The current spate of shootings of black people by white police has raised the issue of whether race is the determining factor. A case can be made that what we have as the ultimate cause of such shootings is a police culture nurtured to have an authoritarian mindset in the service of an increasingly authoritarian state that views poor people as potential threats to law and order, especially at a time of rising inequality.
But the fact that most police officers are white and that poor people are often black inevitably puts an overlay of white vs. black conflict onto what one might, if one were being exceedingly charitable, view as a police vs. poor people one. Whether police are more likely to shoot black people in tense situations because they are black or because being black is seen as a proxy for being poor seems almost immaterial because the net result is that race has become a proximate cause for these shootings.
Take for example, the case of a Colorado man who was arrested for pointing a banana at a policeman.
A Colorado man wielding a banana probably should have just split.
Instead Nathan Channing, 27, was sent to Mesa County Jail after he pointed the piece of fruit at two sheriff’s officers Sunday and pretended it was a gun.
…The officers wrote in the police report they feared for their safety despite observing the supposed weapon was yellow.
…The bad joke actually turned into quite a dangerous scene as the other officer, Donald Love, was about to pull out his gun before Channing screamed, “It’s a banana!” the officers said.
Channing now faces felony charges. But what if he had been black? That difference could have been the factor that caused the momentary hesitation on the part of the police that enabled him to shout that what he was holding was not a weapon. We see from the video of the Tamir Rice shooting that there was no time at all for such a clarification to take place since he was shot less than two seconds after the police arrived.
While this story is not funny because it could have had a tragic outcome, especially if Channing had been black, I could not help but be reminded of this Monty Python sketch where John Cleese teaches recruits how to defend themselves against someone armed with a banana.
One thing I’ve not heard about in all these shootings are instances of black cops shooting white suspects. Are there any, especially cases where black cops simply pulled out guns and shot a white suspect without any attempt to talk to the “suspect”? (That’s what happened to Tamir Rice, the cops got out of the car and shot him without even talking to him.)
If there are, I haven’t heard of any. I doubt it’s because black cops are more hesitant or less willing to use violence. I suspect they’re less willing because they would face more scrutiny and questioning than if they shot a black suspect or a white cop shot anyone. If that’s true, it makes the institutionalized racism all the worse.
It’s an interesting seeming contradiction. It’s unlikely that Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown were killed because they were black, but it’s equally unlikely that they would have been killed if they weren’t black.
4ozofreason,
That is a very good way of putting it.
If cops can’t tell a piece of fruit from a firearm then they are in the wrong line of work.
It is a good thing he didn’t have a pointed stick.
What studies I am familiar with show little correlation between race and the willingness of cops to use force.
http://swacj.org/swjcj/archives/7.2/Klahm%20and%20Tillyer%20Article%20%285%29.pdf
Most incidents of police brutality involve beatings and abuse, not death. Your odds of getting shot for a banana are pretty slim, white or black.
I don’t think it’s helpful to make a lot of speculative racial what ifs based on no real evidence, or dismiss police brutality against whites as if it’s a non-issue. The white guy here got charged with a felony, which is bad enough.
I have myself been beaten by the police twice, as have many of my friends, one of whom was white middle class and the son a prominent attorney in one of the wealthiest counties in the US. He was forced to plea bargain to a DWI even though they had video of him being beaten while handcuffed face down at a tollbooth on I-95. They were going to hit him with felony assault on a police officer.
My father was beaten Rodney-King style in his own back yard in El Paso, Texas while the cops held my sister and her husband at gunpoint. He was also beaten many times while being involved as a union organizer in NYC in the 60’s. My next door neighbor when I was a kid was shot in the stomach by a drunken off-duty NYC cop who had insulted his wife. I could go on and on, just from my own little circle. All white people
You’ll forgive me if I think police brutality against whites is a real problem, and find attempts to dismiss it out of hand to be in poor judgment.
Where did anyone dismiss police brutality against whites, Sean?
Anecdotes are not evidence, and the fact that you are relying on your own little circle is obviously going to give you a strong availability bias. Come on, man.
Seriously, where did anyone dismiss police brutality against whites? I’m trying to find it all over this page and others. You just have this weird thing in your head where talking about race means you can’t talk about other things. Yes, race matters. And nothing you said even attempts to contradict that.
Yes, white people get brutalized too. What is your point? Seriously, i don’t understand what your point is other than “But but but… I DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT RACE!!!!” which is childish at best.
Unless I’m misreading that study Sean posted, it seems to have a very small (selective?) data set.
I immediately thought of that Monty Python sketch even before seeing the video posted.
Perhaps airport security should confiscate all bananas before passengers can board their planes?
We see from the video of the Tamir Rice shooting that there was no time at all for such a clarification to take place since he was shot less than two seconds after the police arrived.
That is absofuckinglutely appalling. I can see a cop being that quick to shoot someone who was huge and mean-looking and clearly in the process of doing something violent and frightening, like savagely beating someone or holding a weapon to his/her throat. But a kid? There’s no excuse for that, even if the toy gun did look real. Was there a rumor of an invasion by an army of child-soldiers?
This isn’t just racist, it’s animalistic.
And Sean, I know you’re desperate to get that grand-jury spot, but do you really have to gum up THREE threads (so far) with your blithering denialism? Why is it so important for you to show us all how blind you’re willing to make yourself?
My father … was also beaten many times while being involved as a union organizer in NYC in the 60’s.
That’s clearly about class. You know what else is about class? The one-percent using racism, and racist policies, to keep the rest of us too divided against each other to unite against the real source of our problems. Your father got beat up for trying to fight that. How do you think he’d feel if he saw you caving to it and letting yourself be manipulated into attacking the wrong “enemy?”
You’ll forgive me if I think police brutality against whites is a real problem, and find attempts to dismiss it out of hand to be in poor judgment.
The only one here doing any dismissing is you, moron. That’s exactly what both the racists, and your father’s tormentors, want you to do. That’s how they win despite being in a tiny minority. How does it feel to be such a tool?
In the other thread someone dismissed my claims of police brutality against whites with a disinterested “yawn” as mere “anecdotes.”
I responded with a study which was a review or over 20 other studies on the issue of race and other factors on police use of force. The study concluded that there is little to no evidence of a correlation between race and police use of force.
If you have a problem with this conclusion, then address the study, not me. If you can’t address the study with anything but personal attacks or insinuations that I am a racist then I am afraid it isn’t me who is the “denialist.” My opinions are subject to change in the face of evidence. How about yours?
For the record I don’t deny there is racism in the system, particularly where that fact has been established by research. But racial bias in sentencing and police brutality are not the same thing. Suggesting that I “deny” all manner of racial abuses in the system that have absolutely nothing to do with police brutality is both a strawman and a lie.
I would never be a juror in this system but if I was one in Ferguson, I would have found that cop guilty for reasons I can explain rationally, and not conclusion-jumping based on “ZOMG RASIZM!”
The ruling class uses race as a divisive force, and one of the ways it does this is with endless racial circuses like Ferguson designed to convince black people that whites are all racists and we are all willing to see them gunned down in the streets for nothing. The mass media and academia, which serve the interests of the 1 percent, try to make EVERYTHING about race. They even go so far as to dismiss class issues altogether or accuse anyone who raises them of being in “denial” of race issues or attempting to minimize them.
If it’s all about race, and whites can only get ahead by oppressing blacks, then whites and blacks are natural enemies. But if it’s mostly about class, and the 1 percent gets ahead by screwing us all, then whites and blacks are natural allies, and the 1 percent is the enemy. It is easy to see why the ruling class and its stooges promote the former idea while denying the latter. This doesn’t mean racism doesn’t exist or isn’t a problem that needs to be addressed. But exaggerating or fixating exclusively on racial issues can have the effect of increasing racial divisions. Putting racism and racial oppression in its proper context of an overall system of oppression that targets us all can help us see we are all in this together.
This problem is not new nor am I the first to recognize it. If you can get past the racism in this piece (it was written in the 1800s) it has some powerful observations that still hold true today.
http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/spl/tomwatson.html
“You are kept apart that you may be separately fleeced of your earnings. You are made to hate each other because upon that hatred is rested the keystone of the arch of financial despotism which enslaves you both. You are deceived and blinded that you may not see how this race antagonism perpetuates a monetary system which beggars both.”
The study concluded that there is little to no evidence of a correlation between race and police use of force.
The study failed to account for observable instances of police misconduct that were quite clearly racially motivated: Ferguson, a mostly black community with a mostly white police force behaving badly before, during and after the killing of an unarmed black civilian, is just one of many examples. There’s also Mayor Giuliani, loudly claiming that his city’s racist police actions were the only keeping the black savages from killing each other — a racist policy justified with racist stereotypes. These and other instances have been stated here as “evidence of a correlation between race and police use of force,” and you’ve totally ignored all of it.
If you want to contend that race is not the ONLY factor in police misconduct, then I agree with you, and so, I suspect, would everyone else here. But if you want to contend that race is not even _A_ factor, then you’re observably full of shit, and so is any cherry-picking study that you dredge up to reinforce such bogus claims.
If you have a problem with this conclusion, then address the study, not me.
First, you’re the one pushing suspicious claims, so why shouldn’t we address you? And second, we HAVE addressed the study; and we’ve also offered information from other sources that your study ignored.
The ruling class uses race as a divisive force…
And when you pretend not to see the consequences of this, you become part of the problem. You can’t counteract the effects of racism if you refuse to acknowledge them or discuss them honestly.
But exaggerating or fixating exclusively on racial issues can have the effect of increasing racial divisions.
This sounds like standard, manipulative libertarian rhetoric: talking about racism can increase racial divisions, so the best way to deal with racism is to sweep it under the rug and refuse to talk about it, or listen to anyone else talking about it. So when cool-headed sensible white men refuse to talk about racial issues, they’re not being cowardly, they’re being benevolent and farsighted. Sort of like Ronald Reagan pretending to oppose apartheid in South Africa with “quiet diplomacy.”
“This sounds like standard, manipulative libertarian rhetoric: talking about racism can increase racial divisions, so the best way to deal with racism is to sweep it under the rug and refuse to talk about it, or listen to anyone else talking about it.”
Nowhere did I say we should refuse to talk about race. I’m not aware of anyone, anywhere who has said we should refuse to talk about race. Can you give some examples of libertarians or anyone remotely credible saying we shouldn’t talk about race?
Well, for starters, Ron Paul — longtime opponent of the Voting Rights Act and all other Federal policies aimed at fighting racial discrimination — has explicitly said that blacks should stop thinking of themselves collectively, and always think of themselves as individuals, with no collective identity or interests. Other libertarians have said that any government policy that even NOTICES racial differences in how people are affected by circumstances, is bad.
The study failed to account for observable instances of police misconduct that were quite clearly racially motivated:
How do you determine that something is “clearly” racially motivated? Are you inside the shooter’s head? That is just your interpretation, not proven fact. Just because a cop shoots a black guy doesn’t mean it was racially motivated.
You didn’t address this study at all. All you’ve done is claim it was “cherry-picked” because it doesn’t fit your pre-conceived notions. You clearly don’t understand what the term “use of force” means here. A cop arresting someone is not “use of force.” Neither is a stop and frisk search. If a cop employs physical violence during the encounter, then it is use of force. The studies others mentioned did not specifically address the use of force except one, which showed there is racial disparity in police killings that were ruled (by the police) to be “justified.”
Racial disparity and racial bias are not the same thing. Is the fact most basketball teams are predominantly black evidence of bias against whites? There can be reasons other than racism why a disproportionate number of blacks might be shot by the police, simply jumping to the conclusion you want to believe is not scientific. I am pretty sure everyone who researches police brutality is aware of this fact even if you aren’t.
Nowhere did I say that racial bias plays no role in policing, in fact I said the opposite, so stop lying.
You can’t counteract the effects of racism if you refuse to acknowledge them or discuss them honestly.
An honest discussion involves acknowledging facts and not putting word in people’s mouths like you do. If you want to force everything through a prism of race you are not going to convince anyone who isn’t wearing the same ideological blinders you are. The mass media selectively reports incidents of police brutality against blacks in order to fan the flames of racial division. They also selectively report the “facts” in these cases (or just make them up out of thin air) so nothing reported in the media is a reliable guide to reality in situations such as Ferguson.
Well, for starters, Ron Paul — longtime opponent of the Voting Rights Act and all other Federal policies aimed at fighting racial discrimination — has explicitly said that blacks should stop thinking of themselves collectively, and always think of themselves as individuals, with no collective identity or interests.
I need to see a quote for this. Even if this is true he is not saying black people shouldn’t speak out on racism. There is nothing wrong with blacks or anyone else thinking of themselves as individuals. The essence of racism and bigotry is to pigeonhole people into specific identities based on race, gender, ethnicity etc. I see no reason why anyone would want to pigeonhole themselves based on these things. You can be an individual, not identify with any tribe and still speak out on matters of race. You don’t need to adhere to a particular collective identity to act collectively, nor do you have to agree with an interpretation of black identity or interests that has been created for you by the mass media, academia or FBI stooges like Al Sharpton. Black people should be free to believe and act as they like, and confront racism in the manner they themselves see fit. If Paul says that Blacks should not organize collectively to advance what THEY perceive to be their own interests, then yeah, that’s bullshit. It’s difficult to see anything changing if they don’t.
I need to see a quote for this.
He said it on TV, during the Republican primary season. If you need help finding it, you might try asking Ron Paul’s well-known white-supremacist chums.
How do you determine that something is “clearly” racially motivated? Are you inside the shooter’s head? That is just your interpretation, not proven fact.
Are you actually saying a person’s actions can never be called racist unless we can get inside the person’s head? That’s pure fucking bullshit, and a blatant attempt to deny and ignore the experiences of the persons affected by the actions in question. (And no, asshole, it’s not MY “interpretation,” it’s the “interpretation” of the people who live in the affected communities and knew the victims.)
Just because a cop shoots a black guy doesn’t mean it was racially motivated.
Do you really believe “a cop shooting a black guy” is the entirety of what happened, or of what people are protesting? Your gross oversimplification of this and other incidents proves that you are being deliberately dishonest and arguing in blatant bad faith, not merely naïve or ignorant; and there’s no point in wasting any more time arguing with you.
The essence of racism and bigotry is to pigeonhole people into specific identities based on race, gender, ethnicity etc. I see no reason why anyone would want to pigeonhole themselves based on these things.
So people who recognize they’re being mistreated because of their race, gender, etc. are “pigeonholing THEMSELVES?!” This is pure manipulative word-twisting victim-blaming con-artistry, straight from the libertarian playbook. You’re part of the problem here. Go fuck yourself.
Thanks for the two-minute hate. I hope you feel righteous and superior now.
You’re welcome. And thank YOU for once again proving my point about your dishonesty and bad faith.