Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Should successful black Britons accept the pitfalls of racial profiling?
Last week, England and Tottenham star Jermain Defoe announced he was going to sue Essex police for unlawful arrest and imprisonment because of the number of times he'd been stopped whilst driving his expensive car(s).
Yesterday, he was stopped again (terrible timing on the part of the police).
Is he right to feel aggrieved, or is this the natural fall out from blanket racial profiling?
Could it be argued that no matter who you are and how successful you become, if you're black in a nice car, you should expect to be pulled over?
Yesterday, he was stopped again (terrible timing on the part of the police).
Is he right to feel aggrieved, or is this the natural fall out from blanket racial profiling?
Could it be argued that no matter who you are and how successful you become, if you're black in a nice car, you should expect to be pulled over?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.AOG
I've just been thinking about the stats you've put forward.
They're not right!
You know why? Because they're comparing apples and oranges.
Look at them again...can you see what I can see?
There are two elements to the stats...(and let's assume that they are all correct)
1. The overall number of black Londoners is 12%
2. 60% of street crime is committed by blacks.
Now, can you see what's wrong there?
It assumes that the entire black community is involved in street crime, whereas we can be pretty sure that it's young black men, between the ages of (say) 15-20.
Now, just work with me here...let's say that demographic forms about 15% of the black population...that means 1.8% of Londoners commit 60% of the street crime (or rather, the arrests - we don't have figures on convictions).
So, what we're saying is that a tiny proportion of the black community are going astray...
And it gets worse for your supposition. My figure of 15% committing 60% of the crimes assumes that every black lad between 15 and 20 actually is committing street crimes.
We both know that's impossible, so here's the final nail in the coffin of your argument...
Repeat offenders.
That reduces the stats even further.
Kids in gangs get arrested over and over again. Black kids in further education, kids with future tend not to.
So what we're talking about is a seriously small number of rotten kids who repeatedly offend, allowing the papers to paint a distorted picture of young black men as a whole.
I'm not disorting the picture or avoiding the issue...I'm addressing the figures.
They back up my argument.
Game set and match I believe.
I've just been thinking about the stats you've put forward.
They're not right!
You know why? Because they're comparing apples and oranges.
Look at them again...can you see what I can see?
There are two elements to the stats...(and let's assume that they are all correct)
1. The overall number of black Londoners is 12%
2. 60% of street crime is committed by blacks.
Now, can you see what's wrong there?
It assumes that the entire black community is involved in street crime, whereas we can be pretty sure that it's young black men, between the ages of (say) 15-20.
Now, just work with me here...let's say that demographic forms about 15% of the black population...that means 1.8% of Londoners commit 60% of the street crime (or rather, the arrests - we don't have figures on convictions).
So, what we're saying is that a tiny proportion of the black community are going astray...
And it gets worse for your supposition. My figure of 15% committing 60% of the crimes assumes that every black lad between 15 and 20 actually is committing street crimes.
We both know that's impossible, so here's the final nail in the coffin of your argument...
Repeat offenders.
That reduces the stats even further.
Kids in gangs get arrested over and over again. Black kids in further education, kids with future tend not to.
So what we're talking about is a seriously small number of rotten kids who repeatedly offend, allowing the papers to paint a distorted picture of young black men as a whole.
I'm not disorting the picture or avoiding the issue...I'm addressing the figures.
They back up my argument.
Game set and match I believe.
One other point which ruins your argument...explain the gun crime, drugs and street crime in Liverpool and Glasgow.
How come deprived areas in these cities have crime rates comparable to London, with tiny immigrant communities?
That one blows a massive hole in any argument you may wish to proffer.
I win.
I shall accept your admonition of defeate with good grace.
How come deprived areas in these cities have crime rates comparable to London, with tiny immigrant communities?
That one blows a massive hole in any argument you may wish to proffer.
I win.
I shall accept your admonition of defeate with good grace.
sp1814
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/crrs13. pdf
South Manchester gangs
Gooch, Doddington, Longsight Crew, Pitt Bull Crew.
Percentage of known
members who are black
Gooch 86%
Doddington 100%
Longsight Crew 75%
Pitt Bull Crew 73%
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/crrs13. pdf
South Manchester gangs
Gooch, Doddington, Longsight Crew, Pitt Bull Crew.
Percentage of known
members who are black
Gooch 86%
Doddington 100%
Longsight Crew 75%
Pitt Bull Crew 73%
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.