Is anyone supprised?
I imagine there are at least some Adams voters out there who thought a “law and order” candidate would be totally different this time because he was black
Probably should have voted based on the content of his character. Never mind they’ll have another chance to do that in four years time. Although having said that he might be up against someone whose character is even worse.
He’s gonna get reelected. He’s got a Trump-like hold over a voting bloc big enough to win the primary.
Not one lick. I knew as soon as Adams started playing that whole ‘tough on crime’ angle, that he’d Tom out for the Fraternal Orders. This is what happens when you tapdance for the settlers. More ‘criminals’, more recidivism, no rehabilitation. Adams has the blood of his own people on his hands; and I for one hope it tortures him at night when he lays his head down and tries to sleep.
Because they’re the ones impacted by the crime this targets. Unlike the racists on the left, they don’t care that the ones this “impacts” are largely black because that’s the makeup of the areas with crime problems
That is honestly sobering. And depressing.
Mostly sobering, because I was happily drunk before reading this.
For those wondering, 5% of 10,000 people is 500 people.
So math time. NYC has a 41% white demographic.
If all 5% white people stopped were legit stops, my calculator says only 12.19% of the stops were legitimate.
Is that disproportionate to the crime rate? If not, then I’m not sure how this is Mayor Adams’ fault.
One of the issues with following a crime rate is that it perpetuates discrimination.
Even if two groups have the exact same probability of, for example, carrying illegal substances, racist targeting will mean your crime rate will continue to reflect that one group “seems worse”.
You don’t spot crime where you dont look for it.
That’s why it’s important to tackle these issues and make sure there is no racial targeting.
As an example:
Imagine, for the sake of argument, both white people and black people have a 50% chance of possessing weed (not that weed should even be criminalized, but you get the idea).
Now also let’s take a group of 100 people, assuming 80 are white and 20 are black. Given the above weed possession rate, we can say there are 40 weed-carrying white people and 10 weed-carrying black people.
Now imagine cops last year searched 20% of the total population, 90% of those searched being black and 10% being white. Thus, last year, 18 black people were searched and only 2 white people. Of these searched people, 9 black people were caught in possession of weed vs 1 white person.
Thus, the newspapers can now publish “9 black criminals for every 1 white criminal!”, and so the police decide to continue mostly searching black people this year.
Same underlying crime rates, but searching one demographic more skews the resulting arrest record and seemingly justifies further discriminatory enforcement.
Don’t even need to imagine it when every study shows that is an accurate description.
Yep.
If you’re only stopping people in cargo shorts to search them for drugs, you’re only going to find drugs on people wearing cargo shorts.
Doesn’t mean they’re the only ones carrying drugs around. They’re just waaaaay more likely to get caught because they’re the ones getting searched
That makes sense. Do you think that there’s a large amount of drug crime among white folks that is presently being ignored?
from the article:
Black and Latino people are “much less likely to get arrested because the stops are bogus from the get-go,”
so, no. the disproportionate number of stops is not because of differences in crime rates. but also, it should be pretty obvious that white people (who are around 30% of the NYC population) should account for more than just 5% of crimes, even considering that more crime will be committed by poor people, and that poor people will be disproportionately non-white.
I was coming here to post that certain people will use this statistic to claim 95% of crime is committed by non-whites.
But I think you just saved me the trouble by demonstrating my point
Skin color has nothing to do with crime rates. You can tell if a system is racist by looking at its rates compared to demographics. Only stopping 5% white people when their population in the area is 60% is a red flag. Essential being a white criminal in that area was like being invisible.
Yes. Most studies show blacks commit a majority of the crimes but not 95% https://www.nyc.gov/assets/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/year-end-2022-enforcement-report.pdf
The arrest rate is around 43% for black people. White is about 17%.
The issue, though, is this is stop and frisk. It is just an excuse to stop people. It isn’t effective law enforcement.
Yes. Most studies show blacks commit a majority of the crimes but not 95%
That logic only works under the assumption everyone that commits a crime is caught…
Which is incredibly naive.
You should use “convicted of crimes” not “committed crimes”. And even then, that’s ignoring how our justice system uses insane prison sentences to make people take plea deals. So innocent people are coerced into pleasing guilty to avoid jail.
There are literally no valid, trustworthy crime statistics in the US. Police only stop people they want to stop, they more often than not lie in court to secure convictions, public defenders have obscene caseloads that leave them entirely unable to provide a competent, effective defense, and, as you said, defendants are all but forced into shit plea deals for crimes they usually either didn’t commit or shouldn’t be imprisoned for.
The US justice system isn’t just broken, it’s nearly nonexistent and should be treated as entirely illegitimate.
Actually commit, or arrested for, or convicted for? I’m on mobile and can’t dive the PDF, but “commit” sounds like it’s a denominator, not a numerator.
We’re not talking about arrests we’re talking about stops of pedestrians, so none of what you said after the first sentence is relevant.
The NYPD has stopped tens of thousands of pedestrians since Mayor Eric Adams took office – claiming someone “fit a relevant description” or citing a vague reason like “other.” Just 5% of them were white, revealing racial disparities even starker than at the height of former Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s “stop and frisk” era.
