Tyler Perry Pulled Over, Accuses White Cops of Racial Profiling via Facebook

ric27 · Apr 7, 2012

nonpareil said:
So police do racial profiling.

BTW, while you concentrate on the criminals, keep in mind that the majority of black people are not criminals but innocent bystanders or victims themselves.

nonpareil - Profiling is a misunderstood and erroneously oversimplified catch word thrown around by those that don’t’ understand what it truly is

Criminal NOT racial profiling is what investigators do. It is about far more than a person’s race, religion and sex.

Identifying traits, characteristics, mannerisms and behavior common in criminal acts. Then going out and looking for those specific behaviors in the population IS criminal profiling NOT racial profiling. To suggest profiling is limited to race, religion or sex is profoundly ignorant and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of its real world application.

Know the difference and remember...its criminal profiling.

nonpareil · Apr 7, 2012

ric27 said:
nonpareil - Profiling is a misunderstood and erroneously oversimplified catch word thrown around by those that don’t’ understand what it truly is

Criminal NOT racial profiling is what investigators do. It is about far more than a person’s race, religion and sex.

Identifying traits, characteristics, mannerisms and behavior common in criminal acts. Then going out and looking for those specific behaviors in the population IS criminal profiling NOT racial profiling. To suggest profiling is limited to race, religion or sex is profoundly ignorant and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of its real world application.

Know the difference and remember...its criminal profiling.

When you use race to profile someone, you are using "racial profiling", understand what those two words together means and read what the thread is about. Nobody said that profiling is limited to race, religion or sex, so keep your strawman to yourself. None of that changes the fact that police use racial profiling which affect blacks and Latinos more than Whites, a fact bear out overwhelmingly by the statistics. Unless you claim that black people act suspiciously more often than white people do, the fact remains that police stop blacks more often than white because they are black and blacks happen to be responsible for most crimes even though most blacks are innocent of those crimes.

nonpareil · Apr 7, 2012

MaggieD said:
The idea they're pulled over more has nothing to do with they break traffic laws more? No. It couldn't be that.

Oh, there's a black guy. I think I'll pull him over. Give me a break!

How about you read the article linked:

Koster says despite minorities being pulled over and searched at a higher rate, it’s white drivers who are more likely to be caught with contraband.

snip.

Despite the elevated search rates, Hispanics were less likely than white drivers to be found with contraband subsequent to being searched. While the “contraband hit rate” for whites was 24.5 percent, the percentage of Hispanics searched and found to have contraband was 14.4 percent. The “contraband hit rate” for African-American drivers was 17.5 percent.

When police asked permission to search a driver's car without probable cause — something that is rare for all racial categories — it was more likely to be a minority driver. Police used "consent searches" for 0.6 percent of white drivers, compared to 1.4 percent of black drivers and 1.3 percent of Hispanics.

Police were more likely to find contraband material, such as drugs or weapons, in the cars of white drivers, according to the study. The chances were 25 percent for white drivers who agreed to a search, 19 percent for blacks and 13 percent for Hispanics.

Read more: Black, Hispanic drivers stopped more often in Illinois, study finds

So who's being brainwashed about the facts? Maybe you should question your own notions about other races.

ric27 · Apr 7, 2012

nonpareil said:
When you use race to profile someone, you are using "racial profiling", understand what those two words together means and read what the thread is about. Nobody said that profiling is limited to race, religion or sex, so keep your strawman to yourself. None of that changes the fact that police use racial profiling which affect blacks and Latinos more than Whites, a fact bear out overwhelmingly by the statistics. Unless you claim that black people act suspiciously more often than white people do, the fact remains that police stop blacks more often than white because they are black and blacks happen to be responsible for most crimes even though most blacks are innocent of those crimes.

Sitting behind your keyboard and telling me how profiling actually works in the real world...You gotta be kiddin' me lol

Pros that actually do criminal investigations and utilize CRIMMINAL profiling as one of MANY investigative tools will continue to do the job.

Carry on with your bull ****.

nonpareil · Apr 7, 2012

MaggieD said:
If a person is pulled over who isn't breaking the law, he may have a legitimate claim for racial profiling that should be investigated. And that's the guy that should probably file a complaint. A series of such complaints against an officer would prove a pattern. If he's ticketed for having illegally tinted windows and driving irratically, any claim of racial profiling goes out the window, in my opinion. If the person was breaking the law, he doesn't have a leg to stand on. Period. No matter what his perception.

Police can call someone over for a lot of reasons, and once stopped, they can always find something wrong if they want to or let the person go even when there's something wrong. It's not about a single police officer, the statistics concern the whole system. It's not about overt racism, it's about the perception that blacks are more likely to be criminals because they make up a large number of the criminal population, despite the fact that most blacks are not criminal. Your jumping to the conclusion that blacks might be stopped more often because they break the laws more often instead of reading the articles to find out what the true facts are is exactly the thinking that results in racial profiling.

nonpareil · Apr 7, 2012

ric27 said:
Sitting behind your keyboard and telling me how profiling actually works in the real world...You gotta be kiddin' me lol

Pros that actually do criminal investigations and utilize CRIMMINAL profiling as one of MANY investigative tools will continue to do the job.

Carry on with your bull ****.

Since I have statistics to back what I say, it's you that is full of bull****.

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

nonpareil said:
There's plenty of evidence if you care to take your head out of your ass long enough to see it. Statistics show clearly that blacks and Hispanics drivers fare worse than whites. Hell, just look at Florence v. Burlington, a black man getting pulled over so often he carries a letter explaining his situation and still he get jailed while being innocent.

More black motorists pulled over, according to HPD study

Black, Hispanic drivers stopped more often in Illinois, study finds

Minorities getting pulled over, searched, arrested at increasing rate

Statistics do not prove intent.

I don't know how many times it has to be said, I have said it plenty but.. whatever.

You can't look at a statistic and then draw the conclusion you want to from it without having facts to support your drawn conclusion. There are way to many factors involved in a traffic stop, as there are way to many reasons why a stop is conducted. The same with searches. For example, if a consent search is asked and refused, then it isn't added to the statistics.......if it is granted, then it is added to the statistics.

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
Do you have proof that black people break traffic laws more than other racial groups or is this just another one your snipes at black Americans? And btw, more arrests is not evidence of breaking more laws.

Right Back Atcha...

Do you have proof these black folks are getting pulled over because they are black and for no other reason?
Do you have proof that more arrests is not evident of breaking more laws?

Do you expect us to ASSume the "suggestive" evidence the way YOU want us to view it?

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

MaggieD said:
I was using sarcasm, Mike.

There are lots of people in this world who use the system to make other people's lives miserable. Accuse a LEO of profiling to his CO? You've just created tons of paperwork for that offficer; a letter in his personnel file; an investigation. Whether it's true or not, it becomes a part of that officer's permanent file. Some people just love doing that. It makes them feel powerful.

Of course it matters whether or not it's true. That's the only thing that matters.

Unfounded complaints are not permanent....... at least not here.

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
You said, "The idea they're pulled over more has nothing to do with they break traffic laws more? No. It couldn't be that."

"They break traffic laws more" is an unsubstantiated generalization. Can you please substantiate that generalization?

"The idea they're pulled over more because they are black" is an unsubstantiated generalization. Can you please substantiate that generalization?

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
Why do you think that people need to legitimize their claims by reporting to you? I don't understand that sentiment. As far as racial profiling goes, it's nearly impossible to prove objectively. Consequently, neither you nor I KNOW if someone is racial profiling. Therefore, if you say, "He's not profiling" and I say, "Yes, he is," we both are giving OPINIONS. You're arguing that your OPINION is better than other peoples' OPINIONS and that people should prove their opinions to you. That doesn't make any sense.

The difference is this.....

In the scenario you described above.... Im not accusing anyone of anything. You are.

If you want to accuse someone of something like racial profiling, You'd better provide solid reasoning for your accusation.

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

MaggieD said:
If a person is pulled over who isn't breaking the law, he may have a legitimate claim for racial profiling that should be investigated. And that's the guy that should probably file a complaint. A series of such complaints against an officer would prove a pattern. If he's ticketed for having illegally tinted windows and driving irratically, any claim of racial profiling goes out the window, in my opinion. If the person was breaking the law, he doesn't have a leg to stand on. Period. No matter what his perception.

I think we have a winner!! ^^^

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
Touche. But I don't think people have to come to me to make their opinions legitimate. I might argue a lot, but at the end of the day, I know that people's opinions are founded by their experiences which is why though I can't imagine adopting a lot of conservative stances for myself, I understand that people have different experiences than me and therefore, those stances make sense to them in that context. This is why Caine's insistence that other people legitimize their opinions by reporting to him is so ridiculous to me.

Exactly my point. If only those involved know for sure, then it doesn't make sense to tell people what they have or have not experienced.

Not opinions PlayDrive. When someone accuses someone else of racism or racial profiling, such an accusation needs to be backed up by evidence or SOME amount of logical reasoning.

If one then jumps on the bandwagon with the accuser (in this case you, and others here), then they fall into the same category of needing to have some kind of evidence. Without it, it just shows more about your own prejudices against Law Enforcement than any point you are attempting to make by agreeing, or independently, accusing an officer of Racial Profiling.

Get it?

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

nonpareil said:
When you use race to profile someone, you are using "racial profiling", understand what those two words together means and read what the thread is about. Nobody said that profiling is limited to race, religion or sex, so keep your strawman to yourself. None of that changes the fact that police use racial profiling which affect blacks and Latinos more than Whites, a fact bear out overwhelmingly by the statistics. Unless you claim that black people act suspiciously more often than white people do, the fact remains that police stop blacks more often than white because they are black and blacks happen to be responsible for most crimes even though most blacks are innocent of those crimes.

Its not a fact that you can draw from statistics without making a leap of logic.

Think of it this way....

The Results of Study B = Z Thus the reason for the study being Z was 9.
........................................................How did you get from ^ to ^ ?

A leap of logic, thats how.

Caine · Apr 7, 2012

nonpareil said:
Police can call someone over for a lot of reasons, and once stopped, they can always find something wrong if they want to or let the person go even when there's something wrong. It's not about a single police officer, the statistics concern the whole system. It's not about overt racism, it's about the perception that blacks are more likely to be criminals because they make up a large number of the criminal population, despite the fact that most blacks are not criminal. Your jumping to the conclusion that blacks might be stopped more often because they break the laws more often instead of reading the articles to find out what the true facts are is exactly the thinking that results in racial profiling.

Whose perception is it that "blacks are more likely to be criminals because they make up a large number of the criminal population" ?

Who are you having the pleasure of speaking on behalf of here?

ric27 · Apr 7, 2012

nonpareil said:
Since I have statistics to back what I say, it's you that is full of bull****.

You apparently don't get it....

Lets say, I'm looking for a serial killer....

Would I target, the B/M/F or the W/M/F?

I'd be profiling, the W/M, preferably unmarried thats because statistically, the majority of serial killers aren't black men/women nor white women, they're white males.

I analyze my data first, but if I decide to profile on race before analyzing my data then, you can call me a racist

nonpareil · Apr 8, 2012

Caine said:
Statistics do not prove intent.

I don't know how many times it has to be said, I have said it plenty but.. whatever.

You can't look at a statistic and then draw the conclusion you want to from it without having facts to support your drawn conclusion. There are way to many factors involved in a traffic stop, as there are way to many reasons why a stop is conducted. The same with searches. For example, if a consent search is asked and refused, then it isn't added to the statistics.......if it is granted, then it is added to the statistics.

Those statistics are the best fact there is. When they all point to the same thing, there's something to it. Consent search is about 1-2% according to one of those article, trying to use that to invalidate the other 98% is just another evidence of you choosing to bury your head up your ass so you don't have to face evidence that contradict your beliefs/arguements. So what is those refused are not entered? They all still say the same thing: different races fare differently during police traffic stops.

Mason66 · Apr 8, 2012

Top Cat said:
Oh so you witnessed this? Because we all know racial profiling never happens. Oh wait.

So the truth is you don't know what really happened and you are assuming you do?

If it is true the side windows were tinted dark, how did the officer see him to profile him in the first place?

nonpareil · Apr 8, 2012

Caine said:
Whose perception is it that "blacks are more likely to be criminals because they make up a large number of the criminal population" ?

Who are you having the pleasure of speaking on behalf of here?

The system that results in blacks being stopped 12.6 more than white in certain district, and you and MaggiD seem to share the perception that blacks are more likely to be lawbreakers:

Caine said:
Right Back Atcha...

Do you have proof these black folks are getting pulled over because they are black and for no other reason?
Do you have proof that more arrests is not evident of breaking more laws?

Do you expect us to ASSume the "suggestive" evidence the way YOU want us to view it?

MaggieD said:
The idea they're pulled over more has nothing to do with they break traffic laws more? No. It couldn't be that.

Oh, there's a black guy. I think I'll pull him over. Give me a break!

So we should believe that blacks are up to 12.6 times more likely to break traffic law than whites, subjected to searches more often than whites, and yet found to have contraband at a lesser rate than whites, because they are more likely to break traffic laws than whites. I'm not the one making a logical leap here.

nonpareil · Apr 8, 2012

ric27 said:
You apparently don't get it....

Lets say, I'm looking for a serial killer....

Would I target, the B/M/F or the W/M/F?

I'd be profiling, the W/M, preferably unmarried thats because statistically, the majority of serial killers aren't black men/women nor white women, they're white males.

I analyze my data first, but if I decide to profile on race before analyzing my data then, you can call me a racist

You apparently don't even get my arguement. Until you do, don't ambarrass yourself with more ignorant replies.

Mason66 · Apr 8, 2012

Thunder said:
racial profiling is real.

mistreatment of blacks by police, because they are black, is real.

that's the first thing we all must accept.

What does that have to do with this case?

Mason66 · Apr 8, 2012

muciti said:
We are getting to the point that white cops can't pull over or arrest black people. Anytime a white person in authority interacts with someone of color it seems they are screaming racism or investigating it or something.

I think it is the reverse. If blacks keep yelling profiling when it doesn't happen, nobody will be listening when it actually does happen.

Mason66 · Apr 8, 2012

Hatuey said:
Don't have to. Here is Mel Gibson blaming the Jews for you know... everything wrong with the world:

Gibson's Anti-Semitic Tirade -- Alleged Cover Up | TMZ.com

Oscar didn't make any threads on that... :shrug: - I wonder why? I guess it's not the right type of racism for him.

The Gibson incident happened in July of 2006 and Oscar has been a member here since September 2010. How could he have posted anything about it?

Mason66 · Apr 8, 2012

Krhazy said:
Can't blame the cops for doing their jobs.

Can't really blame Tyler Perry for the natural psychological consequences of generations worth of racism either.

We are basically only 40 years from black people finally being treated as equals in this country. I don't think it's all that unexpected or unreasonable for black people to continue to be a little paranoid about it. Rather than attacking Perry, people should point out in a reasoned manner why this was not an incident of racial profiling.

You assume every time a white officer interacts with a black person, it is profiling?

How can the officer prove, to you, that it was not profiling?

Mason66 · Apr 8, 2012

MaggieD said:
If a person is pulled over who isn't breaking the law, he may have a legitimate claim for racial profiling that should be investigated. And that's the guy that should probably file a complaint. A series of such complaints against an officer would prove a pattern. If he's ticketed for having illegally tinted windows and driving irratically, any claim of racial profiling goes out the window, in my opinion. If the person was breaking the law, he doesn't have a leg to stand on. Period. No matter what his perception.

After rewading the thread up to here, it came to me that Perry might think he wouldn't have been pulled over for an illegal turn if it had been a black cop. I wonder how he could think that.

If he says he was only pulled over because the officers were white, then he has to be saying he wouldn't have been pulled over if the officers had been of another race, illegal moves not withstanding.