BF2S Forums Do you agree with racial profiling?

Turquoise wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

May be Gates is arrogant, may be he was looking for it, but it doesn't change the fact that there is an issue regarding policing tactics/policy and he call it to the public attention just like Rosa Parks did. The fact that he was probably mentally prepared for the situtation doesn't change to fact that he stood up for his rights and call it like he saw it. A man's home is his castle, even if he is black.

You can be arrested for disorderly conduct within the confines of your own home if a cop deems it as necessary.  This is a law that grants a certain amount of discretion to cops (maybe too much for some of them), but in reality, what Gates did was punishable by law.  The police report more or less stated that he was being verbally abusive to the cops during the questioning.  Black or white, you can be arrested for that.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

The actions that individuals take are the first line of defense for our individual rights.

I agree, but there is no right to disorderly conduct.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

IMO some people are POed because the cop stepped in a pile crap, its raised the racism issue which was supposed to settled because PBO was elected and now there is momentum for change. In fact the city has already started a review panel. Any change regarding policing policies to control how cops approach minorities can only improve the view that the justice system is just and fair to each and every individual in the country.

From what I understand, Boston is a city with a long history of racial tension.  I've known a few people from there, and many of them have pointed out racial issues among law enforcement.  So, while I would agree that this is one of the few positive outcomes of this, I would still suggest that Gates is basically a race-baiting douchebag.

So, if a cop comes into your house uninvited, asks for ID and you comply, then the cop proceeds to ask a bunch of follow up questions instead of checking the ID and leaving.... wouldn't you have to say that the cop's actions weren't provocative. Gates probably did have a chip on his shoulder but if a cop wants to get you they can just provoke you until they get a reaction then they "grounds" for arrest. It used to be in the bad old days that cops would push a batton into the gut of a black person they stopped and continue to do it until the person grabbed the batton at which point the cop would let go of the batton pull out his gun and shot the guy for assaulting a police officer with a weapon and that would be called a justified shooting. I don't think this situtation with Gates can be divorced from that type of history or this individuals personal experiences just as I think that the actions of people like Rosa Parks and the civil rights movement can't be walled off or cellularized from today.  So I don't know if you can call an activist who brings serious issues to light  a race baiter where that persons actions have resulted in a discourse towards needed changes in policing tactics and policies. Race baiting is an awfully negative connotation towards a person whose actions are likely to bring about positive change. IMO that term is as equally derisive as saying uppity N**** because some one dared to talk back over a preceived injustice. Its likely a term coined by news media (like FOX) because they don't have to balls to use uppity N and to me it fails along with the hiding behind semantics like I'm not a racist I'm against "negative black culture and their culture of failure" discussion I posted earlier.


Is Gates a race baiter? No, just an activist that had the misfortune of having a bad personal experience, who got himself in trouble in order to make a point and to bring some bad acts by the cop to light.
Is what Gates did criminal? probably under the letter of the law and according to this cops improper use of his discretion.
Is the cop a racist? probably not, just a bully who wouldn't back down from an uppity N in front of this collegues
Did the cops actions display a problem with how police approach black people? definitely

Like I said the cop picked on the wrong guy, stepped in a pile of crap, no one was hurt, light was shed on some serious issue and that light is likely to lead to some changes which are going to protect individual rights of all citizens.

This may be the odd case where two wrongs make a right. The first wrong is civil disobedience (excusable) the second wrong is an improper use of police discretion (inexcusable) which will likely be curtailed in the future with new policy rules.


I lived in Cambridge for a while, people there used to tell me about how bad things were in Boston/Cambridge during the 1970's where there was basically an on going race war between Italians, Blacks and the Irish with an elite of protestent pilgrim descendants. Things were supposed to be better when I lived there and I never heard of any problems, but that doesn't mean that the tensions don't exist, they are probably just below below the surface. In fact, while I lived there, in the winter I would wear a black knitted hat and a leather jacket and when I walked down the street people would see me and cross the street (men and women) so I think that there are alot of fearful people living there, so I can understand the nieghbor making the call to police especially if she saw her neighbor struggling with a door with a stranger. anyway Cambridge has to be one of the weirdest places I've lived.

In the very best light possible to the cop this is how I see it.
-a neighbor calls, two people struggling with a door
-cop arrives, knocks on the front door, he finds the homeowner, gains entry for the purpose of making sure the homeowner wasn't struggling with a home invasion and making sure the bad guys weren't in the house holding the homeowner.
To me that is all kosher
He checks his ID, also kosher

He made his checks and he should have left at that point, but he didn't and its from that point on when the cop provoke the incident and everything went off the rails. And who knows what was said exactly, too bad there wasn't video tap. anyway IMO at that point the cop deserved an ear full if he wasn't prepared to leave, especially if the cop was copping an attitude.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

So, if a cop comes into your house uninvited, asks for ID and you comply, then the cop proceeds to ask a bunch of follow up questions instead of checking the ID and leaving.... wouldn't you have to say that the cop's actions weren't provocative. Gates probably did have a chip on his shoulder but if a cop wants to get you they can just provoke you until they get a reaction then they "grounds" for arrest. It used to be in the bad old days that cops would push a batton into the gut of a black person they stopped and continue to do it until the person grabbed the batton at which point the cop would let go of the batton pull out his gun and shot the guy for assaulting a police officer with a weapon and that would be called a justified shooting. I don't think this situtation with Gates can be divorced from that type of history or this individuals personal experiences just as I think that the actions of people like Rosa Parks and the civil rights movement can't be walled off or cellularized from today.

I think they can.  A lot has changed in 40 years.  Also, you have to remember that Gates is a wealthy, established black man.  He really has no reason to assume he's in any danger from law enforcement, because he's clearly famous enough and powerful enough to defend himself.

In addition, when police are investigating a reported break-in, they have a series of questions that they must fill out on their forms.  They are also required to investigate suspicious behavior (which includes forcing open doors to enter buildings).

There are plenty of educated black people with a chip on their shoulder, as well as crippled people who do.  He's both, so that's 2 reasons for his angst.

If Gates was just an average Joe, I'd be more supportive of him, but then again, if he was an average Joe, we wouldn't be hearing about him in the news.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

So I don't know if you can call an activist who brings serious issues to light  a race baiter where that persons actions have resulted in a discourse towards needed changes in policing tactics and policies. Race baiting is an awfully negative connotation towards a person whose actions are likely to bring about positive change. IMO that term is as equally derisive as saying uppity N**** because some one dared to talk back over a preceived injustice. Its likely a term coined by news media (like FOX) because they don't have to balls to use uppity N and to me it fails along with the hiding behind semantics like I'm not a racist I'm against "negative black culture and their culture of failure" discussion I posted earlier.

Well, I suppose you could call him an annoying nigger if that's what you're getting at, but I originally didn't want to go there.

It's not his activism in and of itself that I find annoying -- it's his arrogance.  He gets inconvenienced by a cop and then turns it into a race issue.  This isn't the 1960s.  He's already got a leg up on the officer because he is black with connections and wealthy.

"We shall overcome" had nothing to do with an entitlement to avoid police procedure.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Is Gates a race baiter? No, just an activist that had the misfortune of having a bad personal experience, who got himself in trouble in order to make a point and to bring some bad acts by the cop to light.
Is what Gates did criminal? probably under the letter of the law and according to this cops improper use of his discretion.
Is the cop a racist? probably not, just a bully who wouldn't back down from an uppity N in front of this collegues
Did the cops actions display a problem with how police approach black people? definitely

I would argue being an ass to cops is on par with being an ass of a cop.  To me, once again, this was just 1 ego vs. another.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Like I said the cop picked on the wrong guy, stepped in a pile of crap, no one was hurt, light was shed on some serious issue and that light is likely to lead to some changes which are going to protect individual rights of all citizens.

I don't see it that way.  While I would agree that maybe Boston police will be forced to be less racist, the majority of the repercussions of this incident would seem to involve increasing racial tensions between blacks and the police of the local area.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

This may be the odd case where two wrongs make a right. The first wrong is civil disobedience (excusable) the second wrong is an improper use of police discretion (inexcusable) which will likely be curtailed in the future with new policy rules.

I lived in Cambridge for a while, people there used to tell me about how bad things were in Boston/Cambridge during the 1970's where there was basically an on going race war between Italians, Blacks and the Irish with an elite of protestent pilgrim descendants. Things were supposed to be better when I lived there and I never heard of any problems, but that doesn't mean that the tensions don't exist, they are probably just below below the surface. In fact, while I lived there, in the winter I would wear a black knitted hat and a leather jacket and when I walked down the street people would see me and cross the street (men and women) so I think that there are alot of fearful people living there, so I can understand the nieghbor making the call to police especially if she saw her neighbor struggling with a door with a stranger. anyway Cambridge has to be one of the weirdest places I've lived.

Well, I guess it goes back to the curse of multiculturalism.  Boston would probably be a much more peaceful place if only one race/ethnicity lived there -- whether it's white, black, Latino, or whatever.  Unfortunately, diversity leads to a lot of conflicts, and it sounds like Boston still has a lot of cultural adjustment to do.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

In the very best light possible to the cop this is how I see it.
-a neighbor calls, two people struggling with a door
-cop arrives, knocks on the front door, he finds the homeowner, gains entry for the purpose of making sure the homeowner wasn't struggling with a home invasion and making sure the bad guys weren't in the house holding the homeowner.
To me that is all kosher
He checks his ID, also kosher

He made his checks and he should have left at that point, but he didn't and its from that point on when the cop provoke the incident and everything went off the rails. And who knows what was said exactly, too bad there wasn't video tap. anyway IMO at that point the cop deserved an ear full if he wasn't prepared to leave, especially if the cop was copping an attitude.

I get the impression that Gates was being a dick to the officer, so the officer retaliated by arresting him.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

lowing wrote:

Sorry, all I need to hear from you is how Gates is a hero in your mind and how the cop is a racist. Even after all the evidence CLEARLY shows Gates was race baiting. The facts do not support your opinion of the cop, nor do the rest of the MINORITY police officers that served with him.

Gee I see reference to the existence of facts, but no indication of where they are coming from. Without substantiation I guess you're just expressing and opinion and you know what they say about opinions... everyones got one. Get back to me whenyou have more to show other than I choose not to believe what you are telling me then maybe we can have debate or serious talk until that happens you've brought nothing to the table but a radical opinion.

Well try thumbing through the past several pages, link after link after shows more and more that Gates was wrong and the cop was right, and NOT a racist. Link provide facts that the cop was the instructor for racial profiling awareness at the police force, he was also credited for trying to save the life of a black basketball player via mouth to mouth. Then there are the 911 tapes that reveal the guys race was never mentioned. On to the fact that Gates threatened lawsuits, and a production of a documentary accounting his ordeal, which all of a sudden he has backed away from. Last but not least we have Obama who admits NOT having the facts about the event, but automatically defends Gates anyway.

Plenty of links you choose to ignore, which is why I have chosen to ignore you, because if you are not going to acknowledge anything that has been presented already, what point is there in moving forward with you?

Last edited by lowing (2009-08-02 09:04:59)

jsnipy wrote:

I think it is totally gray, in other words there is no one size fits all answer.

It really depends on the location and circumstances.

edit: its funny how we don't ban insurance companies from using racial stats.

We do actually.  You can't charge black people more for insurance just because they're black, for example.

Turquoise wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

I think it is totally gray, in other words there is no one size fits all answer.

It really depends on the location and circumstances.

edit: its funny how we don't ban insurance companies from using racial stats.

We do actually.  You can't charge black people more for insurance just because they're black, for example.

well having worked on a health risk index system recently, i would have to disagree (kindly of course )

Last edited by jsnipy (2010-07-15 19:59:40)

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

We do actually.  You can't charge black people more for insurance just because they're black, for example.

Race can't be used as a factor for actuarial tables?

I didn't think they could, but maybe snipy's on to something here...

If there is validated data supporting the position (like with actuarial tables), is it really "profiling"?

We have no issues with it when it comes to insurance, but take issue with it in other circumstances (like crime)...even when we have validated data in both cases.

It's good and bad, to an extent its a natural reaction to profile everyone from the same race. If you were attacked by say a half human half horse, you would learn not to go near those people again as it can cause you pain.

In the same respect it's important not to generalise, judge each individual as you meet them regardless of race or religion.

If it is applicable EI. We ( NEW JERSEY STATE POLCIE )are looking for Jamaican Gang members Running Coke up from Florida by car on US I 95*

By all means use it. it's Common sense.

* If I am not mistaken that's how it all got started.

AussieReaper wrote:

FEOS wrote:

If there is validated data supporting the position (like with actuarial tables), is it really "profiling"?

We have no issues with it when it comes to insurance, but take issue with it in other circumstances (like crime)...even when we have validated data in both cases.

There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. Only 20% of them are Arabic.

If Islam was such a threat the racial profiling would be targeting mostly Asians.

Ah, lrn2data.

The ones who blow people up aren't Asians. The validated data would point one toward the Arabic persuasion.

Mekstizzle wrote:

FEOS wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. Only 20% of them are Arabic.

If Islam was such a threat the racial profiling would be targeting mostly Asians.

Ah, lrn2data.

The ones who blow people up aren't Asians. The validated data would point one toward the Arabic persuasion.

Really? The bombers over here in 7/7

Three were of Pakistan descent, one was of Jamaican (black) descent or something like that. Then you have your recent Times Square bomber who was from Pakistan I think. We've (and you) have also had cases of people from Euro descent converting to Islam and doing bad shit (or Chechens and such). You've got Somalians (some tried another attack on London soon after the 7th July one) that black Nigerian guy who tried to blow up that plane.

Islam has all the bases loaded

Americans are still stuck in the mindset of 9/11 which actually was done by Arabs, most probably still think it was a bunch of Afghans who did it anyway.

Just watch out for the Brown type of Asians then. Yellow types just stick to being a businessman and try to smuggle pirated shit XD

yeah