More proof that racism does not exist in America today.

[Ben Kenobi]

You should stop and search someone because you have genuine cause to believe they are doing something wrong, being black alone shouldn't be just cause for a stop and search.

Well sure. They are really going to pull over the 79 year old little black lady driving a Caddy.

Race isn't even the most significant profile factor. Age and sex are - most crimes are committed by men between 18 to 35. Of those black folks are the most likely race to be involved. When you have someone who's all three of them, what percentage of the population is young, black and a guy? Probably no more than a couple percent.

What percentage of all crimes are committed by this proportion of the population here in the US, MikeH?

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben. You have no idea about justice.

I have eyes, Kid. Good, not dumb.

[MikeH]

You should stop and search someone because you have genuine cause to believe they are doing something wrong, being a young black male shouldn't be just cause for a stop and search.

[Kidlicious]

I have eyes, Kid. Good, not dumb.

If you profile young black men it should be no suprise that they are convicted of more crimes dumb ass.

[MikeH]

that too.

[MikeH]

also poverty

[Ban Kenobi]

Now I why America still has racism... we're importing racists from abroad!

[Ben Kenobi]

You should stop and search someone because you have genuine cause to believe they are doing something wrong, being a young black male shouldn't be just cause for a stop and search.

If the stats show they are 30x as likely to commit a crime, then they should be stopped 30x as often as another subset of the population. Profiling works. Always has.

It's the exact statistical principle that they use for other things. You can't catch everyone - but through intelligent use of system resources, you can maximize your effectiveness.

[Kidlicious]

He has cognative dissonance

[Ben Kenobi]

If you profile young black men it should be no suprise that they are convicted of more crimes dumb ass.

Only if they are actually committing a crime. If they were profiling and discovering that their hit ratios were changing - then you change the profiling to reflect this.

Are the hit ratios changing? No? Then you keep the same profile ratios.

[Ban Kenobi]

Deaf children have a lower rate of academic success so we might as well kick 'em out of school. Through intelligent usage of system resources we can maximize effectiveness.

[Ben Kenobi]

He has cognative dissonance

Why am I surprised that the misogyny express is poking his head out here? Strange bedfellows seeing you and MikeH on the same side of an issue.

Yes, it's a fact that men are more likely to commit crimes than women. Therefore it makes sense to scrutinize men more often. And yes, I've been profiled and stopped before for pulling up several flags as a young man. You can make profiling work for you by understanding how it works and what they look for and NOT GIVING THEM EASY INDICATORS. duh.

[Ben Kenobi]

Deaf children have a lower rate of academic success so we might as well kick 'em out of school. Through intelligent usage of system resources we can maximize effectiveness.

I'm quite aware that I'm about a 3 or 4 standard deviation outlier. Something I wasn't aware of in the past. I also don't think I would have had less success had I been homeschooled.

I had to prove myself every year. Had I done poorly, I would have been moved out of the public system tout de suite. I had to show that the resources expended were a good investment. I was profiled, (at a loss mind you), and that only changed when I proved I was able to keep up. So, in the face of evidence to the contrary the profile changed.

[MikeH]

I'm suggesting they profile their stop and searches to people who are acting suspiciously.

Places who've done things like this in the UK have tended to find they are more effective than they were before, and have better community relations which leads to better assistance with other cases and led to crime reductions. Would be interested to see if the Illinois example Ming/Rah quoted had a similar impact.

So we have

1. It's racist
2. It's not effective
3. It hurts community relations in the places you need most help 'cause there's most crime
4. Young black males also the most likely to be victims of crime.
5. Stopping and searching people not doing anything suspicious is a waste of time that could be spent doing actual police work.

[Donegeal]

Things turned out OK this time, but lets think about what might have happened had the papers actually been forged, it was a child trafficking situation and two days later this 13 year old girl ends up on a police blotter as a murder victim. The outrage would then be on the officers for not double-checking on the legitimacy of the papers. The public would be after these cops and blame them for not doing a through job. Then on top of that, how do you think the cops who stopped them would feel about letting her go only to be killed? You can't correct that. She'd always be dead and those cops would have to live with the guilt that they could have and should have done a better job. This is the kind of reason police officers have one of the highest suicide rates in the nation.

Now to start pointing out some of the other glaring errors: The two men were not detained for 6 hours. The girl was. And the police did not detain the girl (at least not for very long). The girl was turned over to Child Protective Services. CPS kept the girl for 6 hours, not the police as the story says. That is an error. Once CPS has the girl, it is then their policies and procedures that kept the girl detained.

There are two things I'd like clarified:
1) Was the mother contacted before or after the girl was turned over to CPS?

The article sort-of implies that the mother was contacted prior to turning the girl over to CPS, but the timeline of events is very vague. Anyway, as I have said, once the girl was turned over to CPS, any further detention is on them, not the police.

2) By what means did the cops get the information to contact the mother.

Did they get the info from the males? If they did, how reliable is it? If they were child traffickers, don't you think they'd have some BS impersonator set up for just this type of situation? "Yeah, just call this number. It's her mother. She'll tell you everything is legit." Yeah. Sure. Now had they'd gotten the info from the girl, it'd be more believable.

To me, the worst part is the simple little phrase that has been overlooked until now: "he called into questioning our parenting". This is a personal judgment and should not have happened; however, I'm not really sure to whom the mother is referring to anymore. It says 'he', but it could just as easily been the CPS guys or the cops. I just don't know.