Are Cops Racist?

Rating:
Summary: thorough research
Review: Heather MacDonald's Are Cops Racist? maintains that opposition to racial profiling threatens to erode crime-fighting gains of the last decade. Chapters show how this profiling has led to increased insights on the demographics of crime and criminals - and chapters consider how anti-profiling lobbying produces harmful results for blacks and all peoples. An intriguing discussion.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent, well-researched piece of work.
Review: I just finished reading "Are Cops Racist" by Heather MacDonald. As an African-American and newly minted "Black Neo-conservative," I commend the author for not only showing, though painstaking reseach, interviews and thoughtful analysis, the fictitious and politcally motivated accusations against cops of racial profiling, but also stressing how such nonsense (further propogated by a left-leaning media) will do more harm than good to law-abiding citizens - particularly African-Americans. As the old saying goes, "the truth hurts." This book should leave cop-bashers nationwide with a serious hangover for a long time.

Rating:
Summary: Wanted to like it, but was very dissapointed
Review: I was looking forward to reading this book. Heather Mac Donald's writing came highly recommended from a friend, and I'm sympathetic to her argument in this book. But sadly, I was very disappointed.

First, it should be noted that this isn't a book per se; it is a compilation of several articles she wrote for "City Journal". As such, it doesn't flow like a book, but more like a somewhat-related series of news and editorial clippings. Second, she is guilty of so much oversimplification that it smacks of intellectual laziness.

I knew something was amiss when I read in the first page of the introduction, "For the past decade, the press has been on a crusade to portray cops as brutal and racist...." Where to begin? "The press"? That's a pretty big group, of which allegedly she is a member herself. "Crusade"? Does she mean organized? And why "for the past decade"? Could it be because that's the decade that Bill Clinton was in office?

Mac Donald's book is full of anecdotal evidence and questionable leaps of logic that aren't satisfying. It's a real shame because she is doing a disservice to an argument that is probably right. But after seeing it so poorly defended, even I began to have doubts. She also doesn't help build confidence in her evidence or intellectual integrity by continuing the ad hominems such as "anti-police agitators and their journalist acolytes" throughout the book.

Mac Donald makes some good points and presents some interesting evidence, but unfortunately it is clouded by a lack of detachment and professionalism that would help make her argument more convincing, especially if she meant to preach to more than the choir. Real conservatives are some of the few people left with any good ideas, but sadly this is the kind of book the like of Al Franken will point out as conservative hysterics.

Rating:
Summary: Living with Rose Colored Glasses in the land of OZ
Review: The author is a master of the english language and seems to have an answer for everything. The title question itself is flawed since it's an all or nothing question. It's a universal question that cannot be answered yes or no. A better question should be "Is racial profiling affecting the freedoms and quality of life of the individuals affected? If so, does this create pinned up resentment and anger to the police conducting the profiling? What negative impact does racial profiling have on the population affected? Does this cause border line individuals to go over the edge and turn to a life of crime and disrespect towards the law because of excessive police harrassment (mental paranoia)? Does profiling create a never ending cycle rivaling the Middle East crisis? The fact she did do research does NO good if the author has ALREADY determined, beforehand, that the police are right to use questionable methods to "get the bad guys". The law-biding citizen just has to deal with it (just so long as it's not "me" as any person would say). The spin she's giving does not reflect the real world. Cops are human and being human they bring there own human preferences and bias, good and bad to their job. Some have military, bodyguard, bounty hunter, and security experience they bring to jobs. The question of racial profiling is real. It's not just "driving while black"; but "walking while black" and "living while black" as I can personnally testify to. If we're so sensitive in being fair to people in Iraq and Afghanistan - why can't we do that here in our American communities. The author doesn't acknowledge black leaders of the community. Even though they are not elected officals, and less than perfect, doesn't mean they can't bring to the table concerns of the black communities they are serving. They have news worthy media attention unlike myself. I finally finished the book after becoming angry over what I was reading. I revised my review, but my overall outcome remains unchanged. She really needs to walk in a black person's shoes before giving filtered facts and interviews to fit her arguements. Arguements that she already made her mind up on before conducting the research. I know enough not to introduce personal bias to scientific research to get a desired result -- without even going to an ivory league school.
______MY ACCOUNT OF WHY I'M SO HARSH ON THIS "MYTH" AS THE AUTHOR PUTS IT: I'm middle age and have no car. I work 2 jobs and I'm a former Black Marine. I have been stopped over 30 times at various times of the day, while walking to the bus or running my miles to stay in shape. I have been stopped at gunpoint; and while cleaning the store's parking lot at my job "while in uniform"; you name it--it happened. I have been embarrassed by the stops when they pull up 2 or 3 cars with lots of people around. After searching and questioning me they let me go with little or no apologies. The reason: "such and such store got robbed and it was a Black/Arab/Hispanic guy" -PLEASE. Do they stop every white person when some white person robs a store? No, they use a description as they should be using with all incidents such as this. I had my apartment mistakenly raided at 4am in the morning and afterwards they claim they were responding to a noise complaint. I personally have NO record not even a traffic ticket. One time, I was taken downtown because the officer didn't believe the ID data in the computer laptop in the vehicle. I lived in 3 major cities in California. It's all the same. I have few friends so I'm not associating with the criminal element. I'm just a large old Marine. I've seen abuses and much disrespect. Most of the trouble I had was with the LA and San Jose PD. What usually gets me out of trouble is my Marine tattoo (gang units look for tattos) and my Military Reservist card. I still respect the police. It's just too bad their proactive approach towards people are hostile until proven otherwise. There are countless incidents in the media of raids gone bad (New York) and innocent people being locked up on false charges (Texas). It's how they react after they're actions that really gets me. They want to go home to they're families at the end of a shift. So do I!! No one should live here in the U.S.A. like this is the old U.S.S.R.

Rating:
Summary: The book debunks some sacred myths
Review: We all decry racial-profiling, right? Only one problem: racial profiling does not exist.

The author documents how this myth began with black "leaders" complaining that too many blacks were being stopped for traffic violations. Liberal politicians quickly jumped on the bandwagon and demanded a study. With hysteria in full bloom, a federal study was produced showing that blacks were, indeed, stopped at a disproportionate rate for traffic violations along the New Jersey Turnpike. With the New Jersey Turnpike study in hand, President Clinton, then candidate G.W. Bush, and numerous governors were all out denouncing racial profiling and demanding reform. The hysteria then moved to the courts were numerous arrests were thrown out due to the claim that they were stopped because of their race.

Nobody ever asked the question: Are blacks being stopped at a disproportionate rate because they are committing traffic violations at a disproportionate rate. Even asking such a question usually resulted in charges of racism. To answer this question, however, the New Jersey Attorney General commissioned a study that employed radar to trigger a camera which snapped a picture of the driver whenever said driver exceeded the speed limit along points throughout New Jersey Turnpike. The report showed that blacks did, indeed, speed at a disproportionate rate, double that of whites. Needless to say, the politicians were shocked at the results. The DOJ continued to sidestep the study. The study was performed by the Public Service Institute for Safety in Maryland. The researchers even offered to submit the tests and methodologies to the National Academy of Sciences for peer review. In the end the media and politicians didn't contest the results, they instead chose to just ignore the study. Nobody wanted to tell black folks that they speed at twice the rate of whites and, hence, were ticketed at twice the rate of whites, especially after all the hoopla. The results were not politically acceptable.

The book debunks many other charges of racism such as that during the Cincinnati riots. We all heard about the white racist cops that were out of control and shooting innocent black folks in Cincinnati. Cincinnati suffered greatly during the riots with black "leaders" out front demanding reform to stop the racist cops and demanding more government social programs to appease the agry rioters. The facts, however, showed that of the 15 black offenders that were shot to death, four were shot by black officers. One of the offenders was shot after he hacked to death his girlfriend and was waving the axe at the cops. Another was shot after he dragged a black police officer to his death. In short, when the facts were examined, there was no evidence that the cops were racist and out of control.

After reading this book and books like "Coloring the News" one has to ask why is there so much manipulation out there designed to inflame black resentment against cops, against the government, and against whites in general. Why is there a constant stream of misinformation designed to keep black folks bitter and resentful against whites in general? First, many black "leaders" gain power and prestige and are rewarded financially with more government programs when racial tension is increased. Jesse Jackson, for instance, lives in a 16 room mansion. He obviously has benefited greatly by inflaming racial tensions against large corporations and against the government, and then offering to fix the problems for large fees. Second, the Democrats are beholden to a black constituency. 90% of the black vote went to Democrats. So the Democrats obviously have a stake in perpetuating myths that blacks need the Democrats to rectify the racial situation. Without the black vote the Democratic party would be dead. So there are many reasons for this.

As far as being stopped. I have been stopped numerous times-I am white. In each instance, I stayed calm, cooperated, and was usually sent on my way with a ticket. Nothing newsworthy.