Law Enforcement Reform Thread (formerly Defund the Police) (2 Viewers)

[First Time Poster]

So I got busy the other day with the intention to revisit this topic and answer some of the responses put forward but I realized the thread was deleted. But, I felt we had good dialogue happening before I left so I wanted to restart the topic to get the conversation going again. We started some dialogue about it on the liberal board but I feel this topic transcends party lines so I'm making a MCB thread. Post #2, or my next post, is the post I made on the liberal board when asked to elaborate how I felt.

 

[rajncajn]

Try to actively solve the problem - whether it's a current problem of inherent bias in policing, or a residual effect of decades of racism that leave the black community distrustful of the police.

How do you solve a residual affect when the racial ideal is so deeply ingrained into the black community? The first assumption is typically "because I'm black." How do you fix that? Take FTPs example. What if it wasn't because he was black? How do you know? I've had MULTIPLE experiences just like the one described. In fact, I had my wife berated much worse than that for missing a stop light in New Orleans with me and my elderly mother in the car and it took his level-headed partner to deescalate the situation. There's no reason his friend, nor my wife & family should have had to endure what we did for a minor mistake, but the assumption that it's always about race and that white people don't have to endure many of the same troubles and tribulations as black people is part of the problem.

 

[RobF]

How do you solve a residual affect when the racial ideal is so deeply ingrained into the black community? The first assumption is typically "because I'm black." How do you fix that? Take FTPs example. What if it wasn't because he was black? How do you know? I've had MULTIPLE experiences just like the one described. In fact, I had my wife berated much worse than that for missing a stop light in New Orleans with me and my elderly mother in the car and it took his level-headed partner to deescalate the situation. There's no reason his friend, nor my wife & family should have had to endure what we did for a minor mistake, but the assumption that it's always about race and that white people don't have to endure many of the same troubles and tribulations as black people is part of the problem.

I feel responses like this miss the point. Systemic racism, prejudice, and discrimination don't work like that. If you only focus on specific individual instances, you miss the wood for the trees.

Prejudice is rarely openly stated. A racist cop doesn't say, "Just so we're clear, I'm treating you like this because you're black." A woman being rejected for an interview in an industry where women are underrepresented isn't informed that, "We prefer to hire men because we think they're better." A female black politician receiving abuse on twitter doesn't tend to get an addendum stating, "I'm abusing you in particular because you're black and female."

And in every one of those instances there exists the possibility that, maybe, the cop is like that to everyone, that there were many better candidates, that the abuser is an equal opportunity abuser. You could look at virtually every single instance of those kinds of incident and say, "It might not have been that," and somehow convince yourself that racism, prejudice, and discrimination don't exist.

But for every one of those types of situations, when you look at the broader picture, it very obviously does exist. Black people are disproportionately treated more harshly by the police, women are underrepresented in many industries, black and female politicians do receive disproportionate abuse.

To take individual incidents and say, "Maybe it wasn't prejudiced," completely misses the problem, which is that maybe it was. The person on the receiving end of prejudice can't necessarily know for a certainty whether each individual incident was fueled by prejudice, but they do know many of them are so it's no wonder, that being the case, that all of them feel that way because racism, prejudice, and discrimination absolutely exist and that is what needs to be addressed.

 

[rajncajn]

I feel responses like this miss the point. Systemic racism, prejudice, and discrimination don't work like that. If you only focus on specific individual instances, you miss the wood for the trees.

Prejudice is rarely openly stated. A racist cop doesn't say, "Just so we're clear, I'm treating you like this because you're black." A women being rejected for an interview in an industry where women are underrepresented isn't informed that, "We prefer to hire men because we think they're better." A female black politician receiving abuse on twitter doesn't tend to get an addendum stating, "I'm abusing you in particular because you're black and female."

And in every one of those instances there exists the possibility that, maybe, the cop is like that to everyone, that there were many better candidates, that the abuser is an equal opportunity abuser. You could look at virtually every single instance of those kinds of incident and say, "It might not have been that," and somehow convince yourself that racism, prejudice, and discrimination don't exist.

But for every one of those types of situations, when you look at the broader picture, it very obviously does exist. Black people are disproportionately treated more harshly by the police, women are underrepresented in many industries, black and female politicians do receive disproportionate abuse.

To take individual incidents and say, "Maybe it wasn't prejudiced," completely misses the problem, which is that maybe it was. The person on the receiving end of prejudice can't necessarily know for a certainty whether each individual incident was fueled by prejudice, but they do know many of them are it's no wonder, that being the case, that all of them feel that way because racism, prejudice, and discrimination absolutely exist and that is what needs to be addressed.

I think you missed my question to the statement I was responding to. I'm not trying to claim that systemic racism does not exist. I'm asking how to "actively solve the problem of the residual effect of decades of racism that leave the black community distrustful of the police." Systemic racism should absolutely be fixed. Laws and policies that target black people or that purposefully hold them back should be corrected. But how do you relieve the black communities inherent distrust of the police? My example was simply to point out the differences in our mindsets. Ahole cop pulls us over and berates my wife. My first thought isn't that it's because of her skin color, but it's obvious that FTP & his friend believe his situation to be otherwise. I'm not saying it is or it isn't, I'm just asking how you fix that perception, which was what UTJ was saying we should try to solve.

 

[Farb]

If we should not use personal experience, then what?
Can anyone shine a light on a law or policy that is racist that is still in practice in this country today?

Like I have stated, I am 100% behind changing any system, law, policy that encourages racism in this country. I am always against the mistreatment of any Americans by the system we all built and strive to maintain. Its is a government of the people (the people we elect are the real problem), by the people for the people. I also know this country has failed on that in the past but we have, as Americans always worked for that goal and for the most part, have succeeded. That should our legacy as Americans. We will and have died so others can live free.

All that to say that I know there are racist people of all colors. I know some of those people become cops. There needs to be a way to root them out and make them not cops. Body cam footage is a great start. I also know people that are aholes and those people also become cops. Not racist, just aholes. I hate power hungry, ahole cops just as much as the next person that have ever have to deal with one.

I think we as a country should put an emphasis on establishing, maintaining and rewarding nuclear families. (coming from a divorced father of 1 ).This might solve a lot of the problem, who knows?

 

[brandon]

Can anyone shine a light on a law or policy that is racist that is still in practice in this country today?

Stop and Frisk.

Research shows that "persons of African and Hispanic descent were stopped more frequently than whites, even after controlling for precinct variability and race-specific estimates of crime participation."[4] According to the Washington Post fact-checker, the claim that stop-and-frisk contributed to a decline in the crime rate is unsubstantiated.

Ninety percent of those stopped in 2017 were African-American or Latino, mostly aged 14–24. Seventy percent of those stopped were later found to be innocent.

A 2017 study in The Journal of Politics found that the introduction of a mandate in 2013 that officers provide thorough justifications for stopping suspects led to far fewer stops, far fewer detainments of innocent people and increased the ratio of stops that ultimately produced evidence of the crime that the police stopped the suspect for.

Stop-and-frisk in New York City - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TaylorB]

I think you missed my question to the statement I was responding to. I'm not trying to claim that systemic racism does not exist. I'm asking how to "actively solve the problem of the residual effect of decades of racism that leave the black community distrustful of the police." Systemic racism should absolutely be fixed. Laws and policies that target black people or that purposefully hold them back should be corrected. But how do you relieve the black communities inherent distrust of the police? My example was simply to point out the differences in our mindsets. Ahole cop pulls us over and berates my wife. My first thought isn't that it's because of her skin color, but it's obvious that FTP & his friend believe his situation to be otherwise. I'm not saying it is or it isn't, I'm just asking how you fix that perception, which was what UTJ was saying we should try to solve.

I don't think you can meaningfully resolve the perception of racial bias in police without first addressing police behavior that causes that perception. People use past life experiences to understand current life experiences. For example, you assumed the cop in your case wasn't motivated to mistreat your family because of your race, in part because your life experience teaches you that probably wasn't the cop's motivation. You don't know that for a fact, but like many in the black community who perceive racial bias in police encounters, your own perception that there was no racial bias is based on your own experience that tells you there probably wasn't racial bias.

We could do a much better job training law enforcement officers to recognize how subconscious (or conscious) racial bias could affect how they treat people, and in turn, how people perceive them. But as long as there is a genuine problem with racial bias in policing -- which there clearly is -- the perception that there is bias will persist. You'll inevitably have instances where a person's perception of an encounter is distorted from reality based on incorrect assumptions, but it's not possible to weaken those perceptions until you start to eliminate the actual life experiences they're based on. That doesn't mean it's only the responsibility of law enforcement, and no one else, to address the problem. It just means it's not realistic to ask people to disregard their own past life experiences before they have reason to believe their future experiences will be different.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I think you missed my question to the statement I was responding to. I'm not trying to claim that systemic racism does not exist. I'm asking how to "actively solve the problem of the residual effect of decades of racism that leave the black community distrustful of the police." Systemic racism should absolutely be fixed. Laws and policies that target black people or that purposefully hold them back should be corrected. But how do you relieve the black communities inherent distrust of the police? My example was simply to point out the differences in our mindsets. Ahole cop pulls us over and berates my wife. My first thought isn't that it's because of her skin color, but it's obvious that FTP & his friend believe his situation to be otherwise. I'm not saying it is or it isn't, I'm just asking how you fix that perception, which was what UTJ was saying we should try to solve.

It's a hard question, for sure, there are people in the black community alive today who had police turn hoses on them for protesting segregation. Some of the people who turned those hoses on them or sent their police dogs to viciously take them down are still alive today. They had kids, what do you think they taught their children? What do you think the victims of police brutality told their kids?

There are several schools of thought on the best way to achieve reconciliation - and I'm hardly an expert at any of them. But usually it begins with a very open, and unequivocal apology. An actual statement of what the offense was, how we know it was damaging, that we are sorry and we promise to never do it again. No buts, or you have to understands, etc. This is harder nowadays, b/c it's been 60 years or so since it was official police policy to be racist, and there's a ton of resistance to apologizing for something you don't feel you were directly a part of. But the actual police departments still exist and that police department as an institution needs to make amends (and so on).

Basically, if you want the black community to feel like they can start to trust police and feel a part of society, I think the police and society as a whole needs to show the black community that we fully understand the wrong that society/police/etc has done to them in the past. That we are sorry that it happened and we are fully resolved to never let it happen again. It needs to be done in an unreserved fashion. It can't just be the liberal politicians saying it during speeches, with other people griping and complaining about it. It needs to actually come from society as a whole (if not unanimous -which will never happen, it needs to feel like it is representative of the whole society of which the police deparment is a part of).

That's where I would begin.

There are the practical policies -- engaging the community in best practices for engaging suspected criminals. Engaging the community on use of force spectrum. Follow best practices on use of force - there lots of studies out there that show this can be safer for both police and the community they serve. Be consistent.

Take away the responsibility of cops to "use their instincts" to make a stop. Stop searching for criminals. Don't use minor traffic offenses to launch into a broader investigation. And so on.

 

[rajncajn]

I think we as a country should put an emphasis on establishing, maintaining and rewarding nuclear families. (coming from a divorced father of 1 ).This might solve a lot of the problem, who knows?

I'm not sure if I completely agree with the nuclear family ideal either. Sure, a healthy family relationship, more often than not, produces healthy productive children. But rewarding people to stay together in unhealthy relationships can be just as damaging as broken families. I think the emphasis should be more on family stability, regardless of how it's made up.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

If we should not use personal experience, then what?
Can anyone shine a light on a law or policy that is racist that is still in practice in this country today?

Well, you could say the war on drugs is basically racist. Dan Baum had a book in the 1990's that interviewed John Ehrlichman who was a Nixon aide. In that interview this is what Ehrlichman said about the war on drugs:

"You want to know what this was really all about?" Ehrlichman asked, referring to the war on drugs.

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news."

Top Nixon adviser reveals the racist reason he started the 'war on drugs' decades ago

"By getting the public to associate hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin... We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, and vilify them."

www.businessinsider.com

That never really stopped. The largest demographic of illegal marijuana use is white college kids, the largest demographic arrested for illegal marijuana use is young black men.

I'm sure the cops arresting those young black men aren't thinking that they are being racist. They're enforcing the law, and these young black men were breaking the law. But that's how successful Nixon's administration was -- we associate all these bad behaviors with black people, so that's where our police are looking for it.

You later go on and emphasizing a nuclear family. That's great.... there's a lot of research on the benefit of having a stable home life. Now, how do you think a policy of zero-tolerance, and so on effects families? Kind of hard to have a stable home life if you arrest all the fathers. That is directly a result of those unequal policing polices in the 70's and early 80's. What do you think happened to the kids of the dads arrested for having marijuana? Compare their results to the kids of those college kids smoking a joint in college who weren't arrested and thrown in jail?

 

[MT15]

Some of the commentators who saw the George Floyd protests said that what was different after this killing was that the people taking to the streets to protest were not only one race. There were places where there were as many white people protesting as POC, which seems to be fairly unusual in the past.

That sort of broad support for this movement can start to seem like at the very least an awakening.

Unjust treatment of minorities is not only minorities’ perception, we have data showing that they are not treated like the rest of us. We can’t expect them to get rid of the idea that prejudice affects them until, well, it doesn’t affect them.

 

[TaylorB]

Can anyone shine a light on a law or policy that is racist that is still in practice in this country today?

A good example is the disparity between our treatment of the crack epidemic, which disproportionately affected black people, and the opioid epidemic. We responded to crack with a "war on drugs," creating and enforcing extremely harsh penalties for using or selling. With the opioid epidemic, there's been much more of a willingness to view it as a public health crisis, so we're more likely to offer drug rehab or diversions than locking people up for extended periods of time. [edit - I started typing this before UTJ's response, which is more robust than mine, on the same issue]

I'm not saying it's always the case that the powers that be get together and say "let's make racist laws and put black people away for lesser crimes." I just think it's often the case that our default response to a societal problem is to lock people up for it -- because that's the easiest, least creative, laziest thing we default to -- and many people tend to have less natural empathy for people that look less like them or that they don't associate with as often. So with the crack epidemic, mostly-white legislatures had an easier time criminalizing it, mostly white judges had an easier time enforcing it, etc. With the opioid epidemic, mostly white legislators and judges had friends and family members affected by it, the problem became more real to them, and they became more willing to come up with solutions more creative than just locking people up and forgetting about them. It doesn't make every single white legislator or judge "racist," but the disparity in the policies for addressing very similar problems is very much rooted in racial bias. And certainly there are plenty of instances in which the racism is overt; my point is that it doesn't have to be overt, and that often times the less overt policies are the most harmful because they're harder to identify.

 

[Farb]

Well, you could say the war on drugs is basically racist. Dan Baum had a book in the 1990's that interviewed John Ehrlichman who was a Nixon aide. In that interview this is what Ehrlichman said about the war on drugs:

Top Nixon adviser reveals the racist reason he started the 'war on drugs' decades ago

"By getting the public to associate hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin... We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, and vilify them."

www.businessinsider.com

That never really stopped. The largest demographic of illegal marijuana use is white college kids, the largest demographic arrested for illegal marijuana use is young black men.

I'm sure the cops arresting those young black men aren't thinking that they are being racist. They're enforcing the law, and these young black men were breaking the law. But that's how successful Nixon's administration was -- we associate all these bad behaviors with black people, so that's where our police are looking for it.

You later go on and emphasizing a nuclear family. That's great.... there's a lot of research on the benefit of having a stable home life. Now, how do you think a policy of zero-tolerance, and so on effects families? Kind of hard to have a stable home life if you arrest all the fathers. That is directly a result of those unequal policing polices in the 70's and early 80's. What do you think happened to the kids of the dads arrested for having marijuana? Compare their results to the kids of those college kids smoking a joint in college who weren't arrested and thrown in jail?

I am against the war on drugs. I left that out of my long diatribe so I agree, that needs to be changed. And that would have a direct result on the youth. Good point.

As far as my nuclear family statement goes, I don't think the make up has to be a mother, father, and kids. It can and will be a combination and that is fine as long as it is healthy. If a boy has the presence of a strong father figure then the chances of him being a successful as an adult male goes WAY up. That is just facts. That being said, it doesn't have to be a 'father' but the guidance of a father in a sons life is irreplaceable but any strong male role model will have an impact. As always, there are exceptions to the rule.

I am also not saying that just there needs to a government incentive for parents to stay together if they are in a miserable or unhealthy marriage/relationship. I thought that was fairly obvious when I stated I was divorced. I am in my son's life and my ex wife and I get a long great becasue we understand that that kid will be our legacy when we are dead and buried. How he acts and treats people is a direct reflection on me and her and we act accordingly.

The farther the government stays away from the family unit, the better. I think a bigger marriage tax break or something like that should be explored, although I am sure it has.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I am against the war on drugs. I left that out of my long diatribe so I agree, that needs to be changed. And that would have a direct result on the youth. Good point.

As far as my nuclear family statement goes, I don't think the make up has to be a mother, father, and kids. It can and will be a combination and that is fine as long as it is healthy. If a boy has the presence of a strong father figure then the chances of him being a successful as an adult male goes WAY up. That is just facts. That being said, it doesn't have to be a 'father' but the guidance of a father in a sons life is irreplaceable but any strong male role model will have an impact. As always, there are exceptions to the rule.

I am also not saying that just there needs to a government incentive for parents to stay together if they are in a miserable or unhealthy marriage/relationship. I thought that was fairly obvious when I stated I was divorced. I am in my son's life and my ex wife and I get a long great becasue we understand that that kid will be our legacy when we are dead and buried. How he acts and treats people is a direct reflection on me and her and we act accordingly.

The farther the government stays away from the family unit, the better. I think a bigger marriage tax break or something like that should be explored, although I am sure it has.

I get that, and mostly agree. I think we're paying for the sins of the past, and we can either take an active role in correcting it, or we can just hope it goes away with time

 

[Lapaz]

I prefaced my previous post by saying: "I do believe there does need to be police reform and blacks are unfairly targeted by police." I also think that minorities, especially blacks, aren't treated fairly in the criminal justice system which is yet a reason to end the war on drugs and have drug legalization. I know that the police are more likely to use violence toward blacks. I know that many blacks are victims of unfair profilng and harassment by police. I truly believe those things, support police reform including ending qualified immunity, but I also recognize the media sensationalizes some of the police violence without proper context.

I agree with Farb that I've also come across ahole police. That doesn't excuse what I talked about above, but sometimes it might just be the cop is an ahole.

Knowing your general support for anti-liberal positions, I'm a little surprised to read this from you. What stats prove that blacks are unfairly targeted by police? It may be true, but I don't accept such claims out of hand. I don't accept claims based on proportion of society. It has to be based on police encounters. Note, I just had dinner with a cop friend yesterday, and she believes the portrayal of the police is completely wrong. She noted about how much time they spend giving warnings, and how most cops want to remove bad cops. I know there are plenty of a-hole cops, but I tend to think that segregated police forces aren't targeting unless proven otherwise.

I believe there is evidence of unfair treatment in the criminal justice system based on what I've heard about blind studies, but I haven't researched it much, so that may not be true either. I know many claims are made that are only based on feelings, that's why most people feel crime is worse now than it was a generation ago, while stats indicate that it's been going down for decades, except for a slight upwards blip over the last few years, yet it is still far below what it was decades ago. Feelings are deceiving.

 

[First Time Poster]

So, rather than respond to one poster, I'll make one post and attempt to address all of the points at once, if possible.

We're all mostly men here, right? I'm not trying to generalize, but culturally, men are raised, taught and built different, wouldn't yall agree? So, think back to the last time you cried. More apt, when was the last time you randomly called a friend and started crying? If it has happened, think of what caused that. The trauma. So, knowing just that, why would anyone think this is just a one-off for my friend? This trauma is based off an assumption, or one assumption? That's the shortsightedness. This isn’t about ONE incident.

This is years and years, a lifetime, of being treated this way. The cumulative effect of having to emasculate yourself, lessen yourself, establish yourself as not a threat to survive a traffic stop and get through other encounters. The demoralizing effect on your character of constantly being considered a criminal. Yall really that insulated in your own reality that empathy doesn't allow you to even consider that a grown man being moved to call his friend and shed tears is more than just a few interactions with "ahole cops" or on an "assumption" that his race was involved in the treatment? So if you raise your hand to a dog that has been beaten his entire life and he winces and recoils in fear you really gonna get upset and question the dog and say, "how dare you assume I was going to hit you. Or, I raise my hand to all dogs."

It is that level of, not even callousness, but wanton disregard that I'm speaking of about average white Americans. How many times have yall been held at gunpoint by police? I've been held at gunpoint by police as a toddler. Have you? First, let's define "held at gunpoint." Im not talking about gun pointed in your direction while instructed to get out of a car. Im talking about many minutes, standing there, or kneeling there, gun aimed at your head or center mass, hands above your head or in the air, while a cop waits for backup, is searching your vehicle, is verifying your "story", is running your credentials.

I believe I've been held at gunpoint 5/6 different times. No citations. Think about that for a second. I supposedly did something to warrant being stopped by police, held at gunpoint, my life in the balance, the entire time being sworn at and told if I move an inch I will be shot, and at the end of it, after their "investigation", what I did wasn't even severe enough to warrant a ticket. Not even a ticket. But enough to aim a gun at me. Why? My imagination? My Jordans? Maybe because dudes with fades or waves are dangerous? And its not even the extreme stuff like that. It is being followed constantly. Being watched constantly. Treated as a threat. Or a criminal. Because of the vehicle I'm driving. The neighborhood I'm in. The clothing store I'm in. The bank I'm in. The house I want to buy. The property I want own. The business I want to start. The conference I'm at. The street I'm walking on. The gym I'm at. The grocery store. The library. Everywhere. Every. Where. By everyone.

Your few run-ins with "ahole cops" equates to that? "How do I know?" "Could it have been something else besides race?" I've lived with thus shirt my entire life. I know what it feels like. What it looks like. What it sounds like. That's why he called me to cry. Not because of just THAT day. Because THAT day is like every day and you get exhausted. You get tired. You get depressed and fed up. And he knew I knew what that feels like. And that, most likely, I have shed those tears too. Because I have. Have you? For something as indiscriminate as your skin color?

Like, this post is a drop in the bucket of my experience on the daily. And then that gets questioned? Marginalized? Yeah, continue playing bridge. Must be nice...

 

[SaintForLife]

I believe I've been held at gunpoint 5/6 different times. No citations. Think about that for a second. I supposedly did something to warrant being stopped by police, held at gunpoint, my life in the balance, the entire time being sworn at and told if I move an inch I will be shot, and at the end of it, after their "investigation", what I did wasn't even severe enough to warrant a ticket. Not even a ticket. But enough to aim a gun at me. Why? My imagination? My Jordans? Maybe because dudes with fades or waves are dangerous? And its not even the extreme stuff like that. It is being followed constantly. Being watched constantly. Treated as a threat. Or a criminal. Because of the vehicle I'm driving. The neighborhood I'm in. The clothing store I'm in. The bank I'm in. The house I want to buy. The property I want own. The business I want to start. The conference I'm at. The street I'm walking on. The gym I'm at. The grocery store. The library. Everywhere. Every. Where. By everyone.

Your few run-ins with "ahole cops" equates to that? "How do I know?" "Could it have been something else besides race?" I've lived with thus shirt my entire life. I know what it feels like. What it looks like. What it sounds like. That's why he called me to cry. Not because of just THAT day. Because THAT day is like every day and you get exhausted. You get tired. You get depressed and fed up. And he knew I knew what that feels like. And that, most likely, I have shed those tears too. Because I have. Have you? For something as indiscriminate as your skin color?

Like, this post is a drop in the bucket of my experience on the daily. And then that gets questioned? Marginalized? Yeah, continue playing bridge. Must be nice...

My post literally said that I wasn't excusing those things. Maybe you overlooked me saying that or you were talking about something else:

I prefaced my previous post by saying: "I do believe there does need to be police reform and blacks are unfairly targeted by police." I also think that minorities, especially blacks, aren't treated fairly in the criminal justice system which is yet a reason to end the war on drugs and have drug legalization. I know that the police are more likely to use violence toward blacks. I know that many blacks are victims of unfair profilng and harassment by police. I truly believe those things, support police reform including ending qualified immunity, but I also recognize the media sensationalizes some of the police violence without proper context.

I agree with Farb that I've also come across ahole police. That doesn't excuse what I talked about above, but sometimes it might just be the cop is an ahole.

 

[JimEverett]

There are the practical policies -- engaging the community in best practices for engaging suspected criminals. Engaging the community on use of force spectrum. Follow best practices on use of force - there lots of studies out there that show this can be safer for both police and the community they serve. Be consistent.

Take away the responsibility of cops to "use their instincts" to make a stop. Stop searching for criminals. Don't use minor traffic offenses to launch into a broader investigation. And so on.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you here, but police are doing that in places like Atlanta - and they are getting criticized for it because crime is going up. You are seeing a similar thing in Chicago and other cities.
Baltimore police were criticized for similar things a few years ago in the aftermath of charges being brought in the Freddie Gray murder.

I think there are a lot of factors in rise of violent crime we have seen in some big cities recently, and police actions probably play a role in that. And if that is the case then police slowdowns will have the greatest negative impact on impoverished black communities - the ones where few of the current protestors have to go back and live.

 

[Lapaz]

A good example is the disparity between our treatment of the crack epidemic, which disproportionately affected black people, and the opioid epidemic. We responded to crack with a "war on drugs," creating and enforcing extremely harsh penalties for using or selling. With the opioid epidemic, there's been much more of a willingness to view it as a public health crisis, so we're more likely to offer drug rehab or diversions than locking people up for extended periods of time. [edit - I started typing this before UTJ's response, which is more robust than mine, on the same issue]

I'm not saying it's always the case that the powers that be get together and say "let's make racist laws and put black people away for lesser crimes." I just think it's often the case that our default response to a societal problem is to lock people up for it -- because that's the easiest, least creative, laziest thing we default to -- and many people tend to have less natural empathy for people that look less like them or that they don't associate with as often. So with the crack epidemic, mostly-white legislatures had an easier time criminalizing it, mostly white judges had an easier time enforcing it, etc. With the opioid epidemic, mostly white legislators and judges had friends and family members affected by it, the problem became more real to them, and they became more willing to come up with solutions more creative than just locking people up and forgetting about them. It doesn't make every single white legislator or judge "racist," but the disparity in the policies for addressing very similar problems is very much rooted in racial bias. And certainly there are plenty of instances in which the racism is overt; my point is that it doesn't have to be overt, and that often times the less overt policies are the most harmful because they're harder to identify.

I think drugs should be legalized and only drug abuse should be illegal. To that end, users of dangerous drugs should be required to go through rehab, and issued the drugs through a pharmacy. This would eliminate most drug offenses. With that said, I thought the reason that crack was treated more harshly than cocaine is because of the crimes that people had to commit to gather the money they needed to buy the crack. I then read the attached article, and it is more related to unsubstantiated claims that it is much more dangerous than powder cocaine:

Crack vs. Powder Cocaine: One Drug, Two Penalties

Although both are variations of the same drug, the two have historically different consequences with the law. Learn more about the legal history of these drugs.

www.criminaldefenselawyer.com

How destructive is crack cocaine? — Criminal Justice Policy Foundation

www.cjpf.org

The area where crack causes more problems is due to gang involvement. Here is an abstract of an article that states that crime rose dramatically in cities after the arrival of crack in those cities.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2646648?seq=1

On the other hand, there are abstracts to articles that show correlation between the drop in the cost of powdered cocaine with drastic decreases in crime with the drop in the cost of powdered cocaine. I believe the increase in crack must've had a lot to do with the drop in powdered cocaine. If that is true, then crack has both a positive and a negative affect on crime. My conclusion is that if we just make the drugs legal and controlled, crime will drop, and many fewer people's lives will be destroyed by incarceration for drug possession and use.