From the Kerner Commission to Milwaukee
August 15, 2016 9:41 AM Subscribe
In 1967, the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (known as the Kerner Commission) started with the mandate to answer three questions: What happened? Why did it happen? What can be done to prevent it from happening again?
Milwaukee resident Reggie Jackson explores those questions in light of systemic issues affecting Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the most segregated metropolitan area in the US, in light of the civil unrest following a police shooting on Saturday.
Milwaukee resident Reggie Jackson explores those questions in light of systemic issues affecting Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the most segregated metropolitan area in the US, in light of the civil unrest following a police shooting on Saturday.
Thank you Fox News for bringing people together with your fair and balanced reporting
posted by NervousVarun at 9:54 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by NervousVarun at 9:54 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Thank you, AFABulous. Much more in-depth look than my post.
posted by larrybob at 9:57 AM on August 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by larrybob at 9:57 AM on August 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
I stayed mostly news-free this weekend, but the situation in Milwaukee spilled over into a (usually) funny gif site that I frequent.
The funny gif site isn't superbly well-moderated, and there are a fair number of MRA/anti-SJW types in the community, but visibility of posts and comments is controlled by up/down voting and most of the truly stupid stuff gets downvoted to the point that you have to go looking for it to find it (I don't).
I say all this as preamble to how surprisingly popular the narrative that "Well, the guy was armed and the cop who shot him was black so anyone protesting this is just a thug" is. That and "I can't support Black Lives Matter because some people riot". It's frustrating, because the this situation is complicated and nuanced, and funny gif site is not the place to be trying to educate anyone on the systematic issues that lead to uprisings surrounding what looks on the surface to be a justified use of force by police. But memes with burning cars in the background get traction because there's no equally quick and easy response.
posted by sparklemotion at 10:01 AM on August 15, 2016
The funny gif site isn't superbly well-moderated, and there are a fair number of MRA/anti-SJW types in the community, but visibility of posts and comments is controlled by up/down voting and most of the truly stupid stuff gets downvoted to the point that you have to go looking for it to find it (I don't).
I say all this as preamble to how surprisingly popular the narrative that "Well, the guy was armed and the cop who shot him was black so anyone protesting this is just a thug" is. That and "I can't support Black Lives Matter because some people riot". It's frustrating, because the this situation is complicated and nuanced, and funny gif site is not the place to be trying to educate anyone on the systematic issues that lead to uprisings surrounding what looks on the surface to be a justified use of force by police. But memes with burning cars in the background get traction because there's no equally quick and easy response.
posted by sparklemotion at 10:01 AM on August 15, 2016
White flight led to segregation as suburban housing was denied through redlining (still a thing!), financial discrimination, and intimidation.
To say nothing of the conscious, deliberate and barely veiled efforts to prevent Milwaukee residents from having access to job centers in the suburbs.
posted by ocschwar at 10:11 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
To say nothing of the conscious, deliberate and barely veiled efforts to prevent Milwaukee residents from having access to job centers in the suburbs.
posted by ocschwar at 10:11 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Not Reggie Jackson, the baseball player, which I had to check.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:16 AM on August 15, 2016
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:16 AM on August 15, 2016
Context/editorializing that wasn't appropriate for my post: This is completely unsurprising to anyone I've talked to. It's not about this individual shooting, which is probably justified (pending the body cam footage). A few weeks ago, there was a shooting of a black man by police in the next suburb over. Two years ago, a Milwaukee cop shot an unarmed mentally ill black man after waking him up as he peacefully slept in a park. There have been many other instances. The black community, especially black men, have been completely and utterly abandoned by white voters.
You can easily draw a box on a map where most white people fear to tread. There is nothing there but corner stores and bars and beauty salons and boarded up buildings. I'm really surprised this didn't happen sooner - how many times can you kick someone before they fight back? What do you do when you have nothing left to lose? I don't like that they're attacking police and reporters, but I can't say I wouldn't do the same, and I don't see other good options for them.
I have reporters from the Washington Post and LA Times contacting me on Twitter (because I am a long-term resident). They would not be here if it were not for these riots. No one cares.
posted by AFABulous at 10:20 AM on August 15, 2016 [17 favorites]
You can easily draw a box on a map where most white people fear to tread. There is nothing there but corner stores and bars and beauty salons and boarded up buildings. I'm really surprised this didn't happen sooner - how many times can you kick someone before they fight back? What do you do when you have nothing left to lose? I don't like that they're attacking police and reporters, but I can't say I wouldn't do the same, and I don't see other good options for them.
I have reporters from the Washington Post and LA Times contacting me on Twitter (because I am a long-term resident). They would not be here if it were not for these riots. No one cares.
posted by AFABulous at 10:20 AM on August 15, 2016 [17 favorites]
There was a simple natural experiment performed that night.
One major city did not have rioting and burning.
This one.
posted by hank at 10:23 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
One major city did not have rioting and burning.
This one.
posted by hank at 10:23 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
I was texting with a friend from Milwaukee Sunday morning and he texted, 'Did you see the news?'. I searched the NYTimes front page online and saw nothing. This was at 11:00AM. A half hour later it was on the national news front page of the NYTimes, but still not a lead story. On the Times front page was a story about Alec Baldwin being perhaps ripped off by an art gallery.
posted by readery at 10:28 AM on August 15, 2016
posted by readery at 10:28 AM on August 15, 2016
It's not about this individual shooting, which is probably justified (pending the body cam footage).
We have seen over and over that the police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police.
We need to drop the notion of justified shootings.
posted by srboisvert at 10:59 AM on August 15, 2016 [27 favorites]
We have seen over and over that the police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police.
We need to drop the notion of justified shootings.
posted by srboisvert at 10:59 AM on August 15, 2016 [27 favorites]
We have seen over and over that the police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police.
But this is a dodge. there's little you can do to "de-escalate" a situation where both parties are armed with guns.
imagine, as a simple case study, if the cops were forbidden to carry guns. the Milwaukee incident would have been automatically de-escalated because the cops would never chase an armed man. the overall consequence would be that the police would not involve themselves in lots of potentially criminal situations. But no one would advocate this...
the liberal view of Milwaukee is that what is basically an open air prison camp for people society has very little use for, should never the less be thoroughly yet delicately policed.
posted by ennui.bz at 11:18 AM on August 15, 2016
police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police.
just to be clear. when cops fail to shoot armed white people, it's both sides rightly assume that the other does not want to shoot. when this fails to hold, armed white people get killed by the cops, and this happens all time. this will never happen with black people in the US unless the police are disarmed.
posted by ennui.bz at 11:27 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Here's the thing, if the police, in all cities not just Milwaukee, demonstrated a real good faith effort to curtail police shootings, we might be able to take a few "justified" shootings every so often. But they make little to no effort whatsoever to pretend to follow the law. They shot a man in his car, in front of his family, who was following the rules. They shot a man who was ON THE GROUND with his HANDS UP. They've killed countless people with little or no provocation and next to no independent proof of due diligence.
If they were doctors, they'd be sued into oblivion and lose their licenses. If they were doctors, they'd be disbarred and possibly would be in jail. Until a cop actually goes to jail or hell, at this point even a trial is a novel thing, we as a country can't believe a word they say.
That's why people are rioting. That's why even a "thug's" life matters. Because they are supposed to arrest you, take you to jail, then you get a trial and go to jail. They are not executioners and breaking the law does not automatically justify murder. Until the police in this country start acting like they believe that as well, things aren't going to get better.
posted by teleri025 at 11:31 AM on August 15, 2016 [28 favorites]
If they were doctors, they'd be sued into oblivion and lose their licenses. If they were doctors, they'd be disbarred and possibly would be in jail. Until a cop actually goes to jail or hell, at this point even a trial is a novel thing, we as a country can't believe a word they say.
That's why people are rioting. That's why even a "thug's" life matters. Because they are supposed to arrest you, take you to jail, then you get a trial and go to jail. They are not executioners and breaking the law does not automatically justify murder. Until the police in this country start acting like they believe that as well, things aren't going to get better.
posted by teleri025 at 11:31 AM on August 15, 2016 [28 favorites]
We have seen over and over that the police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police.
And yet, white people do get shot and killed by the police as well. Yes, not as often. And yes, whites less likely to be stopped for pretextual reasons in the first place, etc. etc. etc. But some scenarios can't be de-escalated. And I'll bet that for every video of police de-escalating situations with armed whites that surfaces the racists can drag up videos of police de-escalating situations involving armed blacks. Mainly because police departments would be incentivized to help find those videos, and also because blacks are more likely to be stopped, and black men, in general, know that their lives are on the line if they don't comply with officer's orders* and are more likely to go along with the "de-escalation".
We need to drop the notion of justified shootings.
It's possible to recognize that law enforcement racism leads makes it more likely that Black lives will be ended without cause while also recognizing that some of the people who get shot by police were presenting a clear and present danger to the police officers who 1.) should be trained how to respond appropriately in self-defense, 2.) should have any use of force (probably including drawn weapons) thoroughly investigated, 3.) in service of (2) be monitored at all times while on duty, and 4.) punished/retrained as appropriate for any improper use of force.
*compliance is obviously not a 100% guarantee of safety from police violence. Which is part of the problem.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:34 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
And yet, white people do get shot and killed by the police as well. Yes, not as often. And yes, whites less likely to be stopped for pretextual reasons in the first place, etc. etc. etc. But some scenarios can't be de-escalated. And I'll bet that for every video of police de-escalating situations with armed whites that surfaces the racists can drag up videos of police de-escalating situations involving armed blacks. Mainly because police departments would be incentivized to help find those videos, and also because blacks are more likely to be stopped, and black men, in general, know that their lives are on the line if they don't comply with officer's orders* and are more likely to go along with the "de-escalation".
We need to drop the notion of justified shootings.
It's possible to recognize that law enforcement racism leads makes it more likely that Black lives will be ended without cause while also recognizing that some of the people who get shot by police were presenting a clear and present danger to the police officers who 1.) should be trained how to respond appropriately in self-defense, 2.) should have any use of force (probably including drawn weapons) thoroughly investigated, 3.) in service of (2) be monitored at all times while on duty, and 4.) punished/retrained as appropriate for any improper use of force.
*compliance is obviously not a 100% guarantee of safety from police violence. Which is part of the problem.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:34 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Here's a racial map of Milwaukee that shows where people reside. For comparison, you can look at the other cities profiled in this article that depicted the 25 most segregated cities in America, with Milwaukee being first.
I lived in Milwaukee for two years, and would like to move back in the future. While I can't say that I ever felt like I had a finger on the pulse of racial relations in that city, and that I saw this event coming, I'm not surprised in light of the fact that I saw that article, and others that depicted various different statistics, while I resided in Milwaukee.
It's seeming to me more and more each day that the United States has its own mini-Palestines scattered across the land, particularly with arguments starting to sound just like those used in Israel-Palestine debates.
posted by Dalby at 11:35 AM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
I lived in Milwaukee for two years, and would like to move back in the future. While I can't say that I ever felt like I had a finger on the pulse of racial relations in that city, and that I saw this event coming, I'm not surprised in light of the fact that I saw that article, and others that depicted various different statistics, while I resided in Milwaukee.
It's seeming to me more and more each day that the United States has its own mini-Palestines scattered across the land, particularly with arguments starting to sound just like those used in Israel-Palestine debates.
posted by Dalby at 11:35 AM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
“The Communications Media, Ironically, Have Failed to Communicate”: The Kerner Report Assesses Media Coverage of Riots and Race Relations.
This is a "see also" (bottom) from the Kernel link.
"But the fact that radio is such a constant background accompaniment can make it an important influence on people’s attitudes, and perhaps on their actions once trouble develops. This is true for several reasons. News presented on local “rock” stations seldom constitutes much more than terse headline items which may startle or frighten but seldom inform. Radio disk jockeys and those who preside over the popular “talk shows” keep a steady patter of information going over the air. When a city is beset by civil strife, this patter can both inform transistor radio-carrying young people where the actions is [sic], and terrify their elders and much of the white community. “Burn, baby, burn,” the slogan of the Watts riot, was inadvertently originated by a radio disc jockey.
"Thus, radio can be an instrument of trouble and tension in a community threatened or inundated with civil disorder. It can also do much to minimize fear by putting fast-paced events into proper perspective. We have found commendable instances, for example, in Detroit, Milwaukee, and New Brunswick, of radio stations and personalities using their air time and influence to try to calm potential rioters. In Section II, we recommend procedures for meetings and consultations for advance planning among those who will cover civil disorders. It is important that radio personnel, and especially disc jockeys and talk show hosts, be included in such pre-planning."
It's interesting to see communications talked about then and the reality today.
posted by clavdivs at 11:56 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
This is a "see also" (bottom) from the Kernel link.
"But the fact that radio is such a constant background accompaniment can make it an important influence on people’s attitudes, and perhaps on their actions once trouble develops. This is true for several reasons. News presented on local “rock” stations seldom constitutes much more than terse headline items which may startle or frighten but seldom inform. Radio disk jockeys and those who preside over the popular “talk shows” keep a steady patter of information going over the air. When a city is beset by civil strife, this patter can both inform transistor radio-carrying young people where the actions is [sic], and terrify their elders and much of the white community. “Burn, baby, burn,” the slogan of the Watts riot, was inadvertently originated by a radio disc jockey.
"Thus, radio can be an instrument of trouble and tension in a community threatened or inundated with civil disorder. It can also do much to minimize fear by putting fast-paced events into proper perspective. We have found commendable instances, for example, in Detroit, Milwaukee, and New Brunswick, of radio stations and personalities using their air time and influence to try to calm potential rioters. In Section II, we recommend procedures for meetings and consultations for advance planning among those who will cover civil disorders. It is important that radio personnel, and especially disc jockeys and talk show hosts, be included in such pre-planning."
It's interesting to see communications talked about then and the reality today.
posted by clavdivs at 11:56 AM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
If you guys are looking for demographics then there are sites available such as this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/
posted by I-baLL at 12:03 PM on August 15, 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/
posted by I-baLL at 12:03 PM on August 15, 2016
It's frustrating, because the this situation is complicated and nuanced, and funny gif site is not the place to be trying to educate anyone on the systematic issues that lead to uprisings surrounding what looks on the surface to be a justified use of force by police.
You're probably talking about Imgur, which I like to think of as Reddit with pictures.
If here's one thing I've learned from Reddit/Imgur, it's that the old trope, that you need to teach people to be racist, is actually wrong. You just need to give them a snapshot of the present facts, divorced from all history, context, critique and analysis and let them "reason" themselves into a racist cul-de-sac from which they'll never be dislodged.
For example,
Q: Why is the murder rate among blacks higher than whites?
A: Because blacks are innately more inclined to murder than whites.
Perfect, circular, satisfying. Just the kind of deterministic just-world bullshit that they get off on.
posted by klanawa at 12:12 PM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
You're probably talking about Imgur, which I like to think of as Reddit with pictures.
If here's one thing I've learned from Reddit/Imgur, it's that the old trope, that you need to teach people to be racist, is actually wrong. You just need to give them a snapshot of the present facts, divorced from all history, context, critique and analysis and let them "reason" themselves into a racist cul-de-sac from which they'll never be dislodged.
For example,
Q: Why is the murder rate among blacks higher than whites?
A: Because blacks are innately more inclined to murder than whites.
Perfect, circular, satisfying. Just the kind of deterministic just-world bullshit that they get off on.
posted by klanawa at 12:12 PM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
If they were doctors, they'd be sued into oblivion and lose their licenses.
The City of Chicago has been sued/settled into oblivion. Over half a billion in settlements for police misconduct. Guess how much didn't go into the teacher's pension fund when it was supposed to.
posted by srboisvert at 12:17 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
The City of Chicago has been sued/settled into oblivion. Over half a billion in settlements for police misconduct. Guess how much didn't go into the teacher's pension fund when it was supposed to.
posted by srboisvert at 12:17 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
We need to drop the notion of justified shootings.
It's possible to recognize that law enforcement racism leads makes it more likely that Black lives will be ended without cause while also recognizing that some of the people who get shot by police were presenting a clear and present danger to the police officers
Let a jury decide that. Just like a jury should decide whether I, a non-police person, have justifiably shot someone. The police should not be the ones determining whether one of their own was clean.
And any police officer who kills someone, for any reason whatsoever, should be fired. If they've made retirement, let them retire, but they don't get to be police anymore, because they have failed at keeping people alive.
posted by Etrigan at 12:20 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
It's possible to recognize that law enforcement racism leads makes it more likely that Black lives will be ended without cause while also recognizing that some of the people who get shot by police were presenting a clear and present danger to the police officers
Let a jury decide that. Just like a jury should decide whether I, a non-police person, have justifiably shot someone. The police should not be the ones determining whether one of their own was clean.
And any police officer who kills someone, for any reason whatsoever, should be fired. If they've made retirement, let them retire, but they don't get to be police anymore, because they have failed at keeping people alive.
posted by Etrigan at 12:20 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
There are so many moral hazards and perverse incentives in policing these days, it's like a burr that has gotten wound up in a skein of yarn. Involved officers being able to review evidence and video before making statements, delayed questioning, and police unions and policy/contracts making private and somewhat-binding prosecutorial decisions against their own.
posted by rhizome at 12:34 PM on August 15, 2016
posted by rhizome at 12:34 PM on August 15, 2016
The police should not be the ones determining whether one of their own was clean.
I agree. And the efforts by police unions to block attempts to bring more transparency and accountability to their own (see, e.g. fighting against body cams, blue cone of silence, etc, etc) are deplorable.
And any police officer who kills someone, for any reason whatsoever, should be fired.
And you lost me. The Orlando mass murderer was in the process of killing hostages when he was shot by police. I don't have the strength to go crawling back through recent U.S. mass shootings to pull out other examples of police (IMO, based on the facts available to me) justifiably using force to end a shooting spree. That's not even getting into the situations where a cop uses lethal force in defense of just a single non-cop person.
There are good reasons for cops to use lethal force, but if a fair investigation finds that any use of force was justified, the cop shouldn't be at risk of losing their job. But maybe they need more/better training, etc.
The fact that the investigations can't be trusted to be fair these days is a huge part of the problem.
posted by sparklemotion at 12:37 PM on August 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
I agree. And the efforts by police unions to block attempts to bring more transparency and accountability to their own (see, e.g. fighting against body cams, blue cone of silence, etc, etc) are deplorable.
And any police officer who kills someone, for any reason whatsoever, should be fired.
And you lost me. The Orlando mass murderer was in the process of killing hostages when he was shot by police. I don't have the strength to go crawling back through recent U.S. mass shootings to pull out other examples of police (IMO, based on the facts available to me) justifiably using force to end a shooting spree. That's not even getting into the situations where a cop uses lethal force in defense of just a single non-cop person.
There are good reasons for cops to use lethal force, but if a fair investigation finds that any use of force was justified, the cop shouldn't be at risk of losing their job. But maybe they need more/better training, etc.
The fact that the investigations can't be trusted to be fair these days is a huge part of the problem.
posted by sparklemotion at 12:37 PM on August 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
Just a note - in Wisconsin, the local police do not investigate themselves when they have killed someone. A bill was passed in April 2014 at the urging of a father whose (white) son was killed by police.
There is a state agency called the Wisconsin Department of Criminal Investigation: Special Investigations Bureau that takes over.
"Right now [as of May 2016], Wisconsin law requires a minimum of two investigators from an outside agency to head officer-involved death investigations.
However, this new bureau looks to offer police another impartial option rather than turning to surrounding law enforcement agencies." [source]
posted by AFABulous at 12:57 PM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
There is a state agency called the Wisconsin Department of Criminal Investigation: Special Investigations Bureau that takes over.
"Right now [as of May 2016], Wisconsin law requires a minimum of two investigators from an outside agency to head officer-involved death investigations.
However, this new bureau looks to offer police another impartial option rather than turning to surrounding law enforcement agencies." [source]
posted by AFABulous at 12:57 PM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Wisconsin is the worst state in the country to be a Black person; Milwaukee in particular. Black men are incarcerated at the highest rates in the United States, nearly double the average. Racial inequality in education, employment and poverty is far above the national average. Milwaukee has long been called the most segregated city in America. Black people in Milwaukee are more likely to be stopped by police than in any other metro area. Voter ID laws "are an intentional effort to suppress the Black vote."
White couple from Wisconsin, during our required class for white parents considering transracial adoption: "We don't have any black people here, but racism isn't really a problem."
posted by not that girl at 12:59 PM on August 15, 2016
White couple from Wisconsin, during our required class for white parents considering transracial adoption: "We don't have any black people here, but racism isn't really a problem."
posted by not that girl at 12:59 PM on August 15, 2016
I will make one comment.
To begin with, I think that some of what people are getting at here does in fact touch on some root issues. Black America is significantly more impoverished than white America, and street-level crime goes hand in hand with that poverty. Across the country, our black neighborhoods are significantly poorer and more crime-ridden than our white neighborhoods.
I think there's an extent to which this is a self-reinforcing problem. The research I'm aware of has shown that small business is a primary driver of economic development. Small businesses are also extremely crime averse - no one wants to open a new business on the same block where shootings are common place. This results in a concentration of opportunities in already-safer neighborhoods, while the drug trade, robbery, burglary, sex trafficking, etc continue to be primary sources of income for many people in poorer neighborhoods.
Poverty also increases reliance on public transit, with its higher commute times to get to those jobs that are outside the violent neighborhoods, and then public transit itself becomes an artery along which crime circulates (you can trace the bus and train lines in my city by plotting violent crimes). I would absolutely agree that systemic racism is one of the factors maintaining the economic divide between AA and white Americans, but it's also a huge complex issue without a single, easily fixed cause. And part of the problem is that violent crime IS one of those causes. Just growing up in certain neighborhoods in Chicago can give you PTSD! If you grow up with gunfire, robbery, and murder on your block, how are you supposed to do well in school? If your whole social circle is gangmembers, how are you expected to look to hourly employment at $8/hour as a viable way to support yourself? If you might be shot just because of the neighborhood you live in, why wouldn't you join your neighborhood's gang for at least some measure of protection?
Do you seriously think that there exists some punitive measures you could take against police that would have any effect on those issues?
Whenever we specifically talk about proportionality of incarceration/Police presence/Police use of force in an area, there's a figure I always look up that tends to not be seen. That figure is the number and type of murder victims. A Milwaukee paper is tracking Milwaukee's 2016 homicides. 77% of those victims are African American. According to wikipedia, as of 2010, African Americans accounted for only 40% of Milwaukee's population. Milwaukee has in general experienced a rising rate of violent crime in recent years. I don't have any special knowledge of Milwaukee, but my suspicion is that it's tied to Chicago's status as a drug trade shipping hub. Midwestern cities with ties to Chicago gangs are experiencing spikes in violent crime, including murder, as is Chicago itself. However, like I said I'm not an expert and this is speculation. The big thing I'm driving at however is that violent crime is a significant part of why Milwaukee may be one of the worst places to be African American (and especially an AA man, 81% of the homicide victims are male).
Specifically with regards to AFABulous's first comment:
Shots didn't just "ring out," a man was shot and had to be extracted for treatment by police in an armored vehicle. MPD squad cars and armored vehicles have been struck by gunfire. Police have thus far not returned fire.
I also think it's worthwhile to remember that protesters angry about police use of force immediately shot at a woman in a vehicle in Ferguson after she hit a protester. The man was standing alone in a divided street in dark clothes at night. The driver immediately tried to stop to check on him before multiple people shot at her car and she fled. She was luckily not hit by the gunfire, but her vehicle was. The man who had just been struck by a car was immediately moved around by others and in fact was dragged away from the scene without medical care. This of course is the opposite of what should occur after a serious vehicle crash, especially involving a pedestrian. The last I heard, no one at local hospitals had any contact with him, no one had his identity. Is he dead? Maybe, who knows? If so, could his life have been saved by proper medical care? Possibly?
Regarding whether Castile's case is "clear cut:" say there was an OIS and the agency posted the dash cam or BWC video immediately following the shooting, but without any of the moments leading up to or during the shooting. Is there any possibility - even if a gun was seen in that video - that you would say the situation was "clear cut" and clearly the officer acted appropriately? How is it ever possible to say you have the "clear cut" answer having exclusively seen video from after the fact?
I would in fact argue that this attitude or position with regards to OIS is part of what causes protests to become riots. An "eyewitness" makes a statement, or a video is posted 100% after the fact, and on that basis there are calls for immediate firing and prosecution of officers. Investigations take time, especially investigations of high profile OIS where an outside agency must come in and make sure to cross every t and dot every i. I think that increasingly the Jamar Clark case must be the model for agencies and prosecutors in the future. Then if people feel that a decision not to indict was incorrect, they can at least make that decision on some solid basis.
Regarding stops: police are currently damned if we do and damned if we don't. Police resources are not distributed evenly in a city, nor should they be. Patrol and pro-active police work is concentrated in high crime areas. This month so far I have recovered one stolen car, multiple stolen laptops/ipads, a stolen handgun and an illegally possessed handgun by making proactive stops in areas in my district that I know to have problems with stolen cars and property. Other officers in my district have recovered another two stolen cars from the same 4-block area so far this month alone. All occupied, but solely by juveniles, many of whom have provided several false names to police. I also last night stopped a car that fit the MO of the ring of car thieves operating in my district that turned out to be legally owned. This ring of thieves is comprised of individuals belonging to a particular immigrant community and they're stealing cars off of dealership lots, requiring a traffic stop so I can check the vehicle's VIN in the common situation that they don't have a state license plate. I'm sure those young men now have a story about the racist police that stopped them, removed the driver from the car, ran the VIN, and carefully examined their photo IDs as if they were criminals. I get it, being stopped by the police sucks. No matter how respectful I am it sucks. But we're also paid to investigate possible crime and apprehend criminals. I am not a psychic and if I am to actually find criminals and investigate suspicious activity, sometimes I'm going to come up empty.
This is the sort of police work that citizens generally expect of their police department, the investigation and recovery of stolen property as well as getting illegal guns and the people armed with them off the streets. There are several editorials I've read about police slowdowns in my city, in Chicago, in Baltimore, and others where traffic and pedestrian stops have recently plummeted. Citizens living in the neighborhoods, city council members, and department administration have all excoriated patrol officers and in some cases accused them of cowardice due to reductions in the number of traffic and other stops. At the same time, "make fewer stops" is exactly the demand being made by the activist groups. In that situation, the only frankly rational course of action is to make fewer stops. City council might be mad, but you're not going to be the target of a riots, protests, and media attention for not stopping a car. On top of that, traffic and pedestrian stops are amongst the most dangerous things police do. Why risk your life making a traffic stop when no one cares about all the times you safely recovered a stolen handgun or stolen car and arrested the suspect without incident?
"We have seen over and over that the police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police. "
Harvard researcher Roland Fryer has found that Police are no more likely to shoot black suspects than white suspects. In fact in Houston he found police were less likely to shoot black suspects. More broadly, armed black (and white, and asian, etc) suspects are taken into custody every single day by police without an OIS. These never make the news because again, no one cares. I would suggest to you that your perspective is affected by the news you choose to follow.
If you feel that police should not be able to defend our lives, then I think the onus is on you to enter our country's most violent neighborhoods and do something to reduce the violent crime. As of the 2010 census, African Americans accounted for 12.6% of the U.S. population. According to the FBI, 51.6% of our homicide victims in 2014 were African American. You could disarm police tomorrow and it would make close to 0 difference in the number of young African American men ending up dead. In fact I would expect that the complete elimination of police enforcement that this would cause would result in significantly more corpses.
"Let a jury decide that. Just like a jury should decide whether I, a non-police person, have justifiably shot someone."
If you were inside your own home and a stranger forced entrance and you shot him - even if he was unarmed - there is almost 0 chance you're going to get indicted or face trial. There would have to be extraordinary circumstances to result in a jury trial in that instance. Or if you had a carry permit and shot an assailant in an armed robbery. These situations are rare, most shootings and homicides are committed with illegal guns in the commission of a crime rather than in defense, but the idea that non-police always face trial is simply not true. I will not respond to the rest of your comment.
rhizome, police are the only people required to give a statement about a shooting. Period. Everyone else in this country has access to the 5th amendment but we do not. Witnesses are not required to say anything. Suspects and arrestees aren't required to say anything. Police MUST provide a statement.
Further, the psychological effects of critical incidents are extremely well documented. There are unavoidable physiological reactions that severely impair memory and recall, and any statement given immediately after the fact will absolutely, without doubt, contain innaccuracies. False memories are common, but research has shown that about a 72 hour delay significantly improves the accuracy of recall. If you care about accuracy, then you care about a delay in officer statements on critical incidents.
I also don't understand complaints about police reviewing body cam or dash footage before writing or giving a statement. It's actually policy in my agency that we can review footage for non-critical incidents before writing the report, but we are not allowed to review before giving a statement on a critical incident. To me, I would think you would want that report or that statement to be as accurate as possible. Human memory is fallible. I've seen an incident in my city where a burglary suspect's gun was recovered the following day because it was captured flying into a yard on review of dash cam video. The officer on scene didn't see it at night and with their attention laser-focused on the suspect, but it was captured on video. What is the feared negative outcome of "the officer reviewed video to make sure their statement was factually correct"?
"If they were doctors, they'd be sued into oblivion and lose their licenses. If they were doctors, they'd be disbarred and possibly would be in jail. Until a cop actually goes to jail or hell, at this point even a trial is a novel thing, we as a country can't believe a word they say."
Again, simply untrue. In fact there have been several posts here on metafilter regarding racial inequities in care. A quick google turned up this article. Despite multiple malpractice suits, doctors often keep practicing. Hundreds of thousands die annually from medical mistakes. There is almost NEVER a prosecution for those deaths, even in cases where there's a successful medical malpractice suit. The reality is that doctors are just as subject to racial bias as anyone else and kill hundreds of times the number of people that police do every year, with almost no consequences. But no one cares, and in fact you have held the medical industry up as an example of how police ought to work. Why is that?
Finally, the Fryer study I linked above indicated that African American citizens, at least in NYC, are more likely to have lesser levels of force used on them. I'm still curious if Dr. Fryer controlled for things like precinct, or if he just did a case by case comparison of the facts the officers were presented with, but I would not be surprised if there were some disparities. I am personally generally a low force cop and I would like to think that my decisions in any given situation are based on the facts of that situation. It's also true that in my precinct, all of the shooting suspects we've had on my shift for the past couple years have been African American, all of our shooting victims the same (and the victims have often been armed as well), and I'm human. It's hard to not live that reality every working shift and not have it affect your perceptions.
Part of why I do this job is that I think people should be able to live their lives without fear of being robbed, shot, raped, stabbed, and so on. African Americans are disproportionately the victims of violent crime in my city (and across the country) by a HUGE margin. There is a huge tangled web of causes of this problem, and the "snitches get stitches," "fuck 12" crowd are part of it. Economics, crime, education, and healthcare are also parts. If your position is that if we just change and punish police enough it will fix the problems, you are in my opinion wrong. In fact I think the current focus that is 100% centered on police to the exclusion of all else will only exacerbate the problems, as police withdraw from the community further in simple self preservation.
posted by firebrick at 1:45 PM on August 15, 2016 [14 favorites]
To begin with, I think that some of what people are getting at here does in fact touch on some root issues. Black America is significantly more impoverished than white America, and street-level crime goes hand in hand with that poverty. Across the country, our black neighborhoods are significantly poorer and more crime-ridden than our white neighborhoods.
I think there's an extent to which this is a self-reinforcing problem. The research I'm aware of has shown that small business is a primary driver of economic development. Small businesses are also extremely crime averse - no one wants to open a new business on the same block where shootings are common place. This results in a concentration of opportunities in already-safer neighborhoods, while the drug trade, robbery, burglary, sex trafficking, etc continue to be primary sources of income for many people in poorer neighborhoods.
Poverty also increases reliance on public transit, with its higher commute times to get to those jobs that are outside the violent neighborhoods, and then public transit itself becomes an artery along which crime circulates (you can trace the bus and train lines in my city by plotting violent crimes). I would absolutely agree that systemic racism is one of the factors maintaining the economic divide between AA and white Americans, but it's also a huge complex issue without a single, easily fixed cause. And part of the problem is that violent crime IS one of those causes. Just growing up in certain neighborhoods in Chicago can give you PTSD! If you grow up with gunfire, robbery, and murder on your block, how are you supposed to do well in school? If your whole social circle is gangmembers, how are you expected to look to hourly employment at $8/hour as a viable way to support yourself? If you might be shot just because of the neighborhood you live in, why wouldn't you join your neighborhood's gang for at least some measure of protection?
Do you seriously think that there exists some punitive measures you could take against police that would have any effect on those issues?
Whenever we specifically talk about proportionality of incarceration/Police presence/Police use of force in an area, there's a figure I always look up that tends to not be seen. That figure is the number and type of murder victims. A Milwaukee paper is tracking Milwaukee's 2016 homicides. 77% of those victims are African American. According to wikipedia, as of 2010, African Americans accounted for only 40% of Milwaukee's population. Milwaukee has in general experienced a rising rate of violent crime in recent years. I don't have any special knowledge of Milwaukee, but my suspicion is that it's tied to Chicago's status as a drug trade shipping hub. Midwestern cities with ties to Chicago gangs are experiencing spikes in violent crime, including murder, as is Chicago itself. However, like I said I'm not an expert and this is speculation. The big thing I'm driving at however is that violent crime is a significant part of why Milwaukee may be one of the worst places to be African American (and especially an AA man, 81% of the homicide victims are male).
Specifically with regards to AFABulous's first comment:
Shots didn't just "ring out," a man was shot and had to be extracted for treatment by police in an armored vehicle. MPD squad cars and armored vehicles have been struck by gunfire. Police have thus far not returned fire.
I also think it's worthwhile to remember that protesters angry about police use of force immediately shot at a woman in a vehicle in Ferguson after she hit a protester. The man was standing alone in a divided street in dark clothes at night. The driver immediately tried to stop to check on him before multiple people shot at her car and she fled. She was luckily not hit by the gunfire, but her vehicle was. The man who had just been struck by a car was immediately moved around by others and in fact was dragged away from the scene without medical care. This of course is the opposite of what should occur after a serious vehicle crash, especially involving a pedestrian. The last I heard, no one at local hospitals had any contact with him, no one had his identity. Is he dead? Maybe, who knows? If so, could his life have been saved by proper medical care? Possibly?
Regarding whether Castile's case is "clear cut:" say there was an OIS and the agency posted the dash cam or BWC video immediately following the shooting, but without any of the moments leading up to or during the shooting. Is there any possibility - even if a gun was seen in that video - that you would say the situation was "clear cut" and clearly the officer acted appropriately? How is it ever possible to say you have the "clear cut" answer having exclusively seen video from after the fact?
I would in fact argue that this attitude or position with regards to OIS is part of what causes protests to become riots. An "eyewitness" makes a statement, or a video is posted 100% after the fact, and on that basis there are calls for immediate firing and prosecution of officers. Investigations take time, especially investigations of high profile OIS where an outside agency must come in and make sure to cross every t and dot every i. I think that increasingly the Jamar Clark case must be the model for agencies and prosecutors in the future. Then if people feel that a decision not to indict was incorrect, they can at least make that decision on some solid basis.
Regarding stops: police are currently damned if we do and damned if we don't. Police resources are not distributed evenly in a city, nor should they be. Patrol and pro-active police work is concentrated in high crime areas. This month so far I have recovered one stolen car, multiple stolen laptops/ipads, a stolen handgun and an illegally possessed handgun by making proactive stops in areas in my district that I know to have problems with stolen cars and property. Other officers in my district have recovered another two stolen cars from the same 4-block area so far this month alone. All occupied, but solely by juveniles, many of whom have provided several false names to police. I also last night stopped a car that fit the MO of the ring of car thieves operating in my district that turned out to be legally owned. This ring of thieves is comprised of individuals belonging to a particular immigrant community and they're stealing cars off of dealership lots, requiring a traffic stop so I can check the vehicle's VIN in the common situation that they don't have a state license plate. I'm sure those young men now have a story about the racist police that stopped them, removed the driver from the car, ran the VIN, and carefully examined their photo IDs as if they were criminals. I get it, being stopped by the police sucks. No matter how respectful I am it sucks. But we're also paid to investigate possible crime and apprehend criminals. I am not a psychic and if I am to actually find criminals and investigate suspicious activity, sometimes I'm going to come up empty.
This is the sort of police work that citizens generally expect of their police department, the investigation and recovery of stolen property as well as getting illegal guns and the people armed with them off the streets. There are several editorials I've read about police slowdowns in my city, in Chicago, in Baltimore, and others where traffic and pedestrian stops have recently plummeted. Citizens living in the neighborhoods, city council members, and department administration have all excoriated patrol officers and in some cases accused them of cowardice due to reductions in the number of traffic and other stops. At the same time, "make fewer stops" is exactly the demand being made by the activist groups. In that situation, the only frankly rational course of action is to make fewer stops. City council might be mad, but you're not going to be the target of a riots, protests, and media attention for not stopping a car. On top of that, traffic and pedestrian stops are amongst the most dangerous things police do. Why risk your life making a traffic stop when no one cares about all the times you safely recovered a stolen handgun or stolen car and arrested the suspect without incident?
"We have seen over and over that the police can de-escalate scenarios with armed white people, even those who point guns at police. "
Harvard researcher Roland Fryer has found that Police are no more likely to shoot black suspects than white suspects. In fact in Houston he found police were less likely to shoot black suspects. More broadly, armed black (and white, and asian, etc) suspects are taken into custody every single day by police without an OIS. These never make the news because again, no one cares. I would suggest to you that your perspective is affected by the news you choose to follow.
If you feel that police should not be able to defend our lives, then I think the onus is on you to enter our country's most violent neighborhoods and do something to reduce the violent crime. As of the 2010 census, African Americans accounted for 12.6% of the U.S. population. According to the FBI, 51.6% of our homicide victims in 2014 were African American. You could disarm police tomorrow and it would make close to 0 difference in the number of young African American men ending up dead. In fact I would expect that the complete elimination of police enforcement that this would cause would result in significantly more corpses.
"Let a jury decide that. Just like a jury should decide whether I, a non-police person, have justifiably shot someone."
If you were inside your own home and a stranger forced entrance and you shot him - even if he was unarmed - there is almost 0 chance you're going to get indicted or face trial. There would have to be extraordinary circumstances to result in a jury trial in that instance. Or if you had a carry permit and shot an assailant in an armed robbery. These situations are rare, most shootings and homicides are committed with illegal guns in the commission of a crime rather than in defense, but the idea that non-police always face trial is simply not true. I will not respond to the rest of your comment.
rhizome, police are the only people required to give a statement about a shooting. Period. Everyone else in this country has access to the 5th amendment but we do not. Witnesses are not required to say anything. Suspects and arrestees aren't required to say anything. Police MUST provide a statement.
Further, the psychological effects of critical incidents are extremely well documented. There are unavoidable physiological reactions that severely impair memory and recall, and any statement given immediately after the fact will absolutely, without doubt, contain innaccuracies. False memories are common, but research has shown that about a 72 hour delay significantly improves the accuracy of recall. If you care about accuracy, then you care about a delay in officer statements on critical incidents.
I also don't understand complaints about police reviewing body cam or dash footage before writing or giving a statement. It's actually policy in my agency that we can review footage for non-critical incidents before writing the report, but we are not allowed to review before giving a statement on a critical incident. To me, I would think you would want that report or that statement to be as accurate as possible. Human memory is fallible. I've seen an incident in my city where a burglary suspect's gun was recovered the following day because it was captured flying into a yard on review of dash cam video. The officer on scene didn't see it at night and with their attention laser-focused on the suspect, but it was captured on video. What is the feared negative outcome of "the officer reviewed video to make sure their statement was factually correct"?
"If they were doctors, they'd be sued into oblivion and lose their licenses. If they were doctors, they'd be disbarred and possibly would be in jail. Until a cop actually goes to jail or hell, at this point even a trial is a novel thing, we as a country can't believe a word they say."
Again, simply untrue. In fact there have been several posts here on metafilter regarding racial inequities in care. A quick google turned up this article. Despite multiple malpractice suits, doctors often keep practicing. Hundreds of thousands die annually from medical mistakes. There is almost NEVER a prosecution for those deaths, even in cases where there's a successful medical malpractice suit. The reality is that doctors are just as subject to racial bias as anyone else and kill hundreds of times the number of people that police do every year, with almost no consequences. But no one cares, and in fact you have held the medical industry up as an example of how police ought to work. Why is that?
Finally, the Fryer study I linked above indicated that African American citizens, at least in NYC, are more likely to have lesser levels of force used on them. I'm still curious if Dr. Fryer controlled for things like precinct, or if he just did a case by case comparison of the facts the officers were presented with, but I would not be surprised if there were some disparities. I am personally generally a low force cop and I would like to think that my decisions in any given situation are based on the facts of that situation. It's also true that in my precinct, all of the shooting suspects we've had on my shift for the past couple years have been African American, all of our shooting victims the same (and the victims have often been armed as well), and I'm human. It's hard to not live that reality every working shift and not have it affect your perceptions.
Part of why I do this job is that I think people should be able to live their lives without fear of being robbed, shot, raped, stabbed, and so on. African Americans are disproportionately the victims of violent crime in my city (and across the country) by a HUGE margin. There is a huge tangled web of causes of this problem, and the "snitches get stitches," "fuck 12" crowd are part of it. Economics, crime, education, and healthcare are also parts. If your position is that if we just change and punish police enough it will fix the problems, you are in my opinion wrong. In fact I think the current focus that is 100% centered on police to the exclusion of all else will only exacerbate the problems, as police withdraw from the community further in simple self preservation.
posted by firebrick at 1:45 PM on August 15, 2016 [14 favorites]
Thanks for your perspective, firebrick.
I know you only wanted to make one comment, but I'm wondering if you could share more about why you feel like the "the current focus [is] 100% centered on police"?
It seems to me that problems within law enforcement are finally getting treated as part of the "huge tangled web" and people are pushing for solutions now, but "[e]conomics, crime, education, and healthcare"are also issues that people have been trying to address for decades.
posted by sparklemotion at 2:08 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
I know you only wanted to make one comment, but I'm wondering if you could share more about why you feel like the "the current focus [is] 100% centered on police"?
It seems to me that problems within law enforcement are finally getting treated as part of the "huge tangled web" and people are pushing for solutions now, but "[e]conomics, crime, education, and healthcare"are also issues that people have been trying to address for decades.
posted by sparklemotion at 2:08 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
i guess you could say my question is why are we holding the police to a higher standard of conduct than gang members? that seems like a double standard
posted by beerperson at 2:11 PM on August 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by beerperson at 2:11 PM on August 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
why are we holding the police to a higher standard of conduct than gang members?
Because the police swear an oath to uphold and serve the community?
Because the police are empowered to perform violent acts (raiding, arresting, seizing, etc.) on behalf of the state (and therefore on behalf of all of us)?
Because the police expect civilians to treat them with respect (in the sense of treating someone as an authority)?
Because expecting better conduct of police officers than criminals should be a tautology?
posted by sparklemotion at 2:19 PM on August 15, 2016 [18 favorites]
Because the police swear an oath to uphold and serve the community?
Because the police are empowered to perform violent acts (raiding, arresting, seizing, etc.) on behalf of the state (and therefore on behalf of all of us)?
Because the police expect civilians to treat them with respect (in the sense of treating someone as an authority)?
Because expecting better conduct of police officers than criminals should be a tautology?
posted by sparklemotion at 2:19 PM on August 15, 2016 [18 favorites]
i guess you could say my question is why are we holding the police to a higher standard of conduct than gang members?
Is this a serious question? I'm not paying and arming gang members to fight crime in my city.
posted by praemunire at 2:46 PM on August 15, 2016 [8 favorites]
Is this a serious question? I'm not paying and arming gang members to fight crime in my city.
posted by praemunire at 2:46 PM on August 15, 2016 [8 favorites]
At the same time, "make fewer stops" is exactly the demand being made by the activist groups. In that situation, the only frankly rational course of action is to make fewer stops. City council might be mad, but you're not going to be the target of a riots, protests, and media attention for not stopping a car. On top of that, traffic and pedestrian stops are amongst the most dangerous things police do. Why risk your life making a traffic stop when no one cares about all the times you safely recovered a stolen handgun or stolen car and arrested the suspect without incident?
First of all, the issue has usually been a drop in the level of enforcement generally, not stops (which no one actually wants more of in the abstract). You know, like not writing traffic tickets.
Second, the activist demand is to make fewer BS stops. You know, like the "make something up" stop that the Baltimore cops did right in front of a DOJ observer. (Yes, I already know what your response is going to be here, as before: you can't possibly speak to this, like the dozens of "isolated incidents" in "other departments" that people will mention to you, but of course you can discuss with confidence the righteous cop mindset that you just know prevails everywhere. Except, coincidentally, during those isolated incidents in those other, mysterious departments.)
Finally, performing your job duties is not discretionary. It is not a favor you are doing the city that you can quit doing if you don't think the populace is sufficiently grateful. It is your job. If you don't want to do your job, then the solution is to quit, not to slack like some whiny teenager being oppressed by Mr. Magee at the five-and-dime.
posted by praemunire at 2:58 PM on August 15, 2016 [17 favorites]
First of all, the issue has usually been a drop in the level of enforcement generally, not stops (which no one actually wants more of in the abstract). You know, like not writing traffic tickets.
Second, the activist demand is to make fewer BS stops. You know, like the "make something up" stop that the Baltimore cops did right in front of a DOJ observer. (Yes, I already know what your response is going to be here, as before: you can't possibly speak to this, like the dozens of "isolated incidents" in "other departments" that people will mention to you, but of course you can discuss with confidence the righteous cop mindset that you just know prevails everywhere. Except, coincidentally, during those isolated incidents in those other, mysterious departments.)
Finally, performing your job duties is not discretionary. It is not a favor you are doing the city that you can quit doing if you don't think the populace is sufficiently grateful. It is your job. If you don't want to do your job, then the solution is to quit, not to slack like some whiny teenager being oppressed by Mr. Magee at the five-and-dime.
posted by praemunire at 2:58 PM on August 15, 2016 [17 favorites]
I am very concerned about what Trump will say or incite at his appearances tomorrow in Milwaukee and West Bend, especially if many protesters choose to attend his rallies. I hope it's not all going to erupt in hate speech and violence, but Trump will need to grab headlines again to take attention off his poorly received foreign policy speech today, which includes tests to ensure that prospective immigrants "hold American values" and the NYT articles about his incompetent campaign and the secret ledger revealing Paul Manafort's $12.7 million dollar fees from his Ukraine work. It could be very bad.
posted by carmicha at 4:29 PM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by carmicha at 4:29 PM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
rhizome, police are the only people required to give a statement about a shooting. Period. Everyone else in this country has access to the 5th amendment but we do not. Witnesses are not required to say anything. Suspects and arrestees aren't required to say anything. Police MUST provide a statement.
From what I understand, cops get to make a statement after a "cooling off period" where crooked cops have ample time to agree on alibis, destroy evidence, and intimidate witnesses. Non-police suspected of a crime will be held and interrogated until someone cracks and a case can be made.
posted by dr_dank at 4:38 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
This results in a concentration of opportunities in already-safer neighborhoods, while the drug trade, robbery, burglary, sex trafficking, etc continue to be primary sources of income for many people in poorer neighborhoods.
Continue to be primary sources of income for some, but by and large the problem is that for many, many more people than who benefit from the vice trades, their primary source of income is "nothing." Still others have the kind of upward mobility provided by working minimum wage jobs for just enough hours under the line not to receive benefits. This may be what you mean by it being complicated, but the vice trades are neither the chicken nor the egg. They're more like the frying pan that will take either one.
This is doubly or triply so for those who have been incarcerated, and many of those have convictions for offenses that should not result in prison time and for offenses that are unequally enforced across the jurisdiction. How many black Milwaukeeans have to check the "have you ever been arrested?" box on the job application, and how many of those are due to getting jacked up on some bullshit?
posted by rhizome at 4:40 PM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Continue to be primary sources of income for some, but by and large the problem is that for many, many more people than who benefit from the vice trades, their primary source of income is "nothing." Still others have the kind of upward mobility provided by working minimum wage jobs for just enough hours under the line not to receive benefits. This may be what you mean by it being complicated, but the vice trades are neither the chicken nor the egg. They're more like the frying pan that will take either one.
This is doubly or triply so for those who have been incarcerated, and many of those have convictions for offenses that should not result in prison time and for offenses that are unequally enforced across the jurisdiction. How many black Milwaukeeans have to check the "have you ever been arrested?" box on the job application, and how many of those are due to getting jacked up on some bullshit?
posted by rhizome at 4:40 PM on August 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
17-year-old Lew Blank was fiddling around with the Weldon Cooper Center’s Racial Dot Map when he discovered something disturbing about Wisconsin, where he lives: More than half of the African-American neighborhoods in the state are actually jails.
posted by larrybob at 5:21 PM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by larrybob at 5:21 PM on August 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
Part of why I do this job is that I think people should be able to live their lives without fear of being robbed, shot, raped, stabbed, and so on. African Americans are disproportionately the victims of violent crime in my city (and across the country) by a HUGE margin. There is a huge tangled web of causes of this problem, and the "snitches get stitches," "fuck 12" crowd are part of it. Economics, crime, education, and healthcare are also parts. If your position is that if we just change and punish police enough it will fix the problems, you are in my opinion wrong. In fact I think the current focus that is 100% centered on police to the exclusion of all else will only exacerbate the problems, as police withdraw from the community further in simple self preservation.
Thanks firebrick. Your post is well-reasoned and empathetic. You mentioned several times that this is a very complex problem that will only be solved by a number of different strategies. I hope that your thoughts are not unique to you and are shared by your colleagues.
posted by ashbury at 6:36 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Thanks firebrick. Your post is well-reasoned and empathetic. You mentioned several times that this is a very complex problem that will only be solved by a number of different strategies. I hope that your thoughts are not unique to you and are shared by your colleagues.
posted by ashbury at 6:36 PM on August 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
In related news, Tim Pool pulls out of doing independent reporting in Milwaukee, due to 'escalating racial tensions'.
https://www.facebook.com/topic/Tim-Pool/278800372165940 (You don't need a FB account to read the articles posted here.
posted by spinifex23 at 10:04 PM on August 15, 2016
https://www.facebook.com/topic/Tim-Pool/278800372165940 (You don't need a FB account to read the articles posted here.
posted by spinifex23 at 10:04 PM on August 15, 2016
If the choice is to be shit-upon and murdered by overwhelmingly racist, toxic-masculinity-powered bullies or have them "withdrawal from the community" (where 98.7% of them don't live, so I'm not sure how it's even a "withdrawal"), I'm pretty convinced the community would prefer the withdrawal.
posted by maxwelton at 1:36 AM on August 16, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by maxwelton at 1:36 AM on August 16, 2016 [2 favorites]
where 98.7% of them don't live, so I'm not sure how it's even a "withdrawal" In Milwaukee, not only do they usually not live in the same community, the police actively lobbied (and succeeded) in changing the law so they can live up to nearly an hour away from the city.
posted by drezdn at 6:24 AM on August 16, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by drezdn at 6:24 AM on August 16, 2016 [4 favorites]
(where 98.7% of them don't live, so I'm not sure how it's even a "withdrawal")
Think of it as a bank account -- people in the city pay police officers who then spend most of that money outside the city.
posted by Etrigan at 7:05 AM on August 16, 2016 [2 favorites]
Think of it as a bank account -- people in the city pay police officers who then spend most of that money outside the city.
posted by Etrigan at 7:05 AM on August 16, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think we can have a balanced response here. Stop the bullshit traffic stops. If someone's plates are expired or their tail light is out, follow them, take a photo with the dashcam that includes the plates and mail them a ticket. If we have red light cameras, then we have the technology to do that. It would take the bias out of it - think how many white people that would snag! In fact, start stopping cars with white people at the same rates and this problem would be solved. No one cared about the heroin problem until white kids started overdosing and getting arrested en masse.
Legalizing drug possession would be another step to stop the revolving prison door. Less bullshit convictions = more people able to be employed = less crime.
There is still far more violence that has nothing to do with police brutality, though, and if my house is getting broken into, I'm sure as fuck going to call 911. I've called 911 for other stuff (my car was totaled in a busy intersection, homeless man lying on a busy street in a separate incident) and I'm glad someone showed up.
posted by AFABulous at 7:10 AM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
Legalizing drug possession would be another step to stop the revolving prison door. Less bullshit convictions = more people able to be employed = less crime.
There is still far more violence that has nothing to do with police brutality, though, and if my house is getting broken into, I'm sure as fuck going to call 911. I've called 911 for other stuff (my car was totaled in a busy intersection, homeless man lying on a busy street in a separate incident) and I'm glad someone showed up.
posted by AFABulous at 7:10 AM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
In related news, Tim Pool pulls out of doing independent reporting in Milwaukee, due to 'escalating racial tensions'.
I watched his live free the other night. Reading between the lines, I think the headline should be "Tim Pool pulls out of attending riots where guns are being fired."
A photographer friend of mine, a middle-aged white woman, was out at the remains of the gas station yesterday taking pictures in between senior photo shoots. And unlike many of the pictures being posted on reddit, she wasn't doing this from a locked car - she was walking around talking with people.
I live less than 3 miles away from Sherman Park and haven't thought twice about my personal safety. My wife works at a school associated with a homeless shelter even closer to Sherman Park, but she's not doing anything special this week in regards to safety. Milwaukee's a big place, and it seems bizarre to conflate the city with a riot. Comparing how this is being reported to what I'm seeing has really made me rethink my opinions of what happened in Baltimore, Fergunson/St. Louis, Dallas, and the other cities that have seen protests or riots. Even though I try to stay away from sensationalist coverage, I was left with the understanding that those entire cities were up in flames, but now I'm realizing I likely completely misunderstood the size of events.
It doesn't make for dramatic pictures like a flaming gas station, but I'm seeing churches and community groups, comprised of all sorts of people, gather in the Sherman Park area to figure out how to fix things and how to make things better. Due to some personal things I'm unable to currently get involved with much outside of my regular schedule, but if you look for it, people are coming together with a lot of hope for the future Milwaukee. I'm looking forward to seeing what people smarter than me come up with, and how I can get involved.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 9:38 AM on August 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
I watched his live free the other night. Reading between the lines, I think the headline should be "Tim Pool pulls out of attending riots where guns are being fired."
A photographer friend of mine, a middle-aged white woman, was out at the remains of the gas station yesterday taking pictures in between senior photo shoots. And unlike many of the pictures being posted on reddit, she wasn't doing this from a locked car - she was walking around talking with people.
I live less than 3 miles away from Sherman Park and haven't thought twice about my personal safety. My wife works at a school associated with a homeless shelter even closer to Sherman Park, but she's not doing anything special this week in regards to safety. Milwaukee's a big place, and it seems bizarre to conflate the city with a riot. Comparing how this is being reported to what I'm seeing has really made me rethink my opinions of what happened in Baltimore, Fergunson/St. Louis, Dallas, and the other cities that have seen protests or riots. Even though I try to stay away from sensationalist coverage, I was left with the understanding that those entire cities were up in flames, but now I'm realizing I likely completely misunderstood the size of events.
It doesn't make for dramatic pictures like a flaming gas station, but I'm seeing churches and community groups, comprised of all sorts of people, gather in the Sherman Park area to figure out how to fix things and how to make things better. Due to some personal things I'm unable to currently get involved with much outside of my regular schedule, but if you look for it, people are coming together with a lot of hope for the future Milwaukee. I'm looking forward to seeing what people smarter than me come up with, and how I can get involved.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 9:38 AM on August 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
I live less than 3 miles away from Sherman Park and haven't thought twice about my personal safety.
Yeah I live less than two miles away and heard sirens until 2 am, but I feel perfectly safe. I live in one of the most integrated neighborhoods in the city, near the edge of the blue and the green on this map and not far from the red area. I believe that makes it safer. Even my 9 unit apartment building is a microcosm - black, white, Asian, Latinx. It's much harder to be racist when "those people" are your neighbors.
I went to dinner with a conservative relative last night who has always lived in almost-all white neighborhoods. She brought up "those people" in "that neighborhood" and I gestured to the table across the way. There were two black families with well-behaved children, apparently middle class, quietly conversing about whatever.
"You mean those people?" "No, not those people." "Well, how do you know which people are the 'bad people' if you're only looking at skin color?" I swear something clicked. You really, really can make a dent in racism if you meet the ones you love on their level and slowly walk them through the thought processes.
posted by AFABulous at 10:36 AM on August 16, 2016 [5 favorites]
Yeah I live less than two miles away and heard sirens until 2 am, but I feel perfectly safe. I live in one of the most integrated neighborhoods in the city, near the edge of the blue and the green on this map and not far from the red area. I believe that makes it safer. Even my 9 unit apartment building is a microcosm - black, white, Asian, Latinx. It's much harder to be racist when "those people" are your neighbors.
I went to dinner with a conservative relative last night who has always lived in almost-all white neighborhoods. She brought up "those people" in "that neighborhood" and I gestured to the table across the way. There were two black families with well-behaved children, apparently middle class, quietly conversing about whatever.
"You mean those people?" "No, not those people." "Well, how do you know which people are the 'bad people' if you're only looking at skin color?" I swear something clicked. You really, really can make a dent in racism if you meet the ones you love on their level and slowly walk them through the thought processes.
posted by AFABulous at 10:36 AM on August 16, 2016 [5 favorites]
Reading between the lines, I think the headline should be "Tim Pool pulls out of attending riots where guns are being fired."
Reading the lines, though, it's "Tim Pool pulls out when rioters are targeting white people for violence."
That was his express reason.
posted by jpe at 11:27 AM on August 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
Reading the lines, though, it's "Tim Pool pulls out when rioters are targeting white people for violence."
That was his express reason.
posted by jpe at 11:27 AM on August 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
Reading the lines, though, it's "Tim Pool pulls out when rioters are targeting white people for violence."
Sure, but that means he could just head down the road a bit, instead of leaving the entire city, I guess. The video seems to be describing the whole of Milwaukee as not being safe, when in fact Tim Pool is intentionally going to specific newsworthy places at specific newsworthy times of day.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 11:37 AM on August 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
Sure, but that means he could just head down the road a bit, instead of leaving the entire city, I guess. The video seems to be describing the whole of Milwaukee as not being safe, when in fact Tim Pool is intentionally going to specific newsworthy places at specific newsworthy times of day.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 11:37 AM on August 16, 2016 [1 favorite]
I also think it's worthwhile to remember that protesters angry about police use of force immediately shot at a woman in a vehicle in Ferguson after she hit a protester. The man was standing alone in a divided street in dark clothes at night. The driver immediately tried to stop to check on him before multiple people shot at her car and she fled. She was luckily not hit by the gunfire, but her vehicle was.
If you're trying to get at something other than those people are dangerous it's hard to find it here. Someone did something stupid as a pedestrian. Yep. Some other people did something shitty. Yep. Here's my response to that: who gives a shit? Those people aren't getting paid by tax dollars to use borrowed power. They don't get a different standard of justice when they do something wrong. They do not have a union protecting them, a city paying out damages on their behalf when they lose civil suits, the shield of qualified immunity when they do things that can be claimed to be innocent mistakes.
It is sad that I have to say the same thing here that I do to my child when he says some other kid is doing something that I'm telling him not to do: they're not under my control. The fact that someone else did it - maybe even first! - doesn't mean squat when talking about accountability for agents of the state. I want everyone who causes unnecessary death to face justice. But I am particularly interested in taking away additional privileges, salaries, and ongoing authority from people doing it while wielding authority we've handed them under the social contract.
The man who had just been struck by a car was immediately moved around by others and in fact was dragged away from the scene without medical care. This of course is the opposite of what should occur after a serious vehicle crash, especially involving a pedestrian. The last I heard, no one at local hospitals had any contact with him, no one had his identity. Is he dead? Maybe, who knows? If so, could his life have been saved by proper medical care? Possibly?
Is this more those people do bad stuff here? I just cannot figure out the meaning in this context. If it's a simple wondering why they would do such a thing rather than waiting for an ambulance, maybe from the situation it might be clear why they might not have had a lot of faith that services would respond. Or perhaps well-meaning people, noticing that some hotheaded jerk(s) was shooting, grabbed the dude and hightailed it away out of the mess.
I would in fact argue that this attitude or position with regards to OIS is part of what causes protests to become riots. An "eyewitness" makes a statement, or a video is posted 100% after the fact, and on that basis there are calls for immediate firing and prosecution of officers. Investigations take time, especially investigations of high profile OIS where an outside agency must come in and make sure to cross every t and dot every i.
That sounds fine, except for one thing: this is a degree of care and slow progress that is effectively never extended to private citizens. When the person who pulled the trigger is an officer, suddenly the standard of investigation changes. I quoted my friend the defense attorney and law prof back in the Ferg thread and won't regurgitate it all here for millionth time, but this gets to the point:
If you were inside your own home and a stranger forced entrance and you shot him - even if he was unarmed - there is almost 0 chance you're going to get indicted or face trial.
I'm glad you raised the issue of castle doctrine. One of the things that is a big problem in modern policing is that the standard requiring police to attempt to de-escalate a situation is almost non-existent. You mentioned Ferguson, which is a fantastic example of this leading to an avoidable death. Nothing about an alleged theft and assault demanded immediate action. Nothing about walking in the street demands immediate action or physical confrontation.
But taking those actions unquestionably led to Mike Brown's death. Under castle doctrine, a home is a place where a person doesn't have a duty to retreat. There's a presumption that they're in the one small part of the whole planet where they can reasonable plant their feet and say no, I am not going to be driven out or back down.
Officers don't have this one tiny little part of the world where this applies to them. They now effectively have everywhere. And qualified immunity often means they take courses of action, rather than stepping back or simply calling something in or following someone home or or or - and then when a death results, they're free and clear of consequences from it.
Do police really need to be forever free from contributory negligence? We apply a standard in many states such that if you are part of a crime where a conspirator kills someone, you're also charged with murder. But police seem to have the exact opposite situation, where they can undertake a course of action where they cause the death of other folks but since it's in the course of duty. Or, in the case of Walter Scott, the fellow officer who lied and helped Slagler cover up his execution, still no charges for Habersham.
Do you think that if this had been a shooting of a police officer that the second person wouldn't be already arrested and charged with accessory after the fact? But, again, police get this extensive period of introspection and case making before a indictment that private citizens don't.
rhizome, police are the only people required to give a statement about a shooting. Period. Everyone else in this country has access to the 5th amendment but we do not. Witnesses are not required to say anything. Suspects and arrestees aren't required to say anything. Police MUST provide a statement.
Simply untrue. Do you mean that officers must address the matter if they want to stay officers? Well, one, as others point out above, there's a number of regions where officers get these cooling off periods that no private citizen would ever get. They may be entitled to go home and get a whole night's sleep before having to answer those questions. Do you think that would be the case in the above scenario you mention where someone shot an intruder? I wager it's not, and that in many cases the shooter can expect to be detained and questioned without any chance to collaborate with others who were there. If the citizen had a duty to retreat they'll be expected to justify that. See also above my friend's comment about battered women who were arrested and had to bond out.
Beyond that, if you mean that the officers have to choose between making a statement and keeping their jobs, well, cry me a river. That's the job. It comes with notably better pay and benefits than more dangerous gigs like long-haul trucker, and if there's a standard that once you kill somoene on the job, you need to explain that you had to to keep the job that doesn't strike me as all that awful at all.
False memories are common, but research has shown that about a 72 hour delay significantly improves the accuracy of recall. If you care about accuracy, then you care about a delay in officer statements on critical incidents.
See above re: not what happens to everyone else. Central Florida cops routinely make arrests despite self-defense claims. That's in a stand-your-ground state, even.
I also don't understand complaints about police reviewing body cam or dash footage before writing or giving a statement.
When non-police are arrested for violent acts and surveillance footage exists, are they extended the opportunity to view it before making any statements?
What is the feared negative outcome of "the officer reviewed video to make sure their statement was factually correct"?
So when you and other officers detain people, you always ask questions with all the suspects together rather than separating them? Same thing in interrogation rooms in the precinct?
In fact I think the current focus that is 100% centered on police to the exclusion of all else will only exacerbate the problems, as police withdraw from the community further in simple self preservation.
Police are absolutely a reasonable focus to address the problem of police shooting people they didn't have to shoot. The other stuff is a ridiculous we can't do something about this thing unless we do something about all things fallicy.
As far as police officers "withdraw"ing, do you mean not doing work? Or do you mean withdraw from the community in the not being a part of the community sense? Because as was posted above, in a lot of places - including some of the places getting the most attention like Oakland - it would be hard for police to be less a part of the community than they already are. If you mean they'll stop getting into fatal wrestling matches with people over selling loosies, I can live with that.
posted by phearlez at 2:36 PM on August 16, 2016 [9 favorites]
If you're trying to get at something other than those people are dangerous it's hard to find it here. Someone did something stupid as a pedestrian. Yep. Some other people did something shitty. Yep. Here's my response to that: who gives a shit? Those people aren't getting paid by tax dollars to use borrowed power. They don't get a different standard of justice when they do something wrong. They do not have a union protecting them, a city paying out damages on their behalf when they lose civil suits, the shield of qualified immunity when they do things that can be claimed to be innocent mistakes.
It is sad that I have to say the same thing here that I do to my child when he says some other kid is doing something that I'm telling him not to do: they're not under my control. The fact that someone else did it - maybe even first! - doesn't mean squat when talking about accountability for agents of the state. I want everyone who causes unnecessary death to face justice. But I am particularly interested in taking away additional privileges, salaries, and ongoing authority from people doing it while wielding authority we've handed them under the social contract.
The man who had just been struck by a car was immediately moved around by others and in fact was dragged away from the scene without medical care. This of course is the opposite of what should occur after a serious vehicle crash, especially involving a pedestrian. The last I heard, no one at local hospitals had any contact with him, no one had his identity. Is he dead? Maybe, who knows? If so, could his life have been saved by proper medical care? Possibly?
Is this more those people do bad stuff here? I just cannot figure out the meaning in this context. If it's a simple wondering why they would do such a thing rather than waiting for an ambulance, maybe from the situation it might be clear why they might not have had a lot of faith that services would respond. Or perhaps well-meaning people, noticing that some hotheaded jerk(s) was shooting, grabbed the dude and hightailed it away out of the mess.
I would in fact argue that this attitude or position with regards to OIS is part of what causes protests to become riots. An "eyewitness" makes a statement, or a video is posted 100% after the fact, and on that basis there are calls for immediate firing and prosecution of officers. Investigations take time, especially investigations of high profile OIS where an outside agency must come in and make sure to cross every t and dot every i.
That sounds fine, except for one thing: this is a degree of care and slow progress that is effectively never extended to private citizens. When the person who pulled the trigger is an officer, suddenly the standard of investigation changes. I quoted my friend the defense attorney and law prof back in the Ferg thread and won't regurgitate it all here for millionth time, but this gets to the point:
It'd be nice if every person charged with murder had the benefit of thorough investigation by the police and the prosecutor before being charged. But our adversarial system doesn't give that benefit to citizens, even those who vehemently claim self-defense in their voluntary statements to the police. I know, I've represented those battered women who killed and were immediately charged, jailed, held, had to make bond, lost their jobs, only for the machinery to spit out a not guilty. If the system is a good one, it should work the same way for everyone.Also, pfooey to your scare quotes around eyewitness.
If you were inside your own home and a stranger forced entrance and you shot him - even if he was unarmed - there is almost 0 chance you're going to get indicted or face trial.
I'm glad you raised the issue of castle doctrine. One of the things that is a big problem in modern policing is that the standard requiring police to attempt to de-escalate a situation is almost non-existent. You mentioned Ferguson, which is a fantastic example of this leading to an avoidable death. Nothing about an alleged theft and assault demanded immediate action. Nothing about walking in the street demands immediate action or physical confrontation.
But taking those actions unquestionably led to Mike Brown's death. Under castle doctrine, a home is a place where a person doesn't have a duty to retreat. There's a presumption that they're in the one small part of the whole planet where they can reasonable plant their feet and say no, I am not going to be driven out or back down.
Officers don't have this one tiny little part of the world where this applies to them. They now effectively have everywhere. And qualified immunity often means they take courses of action, rather than stepping back or simply calling something in or following someone home or or or - and then when a death results, they're free and clear of consequences from it.
Do police really need to be forever free from contributory negligence? We apply a standard in many states such that if you are part of a crime where a conspirator kills someone, you're also charged with murder. But police seem to have the exact opposite situation, where they can undertake a course of action where they cause the death of other folks but since it's in the course of duty. Or, in the case of Walter Scott, the fellow officer who lied and helped Slagler cover up his execution, still no charges for Habersham.
Do you think that if this had been a shooting of a police officer that the second person wouldn't be already arrested and charged with accessory after the fact? But, again, police get this extensive period of introspection and case making before a indictment that private citizens don't.
rhizome, police are the only people required to give a statement about a shooting. Period. Everyone else in this country has access to the 5th amendment but we do not. Witnesses are not required to say anything. Suspects and arrestees aren't required to say anything. Police MUST provide a statement.
Simply untrue. Do you mean that officers must address the matter if they want to stay officers? Well, one, as others point out above, there's a number of regions where officers get these cooling off periods that no private citizen would ever get. They may be entitled to go home and get a whole night's sleep before having to answer those questions. Do you think that would be the case in the above scenario you mention where someone shot an intruder? I wager it's not, and that in many cases the shooter can expect to be detained and questioned without any chance to collaborate with others who were there. If the citizen had a duty to retreat they'll be expected to justify that. See also above my friend's comment about battered women who were arrested and had to bond out.
Beyond that, if you mean that the officers have to choose between making a statement and keeping their jobs, well, cry me a river. That's the job. It comes with notably better pay and benefits than more dangerous gigs like long-haul trucker, and if there's a standard that once you kill somoene on the job, you need to explain that you had to to keep the job that doesn't strike me as all that awful at all.
False memories are common, but research has shown that about a 72 hour delay significantly improves the accuracy of recall. If you care about accuracy, then you care about a delay in officer statements on critical incidents.
See above re: not what happens to everyone else. Central Florida cops routinely make arrests despite self-defense claims. That's in a stand-your-ground state, even.
I also don't understand complaints about police reviewing body cam or dash footage before writing or giving a statement.
When non-police are arrested for violent acts and surveillance footage exists, are they extended the opportunity to view it before making any statements?
What is the feared negative outcome of "the officer reviewed video to make sure their statement was factually correct"?
So when you and other officers detain people, you always ask questions with all the suspects together rather than separating them? Same thing in interrogation rooms in the precinct?
In fact I think the current focus that is 100% centered on police to the exclusion of all else will only exacerbate the problems, as police withdraw from the community further in simple self preservation.
Police are absolutely a reasonable focus to address the problem of police shooting people they didn't have to shoot. The other stuff is a ridiculous we can't do something about this thing unless we do something about all things fallicy.
As far as police officers "withdraw"ing, do you mean not doing work? Or do you mean withdraw from the community in the not being a part of the community sense? Because as was posted above, in a lot of places - including some of the places getting the most attention like Oakland - it would be hard for police to be less a part of the community than they already are. If you mean they'll stop getting into fatal wrestling matches with people over selling loosies, I can live with that.
posted by phearlez at 2:36 PM on August 16, 2016 [9 favorites]
It's really sad that it took burning down buildings and throwing stuff at people to get to this point, but now local media is running stories on segregation and Black poverty. Elected officials are vowing to address it. Riots suck and sometimes innocent people get hurt, but most of the time, they work. If people had started paying attention years ago, the riot never would have happened.
posted by AFABulous at 4:12 PM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by AFABulous at 4:12 PM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
I mean, goddamn Donald Trump addressed the issues plaguing the African-American community in his speech last night* in the Milwaukee area.** Whether he sincerely cares is another matter - he never would even pretended to give a shit if the focus of attention weren't on the riots right now. Hillary's statement was predictable; Trump's was directly caused by the riots.
*cluelessly delivered to a 99% white audience in a 95% white county who I assure you does not give one single shit about black people, but that makes it even more amazing that he wasn't pandering to the crowd in front of him
**45 minutes away from the city, but whatever
posted by AFABulous at 7:22 AM on August 17, 2016
*cluelessly delivered to a 99% white audience in a 95% white county who I assure you does not give one single shit about black people, but that makes it even more amazing that he wasn't pandering to the crowd in front of him
**45 minutes away from the city, but whatever
posted by AFABulous at 7:22 AM on August 17, 2016
BBC–Britain's Equality and Human Rights Commission: Ethnic minorities face 'entrenched' racial inequality
posted by XMLicious at 1:13 AM on August 19, 2016
posted by XMLicious at 1:13 AM on August 19, 2016
« Older Sailing the seven seas of Microhouse | Interactive Dynamic Video Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
On Saturday, Milwaukee police killed a 23 year old Black man [video] after he ran from a traffic stop. Mostly peaceful crowds gathered at the scene, but after dark, anger spilled into the streets and protesters set businesses and cars on fire. Sunday morning was filled with prayer circles, local clean-up efforts [video] , and pleas for calm [video] . It didn't last long, and violence erupted again [video] as people threw rocks and bricks at police, injuring several. Shots rang out through the neighborhood and the riot police came out in force. The National Guard was activated, but not deployed. This shooting isn't a clearcut case like Philando Castile - the victim was armed, refused orders to drop his weapon, and was shot by a Black officer. So why did it cause so much spontaneous turmoil? The anger and despair [video] in Black Milwaukee has much deeper roots.
Wisconsin is the worst state in the country to be a Black person; Milwaukee in particular. Black men are incarcerated at the highest rates in the United States, nearly double the average. Racial inequality in education, employment and poverty is far above the national average. Milwaukee has long been called the most segregated city in America. Black people in Milwaukee are more likely to be stopped by police than in any other metro area. Voter ID laws "are an intentional effort to suppress the Black vote."
This came about through the collapse of the manufacturing industry in the 1960s through the 1990s (which continues today), and the ensuing spiral of poverty and crime. White flight led to segregation as suburban housing was denied through redlining (still a thing!), financial discrimination, and intimidation. It also led to the decimation of the tax base, which was a factor in the decline of the educational system.
[note: the vast majority of the comments on recent local news articles are virulently racist, please use caution]
posted by AFABulous at 9:48 AM on August 15, 2016 [42 favorites]