As a black Libertarian, who has spent majority of his life as a black conservative, I am no stranger to going against mainstream or accepted "black opinion" and viewpoints. And till this day, I have many positions about the black community that most black people would not agree with. Butt I have noticed a very disturbing viewpoint when it comes to addressing police brutality in the black community, and it's often "what about black on black crime". Now at one time, I took this position. On the surface it seems quite logical. It's the old "clean up your own backyard, before you tell someone else to clean theirs" mentality. Except the argument doesn't hold up to deeper evaluation, and once one look deeper, it is unsupportable as a rational point of view. I do not attempt to speak for all black people who are against the entire "black on black crime" rebutttal, since I'm sure my POV is much different than theirs. 1. How EXACTLY do you fight black on black crime? So I'm one of those people who actually sat back and thought about how someone solves an issue with black on black crime. What does this strategy look like? What is the gameplan? No one will answer this? Because stopping black on black crime is basically stopping crime itself. And if we could stop all crime, then what good are police? so this is where the argument breaks down. Why are black people even responsible for stopping black on black crime? In theory isn't that what we pay police to do? So if it is up to black people to stop black on black crime, then essentially what you're saying that black people should police themselves? Since this responsibility OBVIOUSLY don't fall on cops, and falls on black individuals. Actually I do support black people removing police out of their community, and policing themselves. But that's another topic for another time. 2. Black on black crime isn't ACTUALLY that bad The bizzare narrative is that black on black crime hasn't been lower in over 50 years than it is today. As a whole black on black crime is down, and has gone down continously for 20 years. So the common rebuttle is this: "Crime is still disproportionately high in the black community" - Except it's not, since crime is low overall in America relative to the population. This would mean that majority of black people aren't likely to be directly impacted by "black on black crime". "Crime has gone up in Chicago" - This is also quite irrational. So because black on black crime is up in 1 city, does this automatically mean it's every black person's problem? So one has to ask, what is the assumed values of such a system? Do we assume that because people in Chicago are black, and commit crime, and if you happen to be black, that crime local to Chicago is somehthing a black person could do anything about? Again, how does a black person in LA fight crime in Chicago? Isn't this more of a function of the failures of the Chicago PD than the black race as a whole? 3. There actually was a community effort to stop violence when violence was high in every black community Before hip hop was just a whored out art form for corporate record companies, it was actually part of a huge social movement. It was an amazing way that people in the streets organized, talked about life in poverty, and mostly had positive messages. People who think rap has always been gangsta "shoot em up" should listen to 80s hip hop before it became mainstream. In many cases reformed gang members and gang leaders used hip hop as a medium for peace. And in many cases it reached out to black people, caused many cease fires in gang wars in LA, and I feel was instrumental in the drop in black on black crime from the 80s and 90s. Yet the main people who talk about black on black crime has no sense of history, because if they did, the black community does respond when black on black crime is at epidemic levels. In conclusion. The "black on black crime" is a convenient rebuttal, and it speaks to ignorance about the history on black on black crime, unfair assumptions about black people's responsibility, and the lack of responsibility on the behalf of police.
I do think there is a cultural gap between white and black communities on crime. There seems to be a much higher tolerance for crime in the black community than the white community. Outside of the Mafia and Mountain hillbillies, there just isn't a animus against "snitching" to the police among whites. However watching local news, time and time again they report that witnesses refuse to talk to the police. That would be unheard of in a white community. A shooting there would have the whole neighborhood telling the cops everything they know. Neighborhood watches. They exist in many white communities. Do they in black communities? I don't know I'm just asking. But to answer your question..YES. Black communities should police themselves in the same way that White communities do. The fact that you actually ask such questions is revealing. I think it shows a large cultural gap between black and white views on crime and policing, and probably goes a long way to explain the large gap in crime figures between white and black communities.
I doubt that there would be too many people on this forum who would disagree with the suggestion that cops should let blacks police themselves in black neighborhoods; simply because it is too dangerous for white cops to police in these areas. It would be an interesting experiment. I suspect crime would skyrocket though. What it would be like in these all-black enclaves is what it is like in post-apartheid South Africa. There are many examples of blacks policing themselves. South Africa virtually ridded itself of its white officers, and is now more than 90% black. Blacks are finally policing blacks. Unfortunately crime within the black communities and black-on-white crime has risen dramatically. The result of letting blacks police themselves in SA is that it now has one of the highest murder rates, and the highest rape rate in the world. Other crimes--like home invasions--have increased to the point that everyone, whites especially, have to live behind barbed wire fences, and hire protection. The problem of the disproportionate number of crimes being committed by blacks is not a problem caused by white police officers. It is a problem of blacks being frustrated over the fact that they are being left behind, and cannot compete in a fast-paced world. This is no one's problem but their own and the educational system who doesn't understand that academics is not something the majority of blacks value, or are interested in. (I remember Will Smith's kid telling all blacks to drop out of school because schools were "tools" of indoctrination.) Forcing a swath of people to learn subjects that they do not want to learn, nor see the value in learning them is pointless and a waste of money. The black community suggests that, like letting them police themselves, they should let them teach themselves. Many schools in black communities and many charter schools are all black schools, and their graduation rates are dismal. Career training schools, and apprenticeship schools might be a more successful educational approach to getting blacks up to par and able to compete in the world. I think black crime is directly related to unemployment in black communities. Perhaps its time to take a different approach to teaching blacks. What you are suggesting about letting blacks have control of themselves in their own communities has precedence--South Africa. I don't know why, but post-apartheid SA is a shocking failure. There are more and more blacks graduating from college with nothing but degrees in teaching; and needless to say, there are a lot of angry, unemployed teachers in South Africa. It would have served them better to go to trade schools. Businesses do not want to invest in areas with high crime rates, and with an unemployable populace.
Police go where the crime is. Simple as that. If the crime rate is disproportionately high in certain demographic groups like blacks and latinos compared to European decedents then that is where the majority of police will be required to respond to. The fact that police are viewed as racist is a direct result of the amount of crime based on demographic. Black cops shoot black people too but that doesn't make the news.
I agree, saying at least are cops our not as bad as criminals is no comparison, we expect police to be better then criminals I believe if we end the war on drugs... we will see more respect for the police and less gang violence as we will no the funneling billions into gangs and we wont be having the cops harass people for just trying to get by in life . to some people a beer or a joint on the weekend is the break from reality they need, many can't afford vacations all across the globe. this is how they relax and the police are harrassing them, same with taxing the poor to kingdom come for smoking, quality of life is as important as quantity of life if not more so..... stress kills, stop harassing people and let them live their lives in peace police should be there to help people, not harass people I think this will bring back respect for cops again. long past due.. .
Personally I don't understand the "black on black crime" rebuttal when talking about police violence. I assume we're talking about the statements made by various people / movements, especially over the last couple of years, that police officers are more likely to be violent with black people. A recent study by a black Harvard professor does seem to shed some new light . It's only one study to be sure, but the results are enough to be at least used in conversation on this topic. Personally, I think if you look at the actual locations / areas where many of these high-profile police shootings have taken place (justified or not) you will see that many of these locales are in fact areas where the majority of the residents are black and these areas tend to be higher crime (thus have a higher police presence). FBI / DOJ statistics do show that black people commit a disproportionate amount of violent crimes (based on the percentage of the entire country's population they represent). This doesn't mean that black people commit more crimes because they are black. It simply means there are a lot more factors coming into play, and many of them are issues that have existed in some black (and other races as well) urban communities for more than a few years. Of course no one really wants to broach that topic. The subject of the many socioeconomic issues plaguing many communities are simply ignored by many, since the solutions are not something that can be relayed in a 140 character tweet or in a politician's campaign promises. I would think the more appropriate question would be how you correct or at least improve social and economic factors that tend to make people desperate enough to turn to crime to better their situation, as many times they don't see an alternative. I wonder if anyone has looked at the massive budget cuts across the country, where community based actions / services are usually the first things cut when local governments are scrambling to cover their obligations in the time where incoming taxes are not increasing on the whole. I think my last statement applies here as well. It's always easier to point fingers and propose simplified responses to very complicated issued that have developed over YEARS of misguided and mismanaged social service programs and other efforts. Point taken. I won't address this statement then. Crime as WHOLE, in the entire country, has been on a downward trend for quite a long while now. I think the issue that some people bring up is that black people in this country, strictly by the numbers, commit a disproportionate amount of crime, as compared to what percentage of the entire population they represent. . Me personally, I don't subscribe to this line of thinking and I'm not sure what sense it makes. An entirely separate point would be that it seems that most all forms of mass media seem to ignore "black on black" crime in major urban communities. It's almost like that each side of the aisle is narrowing down it's so-called current event coverage to focus on a certain demographic, to sustain their own narrative it seems. Me personally, no I don't think that's the case. Chicago is like many other large urban communities. To get to the root of an issue, you have to peel back all the surface BS and find the root of the problem. Only then can you do anything to address that root problem. I guess that sounds to much like work to many people. It's a hell of a lot easier to simply point at something, use it as a talking point, then move on. I agree that these areas of high crime need to be addressed with potential solutions that are tailored to the particular location in question. Efforts, regardless of the source, to reduce crime in one location will likely not work in another location, simply because the unique factors that contribute to each area's particular issues. On the other hand, laying the entire responsibility for these crime-reduction efforts directly on the local police departments is an easy way out as well. Many times local police departments are overloaded simply dealing with enforcing laws. If politicians, activists etc were really serious about addressing the core issues involved here, they would be looking at all options that have proven themselves in other locales and even analyzing new options / procedures that might be considered "out of the box".
Why do you think there is an upswing in concealed carry permits in the entire Country ? Because People are not going to rely completely on the Police for protection anymore, it is far more expedient to defend yourself from Criminal attack than to dial 911 and wait for the Police to arrive late after you and your loved ones are dead.
The Police are not well connected or understanding of the communities they patrol, they act almost like occupation troops in a foreign land, White Police Officers treat Black People and Latinos like the Enemy, There is very little love lost between an occupying Army and the People they Oppress and serve, at least that is the common perception among Minorities of the Police.
OP you hit on a great point that is probably worth highlighting in its own thread. Murder is EXTREMELY rare. There were 5,000 murders in 2015. The US population is 300 million. Why on earth is anyone concerned and making a huge deal about a cause of death that ranks somewhere in the 30's or 40's. Anyone's probability of getting murdered is less than .001%. If you are not a gang member or drug dealer, then your probability of getting murdered is like 0.0000001%. Case closed. There is nothing to see here. Just race baiters interested in having conversation. Just media interested in selling advertising space.
