On Sunday, the LA Times reported that the U.S. Justice Department believes that the Los Angeles Police Department could do a lot more to combat racial profiling by its officers.
In this regard, the LAPD is hardly unique.
On Monday, the well-respected Washington DC-based Sentencing Project released a report that talks about the troubling extent of the problem of racial profiling throughout the country.
In particular The Sentencing Project spotlighted a new study by Joan Petersilia, along with Jeffrey Lin and Ryken Grattet, which has found that non-law-breaking elements like race, ethnicity and gender greatly affect the likelihood that parole violators will be re-imprisoned.
The results found by Petersilia and her colleagues indicate that men and parolees of color are more likely than women and white parolees to be returned to prison.
It is important to know that Petersilia is arguably the best regarded expert on parole and reentry in the nation, and not someone who arrives at a conclusion lightly.
“Using data from the California Parole Study,” writes the Sentencing Report, [Petersilia and company’s] analysis suggests that parole boards in California exercise a significant amount of discretion in deciding which parole violators are returned to prison and which are permitted to remain in the community. The authors assert that the findings are evidence of a conscious or unconscious bias by parole boards…”
More at the Sentencing Report.
NOTE: On Tuesday, the LA Times editorial is all about the issue of racial profiling.
MEANWHILE, DETAILS UNFOLD ABOUT THE MURDER OF THE RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER
The more we hear about the murder of Riverside police officer Ryan Bonaminio, the more painful the story becomes.
Here’s the newest and here.
I knew whoever shot the Riverside PD officer wasn’t a Mexican immigrant, because WTF hasn’t peppered every thread with 20 articles about it, captioning all of them with “Here’s another story about the hard working Mexican immigrants”.
The only problem with racial profiling is that some cop might wait a moment to long to just use it, along with evrything else I mentioned, and get hurt.
I realize that doesn’t matter to some people here, but it matters to most.
I’m suprised the blogging wacko hasn’t told us Earl Ellis Green was a “good man” despite being a murderer and career criminal. But it’s only his first comment.
If Green were a Mexican immigrant, you’d have to scroll down for about 5 minutes to see this comment, to get past all of WTF’s news articles about it (where one article would be sufficient enough), all with sarcastic captions about Mexicans being hard workers and innocent. Good thing Green isn’t Mexican. Whew. We dodged a bullet.
Sure Fire, only a tiny percentage of any race kills police officers. Only a tiny percentage of any race even commits crimes. That’s why racial profiling is stupid and useless, and racist, obviously. Don’t call others racists, Sure Fire, if you’re clearly in support of racial profiling. Racial profiling is racism. It’s the most absolute form of racism. It’s is the unbridled belief that someone is likely to commit a crime because of what race they are.
This is like watching a bad game of ping pong, where you want both players to lose.
Jim, everything reminds you of watching something. Because that’s what you are, a spectator. You’re a voyeur.
Uh huh.
Watching this jim hitchcock and Lee Plenty go at it is like watching a bad game of ping pong, where you want both players to lose.
Jim, is it possible you and Randy are brothers? What game of ping pong are you talking about? I made a post about how racial profiling as an effective tool along with many others cops use on adaily basis. I didn’t respond to anything but what Celeste put up. I respond to nothing put up by Rob. You guys truly need to get a life, one with the ability to understand what you read would be helpful.
Every time I come to this blog, Sure Fire is fighting with someone.
SF,that was directed at WTF & Rob, if it wasn’t clear to you.
jim, you just slipped. I know who you are now. Want to know how?
Jim,
I think that the better analogy may be it’s like two men fighting over a comb.
Sorry, make that two bald men fighting over a comb.
I’ve still not had time to wade into this nonsense.
Celeste, you could probably delete every single comment before yours, and this one of mine, and not miss anything.
Randy, you are the single most boring writer I’ve ever read on any blog, ever. That’s not an exaggeration. You’re BORING.
Same old, same old. What ever happened to this:
“I’m inclined to block Rob, Sure Fire and ATQ”
Add WTF to this list, and you’ve got a chance to have an interesting comment board. Until then, it’s all childish silliness and slogans.
Lee Plenty,
Sticks and stones . . .
“I’ve still not had time to wade into this nonsense.”
Be careful not to wade in too far…
Oh,and SF? Though not related, I consider Randy a brother, and I don’t give a rats ass what anybody thinks about that 🙂
Thanks Celeste for posting. Hard to believe the LA Times is not allowing comments although they have the “comment” post. Here are some scary facts from the Nat’l Law Enforcement Memorial, in 2010 Officers killed in the line of duty so far 143 up 47%. On average, one law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty somewhere in the United States every 53 hours. Since the first known line-of-duty death in 1792, nearly 19,000 U.S. law enforcement officers have made the ultimate sacrifice.
IN 2009 LA Times did a survey and across the board received high marks from Blacks and Latinos doing a much better job performance.
“LAPD gains new approval from the public”
THE LOS ANGELES TIMES POLL….The strong endorsement of the department, expressed in a June poll, cuts across racial and ethnic lines. Other aspects of life in the city do not fare so well”
http://articles.latimes.com/print/2009/jun/22/local/me-poll22
I’m not getting into the back and forth tit for tat stuff Jim. My post was directed at the info Celeste had laid out here and thought you were talking to me with your ping pong comment. Your comment came after Rob had made 3 comments and WTF and I had made one, how in any way does that look like a bad gane of ping pong?
Randy is the one that usually makes those types of unsupported comments so I posted what I did. To keep bringing it up serves what purpose? People like you two want back and forth that’s constantly nice and respectful while making snide comments from time to time yourself, nobody here is totally clean.
People tend to over react to things they disagree with, that’s at least what I see on most sites. That makes it hard for everyone to play nice all the time. I could easily make the case that what Rob does is push things anyone says that he doesn’t agree with to a lie and to such a nasty point just to provoke people and start chaos that people go off. I know I have. Look at his comments on any subject and show me where I’m wrong.
The position of people like you and Randy looks to be in line with what Observer wrote. You want the problem child gone and the three conservatives. Rob has pushed at liberals here as well, they’ve responded and not always in a kind and gentle manner. Should they be banned? For the comments of Rob’s I’ve responded to there are tons I haven’t.
It’s all pretty silly because there’s only one problem poster here. I’ve always said I can play nice, can’t do it with Rob though. It’s either stay quiet or blast him.
Sure Fire, your not gonna like this, Meg Whitman has agreed to pay Nicky Diaz-Santillan $5,500 smackers in unpaid wages to settle the dispute that erupted in the final month of her ‘Can’t Get Any Worse Than This’ campaign?
Whitman (no-relation to highnote yodeler Slim Whitman) has now blown $163,005,500-a-wop-bop-a-loo-lop a-lop-bam-boo shoot-me-in-the-head smackers.
http://media.fresnobee.com/smedia/2010/09/29/21/214-4W30HOUSEKEEP.standalone.prod_affiliate.8.JPG
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/A1dUYZTsPPL._SL600_.jpg
All these stories and comments couldn’t convince me that racial profiling exists. However this video has now convinced me that racial profiling of blacks by the police does exist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AL-wOGVntg&
Okay, the idea or wading through the comment stream to try to decide who’s behaving worse than whom, does not seem like a productive endeavor. So here’s the deal:
ANY COMMENTS THAT ARE PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL BE DELETED. REPEATS WILL CAUSE BANNING.
If you don’t know what that means, read WLA’s 10 Rules for commenting. Then read them again:
RULES OF THE ROAD
I fully believe that a lively and diverse community of commenters makes a news site and/or blog a much richer and more valuable place for all concerned.
But I have learned through trial and error that a system of comment moderation is necessary for such a community to germinate, grow and thrive.
Hence the following 10 RULES FOR COMMENTING AT WITNESS LA
Rule #1: Be civil to and respectful of other commenters. No ad hominem attacks. Discuss or argue issues, do not attack people.
Rule #2: When in doubt, use the Living Room Rule.
If you come into the house—AKA WitnessLA— and behave rudely to a guest at the nice party in the living room, I will ask you to stop. If you continue, you’ll be escorted to the door, and I will tell the big, bad, heavily armed bouncer not to let you back in. Basically, the living room rule means that you should behave as if you’re an invited guest at a lively salon in my living room. Don’t monopolize the conversation. Be civil. Don’t attack people personally. This is a dinner party. Not a food fight.
And just to be clear, if someone attacks you, you don’t have permission to start throwing crockery back. Ignore them. I’ll deal with them—either sooner or later. Send me an email, if you like. If you both trash the living room, I won’t care who started it. Both of you will get tossed.
Rule #3: Racist, sexist, homophobic or generally hate filled comments have no place here.
Ditto hateful or slanderous generalizations about one cultural group, religion, nationality, or occupation.
“It was only a joke,” and “You have no sense of humor,” doesn’t excuse hateful comments. If you were genuinely misinterpreted, a quick, sincere apology may set things right. A rationalization or shouts of PC Police! will not.
Demonization of any kind is what this site stands against.
Rule #4: Don’t attack the host.
Disagree with me all you want. But attack me—or any of the other regular bloggers and reporters that WLA will be adding— and you’re gone. No warnings.
Be smart. This is my house.
Rule #5: Be yourself. Don’t impersonate other commenters.
Rule # 6: Stay on topic, at least within reason. And don’t over post.
If you somehow manage to turn every topic into an opportunity to deliver version #479 of your favorite rant, expect not to be here very long.
By the same token, if you are posting five times as much as everyone else, you are the loudmouth in the room high jacking the conversation. Dial it back
Rule #7: Don’t whine about Rules 1-6.
Comment control is not “censorship.” As Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune put it, shooing someone from the room is not the same as trying to silence him or her. Don’t like the rules here? No problem. I wish you godspeed as you take yourself and your comments elsewhere.
Rule # 8: If you break any of the rules, I will likely (operative word: likely) give you a warning—and/or delete your comment. If you persist, I’ll ban you from the site.
This doesn’t mean I don’t like you. It simply means I’ve determined that—for whatever reason— you are not willing to be part of a lively, thoughtful, decorous discussion in which all members treat the others—even those with whom they passionately disagree—as they would wish to be treated.
Rule # 9: Enforcement of the rules will be subjective.
If I’ve had enough sleep, I may be more be tolerant. If I’m over-tired and you piss me off, tolerance vaporizes without warning.
If you think I’m harder on you than the next commenter: A. You’re probably wrong. But B. Let’s just say you are right. It’s likely that you wandered on to the living room and started throwing rocks when I was in a deleting mood, or just happened to glance over. Oh, freaking well. The best way around this “she’s picking on me” issue not to throw rocks at all (metaphorically speaking) even if somebody else cast the first stone.
Rule #10: In summation, to paraphrase what The Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates said in his own list of commenting rules: Don’t be a jerk and we’ll be fine.
I’d guess it was back in ’03 when I took on a commenter at Coop’s blog and told him not to poop in Marc’s living room. That’s my huge contribution to the internets!
—–
Q: If Rod Serling would have had a blog, would he have had a button on the sidebar enabling him to send offenders to the cornfield?
Randy, I apologize for the other day. You’re not boring at all.
The man Dick Cheney shot in the face Says:
November 17th, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Whitman (no-relation to highnote yodeler Slim Whitman) has now blown $163,005,500-a-wop-bop-a-loo-lop a-lop-bam-boo shoot-me-in-the-head smackers.
………………….
Whitman is a loser on so many levels.
Little known fact I learned watching late-night TV in the ’80s – Slim Whitman sold more albums than Arnold Schwarznegger and Jerry Brown combined…uh…I mean The Beatles and Elvis Presley.