• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are blacks and whites treated equally by the justice system?

Are blacks and whites treated equally by the legal system?


  • Total voters
    26
Good post. I don't have any serious disagreements with it.

As to your point about wealth and lawyer competence, that is certainly correct. I still don't know how that rich kid got off so easily after mowing down a group of people with his car, killing them all, while drunk. If a young (poor) black kid did the same thing, I don't think he'd be doing community service as punishment...

No, he wouldn't. Although some have gotten reduced sentences because of a similar defense, that because of their up-bringing they didn't understand that what they did was wrong; however, those cases didn't involve major crimes like that rich kid.

I still can't understand that ruling. It sure smelled like a payoff to the judge to me.
 
No, he wouldn't. Although some have gotten reduced sentences because of a similar defense, that because of their up-bringing they didn't understand that what they did was wrong; however, those cases didn't involve major crimes like that rich kid.

I still can't understand that ruling. It sure smelled like a payoff to the judge to me.

I am hoping that the $20 million civil suit will help cure the kid of Affluenza. He needs help.
 
What are the racial make up of the others involved in the case. The prosecutors, the defense attorneys, the judge. How about the bailiffs--what are the conviction rates cross tabbed to the race of the bailiffs?

Superficial mathematics should be the basis of more research, not news.
 
See, I make a thread with a preconception, and people make good points which puts my original position into doubt. Success.
 
it has improved some, but no.

Justice On Trial

Reading through that article helix it again is only looking at one thing. Race. There are other factors that have to be considered such as money, and even geographic considerations.

Take what we can call an average poor community. There are going to be a large number of minorities and some white people there. Do you think those white people are being treated differently than black people from the same area? Or if that poor white person gets arrested with some meth and goes to court and a rich black kid gets arrested for the same amount of the same drug do you think the black kid do you think the black kid is getting a harsher sentence? Personally I am certain that the white kid is getting a much harsher sentence.
 
Reading through that article helix it again is only looking at one thing. Race. There are other factors that have to be considered such as money, and even geographic considerations.

Take what we can call an average poor community. There are going to be a large number of minorities and some white people there. Do you think those white people are being treated differently than black people from the same area? Or if that poor white person gets arrested with some meth and goes to court and a rich black kid gets arrested for the same amount of the same drug do you think the black kid do you think the black kid is getting a harsher sentence? Personally I am certain that the white kid is getting a much harsher sentence.

this article is a bit more thorough :

http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/related_material/8 Fellner_FINAL.pdf

although i did read in another article that the number of whites going to jail for drug offenses really went up between the mid 90s and the mid 2000s, as well. probably meth / prescription drug related.
 
this article is a bit more thorough :

http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/related_material/8 Fellner_FINAL.pdf

although i did read in another article that the number of whites going to jail for drug offenses really went up between the mid 90s and the mid 2000s, as well. probably meth / prescription drug related.

That article is a little better but does still focus primarily on race.

Page 271 of that, the excerts are really well worded.

And some of that does state what I have been saying. People from poor neighborhoods are treated differently in our legal system than others. The one comment in that article basically says that is partially because poor people are easier to catch. Couple that with the fact that there are a higher percentage of poor minorities and a higher percentage of rich white people and it paints a pretty clear picture. When all you factor in is race you are going to get the result many people want to see, that minorities are treated differently. But its not supported. If anyone can find a study that shows how poor minorities and poor white people are treated in our legal system I may change how I view this. I spent a good amount of time in the legal system through my early teens to my mid 20's. Including a few years in jail, and months here and there in others. I can assure you I didn't get any preferential treatment. I got the same line every poor person who gets arrested gets. And I know because I was locked up with many minorities in the Michigan/Wayne county judicial system (which is primarily black). They come in and force you to take a deal or threaten to quadruple the sentence in a court case they know you cant afford to win.
 
That article is a little better but does still focus primarily on race.

Page 271 of that, the excerts are really well worded.

And some of that does state what I have been saying. People from poor neighborhoods are treated differently in our legal system than others. The one comment in that article basically says that is partially because poor people are easier to catch. Couple that with the fact that there are a higher percentage of poor minorities and a higher percentage of rich white people and it paints a pretty clear picture. When all you factor in is race you are going to get the result many people want to see, that minorities are treated differently. But its not supported. If anyone can find a study that shows how poor minorities and poor white people are treated in our legal system I may change how I view this. I spent a good amount of time in the legal system through my early teens to my mid 20's. Including a few years in jail, and months here and there in others. I can assure you I didn't get any preferential treatment. I got the same line every poor person who gets arrested gets. And I know because I was locked up with many minorities in the Michigan/Wayne county judicial system (which is primarily black). They come in and force you to take a deal or threaten to quadruple the sentence in a court case they know you cant afford to win.

as with most things, there is certainly a socioeconomic component, and a significant one, at that.
 
When the only factor you include is race you aren't seeing the whole picture. There are far more elements that should be considered.

Good job finding something that isn't there.
 
Assuming that a black person is charged with exactly the same crime, with the same evidence, do you think that the legal system treats them equally? Feel free to comment if your opinion is not represented in the options.

Edit: Both defendants are economically identical.

The minority defendant will be more likely convicted. If convicted, the minority defendant will be more likely sent to prison. The minority defendant will get a longer sentence.
 
This is the wrong question.

The right question is are the rich and poor treated equally by the justice system? No
And an even better one is are citizens generally treated fairly when the plaintiff is the federal government? Again no.
 
What do you mean?

First of all, thank you for asking your question that way and not immediately resorting to defensiveness. That is a rarity around here.

Now, you said:

When the only factor you include is race you aren't seeing the whole picture. There are far more elements that should be considered.

That is not what the study does. It clearly states that all other factors being equal, which is perfectly doable in statistics, a defendant's race has a statistically significant effect on his (or her?) conviction rate.
 
First of all, thank you for asking your question that way and not immediately resorting to defensiveness. That is a rarity around here.

Now, you said:



That is not what the study does. It clearly states that all other factors being equal, which is perfectly doable in statistics, a defendant's race has a statistically significant effect on his (or her?) conviction rate.

Not sure we read the same article. From what I took of it, it was about race.
 
Not sure we read the same article. From what I took of it, it was about race.

No, let's try this again. I specifically emphasized the word "only." O-N-L-Y. You did see that in post #40, right?
 
Yes. Justice On Trial was the site. I went back through it. Yes that article is about only race. It doesn't factor in other considerations.

Show me exactly in the study where the researchers did not properly account for income, gender, or other factors.
 
Take what we can call an average poor community. There are going to be a large number of minorities and some white people there.
In an average low income community, whites will still outnumber other minorities, 50% of the poor are non-Hispanic white.
 
all of it? the words income and gender dont appear in it once. Factor does appear once but not in the same context.

You don't have to reread the whole thing. Just show me somewhere where it implies that other factors were not factored out. Because, yeah, that would pretty much wreck the study.

But if it does factor them out, then you would need to come to terms with your being in denial about the conclusions of the study.
 
A lot of the disagreement seems to come from suggesting that economic class and race are dependent variables. They aren't. Class is one factor where a defendant is unfairly judged. Race is another. They do not always operate in tandem, and one does not necessarily relate to the other in the courtroom. A poor white person has poorness being held against them. A rich black person has blackness held against them. A poor black person has both poorness and blackness held against them.

This doesn't seem a complicated concept to grasp. It isn't one or the other. It's both. And both are abhorrent.
 
You don't have to reread the whole thing. Just show me somewhere where it implies that other factors were not factored out. Because, yeah, that would pretty much wreck the study.

But if it does factor them out, then you would need to come to terms with your being in denial about the conclusions of the study.

It doesnt factor them in. That is the problem with the study. I feel like we are going in circles.

Correlation does not imply causation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Back
Top Bottom