Racism Debate: House of Cards?

The American Commentator ^ | 4/30/03 | Jack Lowry

[TheTory]

The vacuous claims of racism behind liberal lines are once again reaching a fevered pitch. The gaudy attacks on racial profiling, even in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, are now the dernier cri of those who fashion themselves race warriors. Fortunately, there are those within the conservative mold who answer effectively.

Manhattan Institute Scholar Heather Mac Donald, whose new book, Are Cops Racist, throws aside those on the anti-profiling bandwagon. At once a brilliant book much needed by those who understand how difficult the job of law enforcement can be, as well as a good book for those who wear dark glasses, unable to see the truth. MacDonald points out the New York Times has made it quite clear that they are “Anti-police”. She also argues effectively that the Amadou Diallo murder was a case of poor judgment, not “institutional racism”. This is not the first time Ms. Mac Donald has taken on false notions. She refutes prevailing wisdom with dialectic thoroughness.

Macdonald, the author of The Burden of Bad Ideas: How Modern Intellectuals have Misshapen Society, refers to a study of drivers who take to the New Jersey Turnpike, the North, and South route from southern New Jersey to New York. According to the study, black drivers are twice as likely to speed as white drivers are. This fact, and as Ms. Mac Donald points out, it is fact, scatters to the wind the mythology that apologists use as sacred text.

The arguments put forth charging racism by dilettantes rest on the following notion; Blacks make up a small portion of the entire population of the country, yet their instance of arrest and incarceration is high. Therefore, in that same vein, the de-facto cause is racism.

The study of the New Jersey turnpike drivers, commissioned by the Attorney General of the New Jersey, is a cogent argument dispelling that notion. Ms. Mac Donald says in the article that "Until now, the anti-police crusade that travels under the banner of "ending racial profiling" has traded on ignorance. Its spokesmen went around the country charging that the police were stopping "too many" minorities for traffic infractions or more serious violations. The reason, explained the anti-cop crowd, was that the police were racist." They can argue that no more. The study also addresses the myriad of reports undertaken by the opposition who claim factual victory. According to Ms. Mac Donald "most of the studies that the ACLU and defense attorneys have proffered to show biased behavior by the police only used crude population measures as the benchmark for comparing police activity--arguing, say, that if 24 percent of speeding stops on a particular stretch of highway were of black drivers, in a city or state where blacks make up 19 percent of the population, the police are over-stopping blacks." That racism exists in the minds of a small number of police officers is without argument. The law of percentages dictates that it will occur.

The anti-profiling coterie takes this small number and extrapolates it to encompass all of law enforcement. This is precisely why studies such as the one commissioned in New Jersey are so important. They provide scientific evidence that claims are often just that, a claim, with no substantiating evidence. The race warriors detest dealing with facts and evidence. It is vital to their cause that they employ rhetoric and emotion to drown out the calm words of truth. David A. Harris of the Toledo College of Law wrote a report for the American Civil Liberties union in 1999 entitled Driving while Black, Racial Profiling on our Nations Highways. Mr. Black contends that · Because police look for drugs primarily among African Americans and Latinos, they find a disproportionate number of them with contraband. Therefore, more minorities are arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and jailed, thus reinforcing the perception that drug trafficking is primarily a minority activity. Mr. Black brings out in stellar fashion the age-old liberal idea that if police look for drugs among minorities then they will find an inordinate amount of minorities with drugs. It is not possible for Mr. Black to concede that a disproportionate number of minorities commit crimes. His reports length is no indication of its profundity.

In the end, what we have is a valuable police tool that is effective coming under attack. Federal authorities, which seek to use profiling to combat the terror threat post 9/11, are standing in the face of blistering attacks by the intelligentsia. However, it is easier for law enforcement to counter such arguments when scientific studies are performed and talented individuals, such as Heather Mac Donald, are there to offer needed insight.

[lainde]

bttt

[Sonny M]

After 9/11 , a several polls showed that over 75% of african americans approve of racial profiling in regards to arabs. Go Figure, even Sharpton was caught off guard on that, and blamed it on skewing (saying it has to do with where the polls were done, and noting hostility beween african americans and arabs in detroit where one of the polls was done), still saying it was wrong, but not wanting to discuss it further.