https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/126846376828518809...
- "Locking Up Our Own", James Foreman, an analysis by a black attorney discussing black crime, black recidivism and black involvement as attorneys and judges in the criminal justice system
- "In Contempt", Christopher Darden, an autobiography written by one of the attorneys in the OJ Simpson trial where swaths of the book are dedicated to Darner's views and interactions with other attorneys who tackled "black on black crime" in LA during the 90's prior to his time as a District Attorney
- "The Man Not" (the most recent publication in this non-exhaustive list), Tommy Curry, explorations on the victimization of black men by their black guardians, with some focus on sexual abuse and exploitation of their bodies as the lens through which Curry focuses a larger critique
- "Negroland", Margo Jefferson, a memoir of the black elite class of Chicago and ramifications of black success experienced sometimes at the expense of lower-class black Americans, perpetuated sometimes by upper-class black Americans
I'm a bit fatigued by the insinuation that black America is shirking a responsibility to tackle these in-group issues, because it's not as if there's a lack of poignant critical theory emerging from our group on the topic. It's all there and readily available, and the names and reference content I provided here isn't an exhaustive list either.
---
Caveat lector: If we agree.
I don't agree with this idea that the statistics of criminality in the black community is a proxy for anything, and more that it is a result of multiple compounding issues that snowballed throughout generations of peoples bringing us to where we are today. In your mind what is this a proxy for? I'd like to hear this notion unpacked.
Those questions are varied and nuanced and their answers are equally varied and nuanced, and against the backdrop of exactly how certain members of the constabulary execute (pun most certainly and deliberately intended) violence in response to violence are people like me trying to desperately point at as this the topic we want to discuss when we say "Black Lives Matter", yet time and time again we have to stop and have the "black people commit more crimes" discussion with people who are focused on the math of crimes committed while black at the expense of just about any other valid variable in the equation.
So if we take the "black people commit more crimes" framework on its face, does that mean they deserve to die for all of them? Did Sandra Bland really need to be shot because she didn't want to put out a cigarette at a traffic stop or could the officer have written her the moving citation she probably actually deserved, and gone about his policing elsewhere?[0] Did Eric Garner need asphyxiation for a civil citation when he was stopped for selling illegal cigarettes? Did George Floyd need to have a knee on his neck for nearly 10 minutes for a counterfeit $20?
I challenge us all to think beyond just "well they committed a crime" and start asking some hard goddamn questions about what we're saying if that's going to be the response to critical theories of criminal justice-because many (not all) of the names commonly shouted out in discussion about police brutality committed petty offenses that should have received citations but instead received death sentences; highlighting a severely disproportionate view of policing scofflaws that breaks "well they broke the law" down into "contempt of cop"[1].
---
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/07/2...
Criminality, like I said.
I don't see anywhere in your post where you actually addressed the point I made. Again, that is if Black people commit X times as many crimes we should expect X times as many negative police interactions. Whether that be excessive violence or innocents being swept up in police action or anything else.
From this, allow me to make my position more clear:
No, we shouldn't "expect" an increase in police violence in response to black criminality, because it assumes violence is the appropriate and proportionate State response to deviant criminal behavior when often it is neither appropriate nor proportionate nor even necessary. Again, Sandra Bland: died during a traffic stop; George Floyd and Eric Garner died during Terry[0] stops. Breonna Taylor died while she was asleep. Cite for me the case law that admonishes an escalation of physical force to issue civil citations and I will consider the point earnestly and openly.
Furthermore, we need to narrow the scope and find an actionable definition for "officer safety" as many LEOs use as a defense against misconduct charges.
Resisting arrest should not be a death sentence, officers should be trained better and dealt with far more swiftly (it took nearly three months for an officer who blind-fired into Breonna Taylor's house to even be disciplined by his precinct and still has not faced charges[1]). If I blind fired my weapon onto the streets and bullets went into someone's home, I'd be arrested and charged. If I blind fired my weapon unprovoked as a member of the armed services, as I formerly was, I'd be court marshaled faster than the SR-71 can fly for failure to follow rules of engagement.
Public peace officers shouldn't be held to any lesser of a standard.
Your premise is therefore addressed, but rejected on merits.
---
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop
[1] https://blavity.com/officer-brett-hankison-will-be-fired-fro...
I understand the concepts well, I just disagree with the premise as you've framed it, and I'd like to think I've done as much without making any insinuations about your intellect or ability to comprehend them or resorting any other form of red-herring personal attack.
Let's do better.
Why do you consider it okay for police to stop and harass innocent people with no evidence simply because they live in a certain neighborhood?
Bring up racism and police brutality though and people strongly deny it's a problem.
Everything else is beneath notice of the wider society. It's talked about, but no one outside of the community is listening. Which is fine, except when they base their response to the issues on which they do pay a little attention to assumption that what they aren't hearing on other issues is because it's not being talked about.
It's part of the story, though. The incident in the linked article started because a group of teens jumped another and stole his phone. If that's happening 10x as often then innocent kids in that neighborhood are going to be 10x as likely to be swept up in police action.