Not surprising given the location of your head.
And where is that? No need to get bitchy.
What constitute "proof"? It seems you require mind-reading.
I require proof..... not guessing using your own preconceived notion that "racial profiling is the answer to all statistical data". You have to jump from the statistics to the reason why the statistics show what they show. You have done this without any evidence. I am asking you to explain how you got there without something other than speculation.
I have evidence that blacks and Latino are treated worse than whites when they are stopped.
I didn't see that. Probable cause searches are based upon probable cause. Consent searches are based upon asking and receiving of consent. If you have any evidence that this is not the case please present it.
I have evidence that whites are more likely to be found with contraband and yet being searched less often than blacks and Latino.
Okay.... and? Do you know how searching works? The legality of it? It isn't arbitrary...
Do you have evidence that blacks are up to 12.6 time more likely to break traffic law than whites? If you don't, what prompt you to think that blacks are more likely to break traffic laws? Because they are black?
I didn't make the claim, MaggieD
suggested it. You denied it. I asked for evidence. You provided none.
Being stopped more often, and being "more likely" to break traffic laws are not one in the same. You are attempting to make a link where one cannot be made without a leap of faith. Faith in a preconceived notion that Law enforcement base all of their actions around the race of the individual they are dealing with. Hint: They don't.
So if blacks are not more likely to break traffic laws, what account for such high rates of them being stopped compared to whites?
Umm.. About a thousand other possibilities?
Let me ask you this, do you think Officers go around pre-determining the race of the person they stop before stopping the car? I know I don't. I can't. Not at 3am... Everyone is black.... Everyone is a black silhouette.
Lets see... what other possibilities can I toss out there that are just as plausible as your "theory" that it MUST be racial profiling....
Proactive police work is usually encouraged in areas of high crime. Especially high
violent crime.
Gangs operate via the use of
violent crime.
Gangs are known to be a very strong factor in
minority predominant areas.
Now, with that in mind..... The white cracker up in Beverly Hills with his RRRRRRRolls RRRRRRoyce... Has he the money to ensure his vehicle is in good working order? Check (there goes equipment violations). Has he the money to ensure his vehicle is properly registered, inspected and insurance is up to date? Check (there goes registration/insurance/inspection regulatory stops). Has he the money to make sure he pays his previous tickets for moving violations? Check (There goes any suspensions of his driving record for fail to pay/fail to appear for previous driving offenses).......etc.....etc...... And it doesn't just apply to the rich guy, it applies to the middle class folks as well. Poor people (which is almost synonymous with minorities in the liberal media) and young people (because they are often poor, and lack the responsibility to take proper care of these above mentioned issues)(and because young people like to do stupid **** like burn outs, speeding, erratic driving to impress) are the most likely to be stopped for various traffic violations.
Now, with this in mind.... Lets go back to my Violent Crime area Idea. It is not uncommon for a BOLO (be on look out) for an armed robbery suspect in a gang area to contain the description of a young black male with dreads.... Investigatory Stops are another reason to stop a vehicle that has absolutely nothing to do with traffic laws in particular.
So, as you can see.... this is just a small idea of the various reasons why blacks and hispanics can be stopped more often than whites per the STATISTICAL DATA.
Sure, and why don't prove that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist. You made the proposition that it is due to other reason, the onus is on you to provide us with the evidence that your proposition is true, not me. I have provided the statistics and the logic to back my arguements.
You have provided statistics..... then you provided no evidence to how you took those statistics and got to your conclusion.
Read above... I just blew a whole in your "conclusion" of Statistics = Racism.
