale restructuring of NYPD SQF policies and procedures is
          unwarranted.
          point contrary to the original author's argument
          "We found that black pedestrians were stopped at a rate that is 20 to 30 percent lower
          than their representation in crime-suspect descriptions. Hispanic pedestrians were stopped
          disproportionately more, by 5 to 10 percent, than their representation among crime-suspect
          descriptions would predict.
          another interesting point
          White suspects were slightly likelier to be issued a summons than were similarly situated
          nonwhite suspects (5.7 percent versus 5.2 percent). On the other hand, arrest rates for
          white suspects were slightly lower than those for similarly situated nonwhites (4.8 percent
          versus 5.1 percent).
          The author's post and the communities reaction are far closer to republican reactionism than the actions of a truly informed population.  

          All of this information is great information, that is absolutely necessarily to make an informed opinion.

          Forming an opinion without this kind of research is a disservice to our duty to become informed voters.  

          •  You found a 2007 "study" commissioned (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Yasuragi

            by Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.

            This is 2013, and Ray Kelly still doesn't want anyone from outside his Department to have any oversight, even after the fiasco of the SCU.  

            Police who investigate themselves - bogus.

            Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

            by Denise Oliver Velez on Sat Mar 30, 2013 at 03:13:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  A study which does (0+ / 0-)

              recommend some action be taken is not good for you eh?

              Perhaps there is reason to consider any potential bias in the report. I do not deny that. But when you turn out a report, or an entity which supports your point of view..... I am sure it would be fair to... you know... think your report may be biased as well? No?

              However you know the great thing about doing a professional analysis with statistics etc? If you are wrong it can be proven with math.

              Although I am very glad you bothered to read the report at least far enough to realize that their may be a conflict of interest. I have reason to trust Rand Corp as at least a somewhat independent source of analysis....which is probably why the NYPD went to them in the first place.

              "To date, 32 recipients of the Nobel Prize, primarily in the fields of economics and physics, have been involved or associated with RAND at some point in their career"

              Again forgive me if I trust an organization with those credentials more than I trust some random blogger who  dismisses valid reports without providing any quantifiable and  verifiable  criticisms..    
              http://www.britannica.com/...

              Im going to go out on a limb here say you probably knew about the said report before.

              don't you think it is a little biased and...intentionally misinformative.. to present your postings and conclusions as absolute without reference to significant works which counter your points?

              Ps. After spending enough time responding here I decided to re-read the original post. One of your sources  

              http://www.ccrjustice.org/...

              cites a source I found very interesting and informative.

              http://www.ccrjustice.org/...

              Despite your dismissive attitude to the source I cited. The numerical analysis from my reading at 3am seems very similar in both reports.

              The main difference seems to be

              "Even after controlling for crime, local social conditions and the concentration of
              police officers in particular areas of the City, Blacks and Latinos are significantly "

              "However, they do indicate that the disparities are much smaller than the raw statistics would suggest. This result does not absolve the NYPD of the need to monitor the issue,"

              Either way I found the arguments a little more convincing in the RAND report but Fagan report did make me more receptive. Im glad we have courts to figure this out.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site