U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:07 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, not Paris. #MAGA.
9,693 posts, read 5,341,312 times
Reputation: 9676

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl View Post
Apparently people are wrong enough times in describing race, that the city feels it is less helpful. See example I gave about the Indian grandfather. Suppose he had committed a crime? The city would have been seeking a black man based on that neighbor's description when it was an Indian man in reality. I don't think they did this to be PC or something, I think they did this because they found race description alone wasn't accurate enough of the time in people who hadn't had a really good look.. So now they're saying if you really didn't get enough of a look to give a helpful description, we're not going to not to put that limited and unconfirmed description of race alone out to the public, versus putting it out there anyway and sending people on wild goose chases.
Let's use the university's own words as to why they did this. No need to guess. From the article:

Quote:
The University of Minnesota’s President, Eric Kaler, explained that their “Crime Alerts may unintentionally reinforce racist stereotypes of Black men, and other people of color, as criminals and threats.

“That in turn,” he continued, “can create an oppressive climate for some members of our community, a climate of suspicion and hostility.”
This explanation validates what I wrote in my second post in this thread and has NOTHING to do with false identifications or solving crime. And for such a radical departure in policy that threatens to make the community less safe, students should demand something far more concrete than "may . . . reinforce" and "can create" as justification for altering a policy.

Also, again, the comparison to the Indian man is bizarre as the description of race had nothing to do with why the officer responded to begin with (at least we have no evidence to support that). If a police officer receives a call of a suspicious black male and arrives shortly after and sees a dark-skinned Indian in the same area, why wouldn't the officer stop the dark-skinned Indian to see what's up as a part of his investigation? I'm not supporting the officer's ultimate actions as they are not defensible, but that's besides the point.

Note, this isn't the City choosing to do anything, but rather the university instructing its own police department to act in a certain way. On that note, I think it's telling that the overwhelming majority of police departments seem to continue to include race, regardless of the social ramifications it may have among some as that description is still helpful to many who are in positions to help police close cases or safeguard themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:09 PM
 
3,720 posts, read 4,455,954 times
Reputation: 4741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atalanta View Post
Exactly what I think too.

If myself or my daughter etc was raped or attacked, I would be very angry if the person who did it got away due to lack of being able to state a FULL description of the person

Then of course this individual would be free to attack again, and most often they do.
I thought barring a full description, they didn't want race mentioned. Where are you getting that race can't be mentioned at all? If they have a detailed description of the perp (any of the followiing: tattoos, piercings, hair style, eye color, height, weight, footwear, clothing) then of course they wiil mention race. But if they just say 'suspect is a black male' with no other identifiers, how is that going to help you find the suspect unless you think it's ok to harass every black male simply because they are a black male?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:18 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, not Paris. #MAGA.
9,693 posts, read 5,341,312 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by trishguard View Post
I thought barring a full description, they didn't want race mentioned. Where are you getting that race can't be mentioned at all? If they have a detailed description of the perp (any of the followiing: tattoos, piercings, hair style, eye color, height, weight, footwear, clothing) then of course they wiil mention race. But if they just say 'suspect is a black male' with no other identifiers, how is that going to help you find the suspect unless you think it's ok to harass every black male simply because they are a black male?
Apart from explaining (please see my other post) how a simple racial identifier could be useful, and certainly better than reporting merely that an attack took place, you're giving far too much credit to the administration in how they'll implement this policy. As I also showed, and as is in the article, its far from clear that the university would refuse to mention race only if race was the only identifiable feature (but, seriously, how many people are calling the cops, and are ultimately questioned by police as part of their investigation, and are only able to identify an assailant's race with NO OTHER FEATURES?? Let's get serious here . . . the likely small number of cases where a witness is ONLY able to remember a suspect's race, and nothing more, are not the driving force behind this policy!).

The article mentions:
Quote:
The solution that they announced yesterday: you can no longer identify a suspect using his race if not much is known about him or her.
What exactly is "not much" for the purposes of identification? Does race and height alone count as "not much?" What about race and body size? Or race and eye color? The University is making a very dangerous step and is being far from transparent about how it will actually implement this system, which is even more dangerous/outrageous.

Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 03-01-2015 at 12:51 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:21 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, not Paris. #MAGA.
9,693 posts, read 5,341,312 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolhand68 View Post
Hmm, let's see if this sticks if a black female is raped on campus by a white male. Will they say she is not allowed to mention his race?
You make a good point. After all, the express policy considerations behind this move are racial, designed to help reduce "stereotypes" against black males; not a care for others, it seems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, not Paris. #MAGA.
9,693 posts, read 5,341,312 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man View Post
I agree that the more detailed the description, the better. But at least, saying the suspect is a "black male" would eliminate white males, Hispanic males, Asian males, and females of all races from suspicion. This would at least help narrow the choices down. In other words, it's better than nothing.
Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:44 PM
 
Location: East of the Sun, West of the Moon
15,050 posts, read 16,672,521 times
Reputation: 29024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Minnesota has elected Al Franken to the Senate. Twice.

Nothing about that state or its people surprises me.
To be fair, they elected Michele Bachmann to the Senate and to Congress multiple times.

Anyway. This decision by the U of Minn. is just patently ridiculous and frankly, since women are disproportionately victims of violent crime on university campuses, where are the feminists rallying against this anti-victim rule that will potentially put women at risk?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, not Paris. #MAGA.
9,693 posts, read 5,341,312 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
To be fair, they elected Michele Bachmann to the Senate and to Congress multiple times.

Anyway. This decision by the U of Minn. is just patently ridiculous and frankly, since women are disproportionately victims of violent crime on university campuses, where are the feminists rallying against this anti-victim rule that will potentially put women at risk?
Eh, I'd take Bachmann over Franken any day While I don't see eye to eye with her on some issues, at least I think she has a view that's more in line with strict adherence to the Constitution, which is something that's important to me, than Franken does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,533 posts, read 2,396,138 times
Reputation: 4239
The truth is that it remains to be seen how The U of M will go about providing descriptions of assailants. There was a recent protest at the school by Black Lives Matter Minneapolis. Thirteen protesters were arrested as the group occupied Kaler's (The U of M President) office. Among their concerns was the fact that many Black men on campus felt as though they were being treated with suspicion by other students merely because of their race, and that this was a result of what they saw as a disparity in the use of race within the descriptions of suspects in crime alerts.

From my perspective, based upon what I've read in the local media, there are two ways to potentially interpret what the school will do. In the first scenario, they will withhold a description of the suspect's race and will "note that only a limited description of the suspect(s) is available." This would presumably be done in cases in which the only component of a victim's description is race. What the school seems to be trying to eliminate, are descriptions which mention nothing but race. Clearly, the description "Black male", minus anything else, is problematic in that it does have the potential to place all Black men under generalized suspicion. It remains to be seen how regularly the school would apply this process. For example, will they indicate the sex of the suspect if sex is the only identifying factor provided by the victim? I really have no problem with this procedure, assuming it is applied consistently to all insufficient descriptions.

The more troubling possibility is the overt exclusion of race within a a description. For example, if the following description: "Black male; 6 feet tall; about 200 pounds; wearing a blue parka, jeans, and tennis shoes" was sanitized to: "male; 6 feet tall; about 200 pounds; wearing a blue parka, jeans, and tennis shoes". This alteration would create a grave public safety issue on and around campus, since it would leave out a vital identifying factor of the description.

Again, we really don't yet know how the school will alter its policy. However, this is a huge campus, located within a very densely-urbanized area. It shouldn't be very long before the new process of providing descriptions of suspects will need to be used.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, not Paris. #MAGA.
9,693 posts, read 5,341,312 times
Reputation: 9676
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead View Post
What the school seems to be trying to eliminate, are descriptions which mention nothing but race. Clearly, the description "Black male", minus anything else, is problematic in that it does have the potential to place all Black men under generalized suspicion. It remains to be seen how regularly the school would apply this process.
My problem there is that the school provides insufficient justification for that move. The school/administration doesn't claim/provide evidence to support that race-only descriptions from witnesses are a common thing (while not a U of M student or affiliate, my undergraduate and graduate experience at large universities and experience with police bulletins in general have shown that such bare-bones descriptions are virtually non-existent); I'd think that if they could support this move with that evidence, they'd do so. Instead, their decision is concerned with the "stereotyping" that is claimed to result from the inclusion of race in certain suspect descriptions (the administration made this clear, which is detailed in the article). Note, even to the extent that these bare-bones descriptions do exist, I've explained before how they can still be very useful to helping solve crimes. My guess is that the Black Lives Matter crowd at the U of M, as they and their predecessors have done at other universities, are calling for the complete elimination of race in these descriptions, and the University is meeting them part of the way to stop the sit-ins, building/office takeovers, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2015, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,533 posts, read 2,396,138 times
Reputation: 4239
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
My problem there is that the school provides insufficient justification for that move. The school/administration doesn't claim/provide evidence to support that race-only descriptions from witnesses are a common thing (while not a U of M student or affiliate, my undergraduate and graduate experience at large universities and experience with police bulletins in general have shown that such bare-bones descriptions are virtually non-existent); I'd think that if they could support this move with that evidence, they'd do so. Instead, their decision is concerned with the "stereotyping" that is claimed to result from the inclusion of race in certain suspect descriptions (the administration made this clear, which is detailed in the article). Note, even to the extent that these bare-bones descriptions do exist, I've explained before how they can still be very useful to helping solve crimes. My guess is that the Black Lives Matter crowd at the U of M, as they and their predecessors have done at other universities, are calling for the complete elimination of race in these descriptions, and the University is meeting them part of the way to stop the sit-ins, building/office takeovers, etc.
If "race only" descriptions are uncommon, I can't imagine the elimination of such descriptions to be very significant. Again, I think it's probably best to wait for a crime alert to be issued before commenting on how that alert may be structured.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top