A poll was released yesterday, conducted by Tulchin Research, showing 69 percent of likely California voters support AB 953: The Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, a state bill introduced by Assemblymember Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) to combat racial and identity profiling by law enforcement.
The statewide poll, conducted in July for the ACLU of California Center for Advocacy and Policy, found that nearly two-thirds of voters (65%) in California believe black people are more likely to be discriminated against by police. This includes nearly 9 out of 10 black voters (89%) who believe the same.
Seventy-one percent of California voters believe police are most likely to discriminate against young black men. Similarly, voters view Latinos (58%) and young Latino men (61%) as groups that are more likely to be discriminated against. There is strong voter support (71%) for legislation aimed to increase transparency and accountability when it comes to law enforcement’s use of force reporting practices, such as AB 619 (Weber) and AB 71 (Rodriguez).
Nearly every voter (95%) reports having heard of the recent high-profile police shootings and misconduct cases in Ferguson, New York and Charleston, and most voters (80%) believe something like that could very well happen in California.
“The numbers speak for themselves. When it comes to AB 953: The Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, Californians across the board support this solution-based proposal to put us on the path to fair policing,” said Natasha Minsker, Director of the ACLU of California Center for Advocacy and Policy, in a statement Wednesday.
She added, “In the wake of events in Ferguson, New York, Charleston and Baltimore, we have been left heartbroken and shaken by the sometimes lethal impacts of racially biased policing. This year in California, over 100 people have died at the hands of police officers. Our leaders and elected officials should listen to California voters and act on sensible reforms like AB 953.”
An independent analysis of officer-involved killings found that California leads the nation in the number of deaths, with over 100 people killed so far this year. Additionally, many people have lived through experiences with biased policing and police misconduct. However, the state of California does not collect, analyze, or make available information about whom the police, stop, search or even shoot.
AB 953: The Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2014 was introduced by Assemblymember Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) to identify and address problems with disparate policing as they pertain to police stops.
If approved, AB 953 would update California’s definition of racial and identity profiling to be in line with federal recommendations by including other demographic characteristics, such as gender and sexual orientation. It would also require that California law enforcement agencies uniformly collect and report data on stops, frisks, and other interactions with the communities they serve.
Finally, it would establish an advisory board to analyze stop data and develop recommendations to address problems with disparate policing where they exist.
According to the bill fact sheet, “In California, many people have been victims of the humiliating and frightening experience of identity profiling. A 2015 report by a police department in
California found that blacks were stopped twice as often as their driving age demographic representation,and that blacks and Latinos were searched at three and two times the rate of whites, respectively. However, those searches showed that blacks and Latinos were less likely to be arrested.
“In 2000, the CA legislature found that ‘racial profiling is a practice that presents a great danger to the fundamental principles of a democratic society,’ and declared that ‘it is abhorrent and cannot be tolerated.’ Subsequently, the Legislative Analyst’s Office found that California’s law on profiling is too vague and that law enforcement agencies have resisted following it.”
They claim, “AB 953 will improve public safety, protect the rights of all Californians, and advance police-community relations.”
On Tuesday, Governor Brown signed two key police reform bills. In all, nearly two dozen police reform proposals were introduced in the California legislature this year. However, AB 953 is one of the last few proposals standing, after the law enforcement lobby flexed its political muscle in Sacramento.
The survey by Tulchin Research found that “likely California voters overwhelmingly believe that police profile and discriminate based on race and would like to see steps taken to reduce this behavior.”
They found that voters are paying heavy attention to national events “concerning use of force and potential misconduct by police officers that have led to the deaths of several unarmed African American men around the country.” They found that “most voters in California fundamentally believe that police officers discriminate against communities of color.”
Across the state, nearly two-thirds of all likely voters (65%) believe blacks are more likely to be discriminated against by police. Those numbers vary by race, but a majority of all races polled believed it to be the case with nearly 9 out of 10 black voters (89%) who believe the same, 84 percent of Asian voters, 81 percent of Latino voters and 57 percent of white voters.
Voters see young black men as the group most likely to be discriminated against by police, as 71 percent of California voters believe police are more likely to discriminate against this group. Similarly, voters view Latinos (58%) and young Latino men (61%) as groups that are more likely to be discriminated against.
Conversely, most voters believe that whites and Asians are NOT discriminated against by police, as just 11 percent and 16 percent of California voters, respectively, believe these groups are more likely to be discriminated against by police.
The polling found, “Voters want to take concrete steps to address racial profiling and they want to start by having police collect more information during stops so the public has a better sense of the scope of the problem. The survey asked voters whether they would support or oppose requiring police to collect demographic information during police stops such as age, gender and race as well as about what happens during the stops in order to provide the public with more information.
“This core concept finds support from nearly 7 out of 10 voters (69%), including 88 percent of black voters, 79 percent of Latinos, 77 percent of Asians and 64 percent of whites. The proposal also finds broad bi-partisan support that includes over three quarters of Democrats (77%), 69 percent of independents and 57 percent of Republicans.”
The pollsters added, “We provided respondents with a description of this proposal, which includes having police collect basic information during stops, modernizing police training, and creating an advisory board that would work with law enforcement agencies to develop recommendations to stop profiling from occurring. Voters offer strong support for AB 953 as fully two-thirds (67%) support this proposal while just 19 percent of voters oppose it and 14 percent are undecided.”
In conclusion, “Our research finds that voters across the state have strong concerns about police behavior when it comes to interacting with people of color. Voters are particularly concerned about racial profiling and the use of force on the part of local law enforcement agencies, especially as it pertains to blacks and Latinos, and they want to see steps taken to change these practices.”
From July 10-14, 2015, Tulchin Research conducted a statewide survey in California among 900 likely November 2016 voters, including a statewide sample of 800 voters and an oversample of 100 African-American voters. The margin of error for the statewide base sample is +/- 3.46 percent.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
So what’s the solution? A cop pulls over a car because the tail lights are out and sees it’s a black driver and says “never mind, you’re black”? The officer can’t take the chance of being accused of racial profiling.
The first question I think is to assess what practices are leading to the problem. You are presupposing a lot in your comment. So you believe that enforcement of small infractions has just happened to have resulted in a disproportionate number of vehicle stops for blacks over other races? If this report is accurate, I think you’re comment is misplaced: “A 2015 report by a police department in California found that blacks were stopped twice as often as their driving age demographic representation,and that blacks and Latinos were searched at three and two times the rate of whites , respectively. However those searches showed that blacks and Latinos were less likely to be arrested.”
DG–re: “A 2015 report by a police department in California found that blacks were stopped twice as often as their driving age demographic representation,and that blacks and Latinos were searched at three and two times the rate of whites , respectively…”
Is the search rate statistic with regard to those that have been stopped, or with regard to the total driving age demographic representation? If the latter, than search rates for blacks and hispanics is about the same (as a % of stops) as for whites.
Clear reporting of statistical data helps to convey a clear understanding of what is going on here!
The final sentence re: arrest rates, is also unclear.
Possibly. We’ve had a record reduction in crime across the country, but the Liberals still want to tinker with clear success. It would be interesting to read the actual poll, and the background of the polling firm.
I’ve heard some refer to the actual practice as “criminal profiling”. So when we have a mass murder, the Liberals never seem to have a problem putting unemployed crazy middle aged white men at the top of the list.
I’ve had police officers tell me that they know the statistics, they know they are 6 or 7 times more likely to be killed by young black men as any other subgroup. They also tell me they love pulling over little old ladies (zero risk).
“the state of California does not collect, analyze, or make available information about who the police, stop, search or even shoot.”
“It would also require that California law enforcement agencies uniformly collect and report data on stops, frisks, and other interactions with the communities they serve.
Finally, establish an advisory board to analyze stop data and develop recommendations to address problems with disparate policing where they exist.”
And this is exactly where evaluation and possible change needs to begin, with evidence based analysis to see if the problems that have made the headlines are present in California. Without research based on actual data, we have no way of knowing whether or not this is a significant issue in any particular jurisdiction and are thus just relying on our own experiences and impressions, which obviously vary widely, to inform our opinion.
Garbage in, garbage out.
There are some law enforcement agencies (the Federal government?) that classify Latinos as “white” when they commit crimes, yet classify them as Latino / Hispanic when they are the victims!
Who decided to lie with that data?
TBD
“Who decided to lie with that data?”
I have no idea who made the decision to count the data the way they did and I doubt that you do either. If there are flaws in the methodology, the answer is not to abandon data in favor of anecdote and bias, but rather to work cooperatively to improve the data sets used.
Has anyone considered that blacks and Latinos might actually be committing more crimes in ratio to their population and that’s why their numbers are higher than other races?
“A 2015 report by a police department in California found that blacks were stopped twice as often as their driving age demographic representation,and that blacks and Latinos were searched at three and two times the rate of whites, respectively.
However those searches showed that blacks and Latinos were less likely to be arrested.”
So yes, it would appear that they have considered that and found it untrue.
IT IS BECAUSE BLACKS ARE OVER REPRESENTED LIVING IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THERE IS HIGHER CRIME!
that’s a claim, but is it accurate? is there data to back up your claim, in other words. and how do you account for the lower rate of arrests for blacks and hispanics stopped if not for the fact that they are sweeping with a broader net?
You want to dispute that blacks and Hispanics are over-represented in higher crime neighborhoods?
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-statistics-show-96-percent-shooting-victims-black-hispanic-minority-groups-represent-89-percent-murder-victims-article-1.1152838
In areas of higher crime there is logically and rationally going to be more attention from cops. Cops get called more to provide services. Law enforcement has a mission to keep the crime rate in check, so they obviously will go where there is more crime.
The fact that blacks and Latinos get stopped more often is simply a product of more cop-hours spent in these areas.
In my neighborhood in West Davis I rarely see a cop car unless there is a report of crime. Ironically it is usually a property crime and it is usually from someone out of town and the suspect tends to be reported as a black or Latino.
This point is key, and anyone failing to include the fact that there is more crime in minority neighborhoods when making a case for racial over or under-representation in crime statistics and policing needs to be called out for fomenting racial conflict.
Good point Frankly, I rarely ever see patrol cars in Wildhorse either. Why, because most residents here don’t break the law or cause problems.
“You want to dispute that blacks and Hispanics are over-represented in higher crime neighborhoods?”
did i say that. can you please read what i did say and respond to that.
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0514hm.html
why can’t you just address my point instead of cutting and pasting from six year old articles?
Good points, Frankly, which most people intuitively know as they mature into adulthood.
I recently attended an event in Oakland in the early evening, and where we tried to park there were street walkers out in the open plying their trade. Street walkers who appeared to be high or drunk, others drunk in public, other lower-level crimes, and I saw the police drive by at last 5 times and stop no one. Most of the law breakers were African American. The cops were “diverse”. My guess is that they focus on violent crime, and crime they are called to by residents, who are often minorities. If there was really some grand conspiracy, there could have been at least 10 arrests made with little effort.
SPEED KILLS RACIAL PROFILING STUDY
“…Confident that any new study would merely serve to confirm the troopers’ racism, the DOJ and the New Jersey attorney general commissioned a statistical investigation from the Public Services Research Institute in Maryland.
“The institute’s study was a spectacular thing. Using expensive monitors with high-speed cameras and radar detectors, they clocked the speeds of nearly 40,000 drivers on the relevant section of the turnpike. Three researchers then examined the photos to determine the race of the driver — without knowing whether the driver was speeding, which was defined as going more than 80 mph in 65 mph zones.
“The result: No racial profiling. “Blacks constituted 25 percent of all speeders and they were 23 percent of drivers stopped for speeding. Controlling for age and gender, blacks sped at about twice the rate of whites. The racial disparity was even greater for drivers exceeding 90 mph.
“Inasmuch as the study was irrefutable, Mark Posner, a lefty Clinton holdover in the Bush Justice Department, tried to block it from being released, continuously demanding more information.”
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2014-09-03.html
which has nothing to do with this study: “A 2015 report by a police department in California found that blacks were stopped twice as often as their driving age demographic representation,and that blacks and Latinos were searched at three and two times the rate of whites, respectively. However, those searches showed that blacks and Latinos were less likely to be arrested.” ann coulter is hardly a reputable source anyway, but try to compare apples to apples here.
Coulter is commenting on a study. Google the study and refute that, not attack the messenger.
Gangs and crime are not racially proportional either. They’re off the charts proportionally.
she’s commenting on a very old study. the difference between the two of us is you are googling stuff and posting it, i’m aware of the state of the law and work with this on a regular basis in my professional capacity. you are again ignoring the substance of my post that your posting of a 15 year old study in new jersey is irrelevant to the matter at hand when there are lawsuits and newer studies from california.
So DP, since you are a (liberal) self-appointed authority, can you answer a simple question for us?
Why are Latinos counted as white when they commit crimes, but Latino when they are victims of crime? That falsehood renders many crime statistics as disingenuous.
i find your comment insulting, i have over 30 years experience in the criminal justice system and have been hired by the california attorney general to do work much like this. so to call me self-appointed, is an insult.
the answer to your question is that the systems are archaic and they end up hurting everyone because they are. latinos are not a race, and so they end up in older systems being lumped with whites. it helps no one that they do that – it makes it hard to track a lot of things and i expect that you will see the shift in tracking shortly.
DP, all very interesting, but you didn’t answer my question. Why label them as white in one category (when they commit crime), and then Latino in another (when they are victims of crime)?
Such blatant distortions make us wonder where else we are being lied to or manipulated.
i did answer your question. it’s a timing issue. nothing more. newer stats are loaded differently.
Yup. This gets back to my observation having recently spent a lot of time in a particular low income, high minority, area in Sacramento where I witnessed and experienced a much higher disregard for traffic laws. For example, on two of my dozens of trips taking my nephew back and forth, I was passed on the right narrow shoulder by speeding cars on a two lane city street. And I was already going faster than they speed limit! That was just one of many observations that led me to understand that lawlessness would probably explode without a lot of law enforcement involvement.
Or perhaps lawlessness would not explode if the folks in that neighborhood received a living wage, free health care and a job that gives them pride. Perhaps a rental home not run down by slum landlords, too. Perhaps their dangerous driving is passive/aggressive outrage at an unfair system.
Generally brought to them by the same people that claim the cops are racist and decry this false claim of racial profiling.
And note that they do get free healthcare and free food and free housing… and none of that prevents them from exploding because getting handouts does not make a person feel part of the system.
So, why are they not able to earn their own way and have a shot at that American dream?
Accurately answer that question and then maybe, just maybe, look into the mirror of your voting record.
i drive all the time in davis and sacramento and i see the same types of driving. city driving is a bit different and more aggressive, but overall, i would need to see data not anecdotal observations to believe you are describing something real.
Frankly, old timers have often told me that when hobos came to their doors in the Depression, their Mom or parent would first give them a job or chores to do in exchange for food / clothing.
One old time recounted what his Mother said: “When you give a man something for free, you rob him of his dignity.”
I think we lost that wisdom.
BP
I fully agree with considering all possibilities. That is why I favor the collection of data which then can be analyzed to assess what is actually occurring instead of those at the ends of the ideologic spectrum pointing fingers at each other. Since this data collection has not occurred without a law mandating it, which would have been far preferable from my point of view, it seems that we need a law to make information gathering the standard practice.
Yes Tia Will, I can see it now. A cop makes a stop and isn’t sure of the race of the driver. Sir, for my report, are you Latino, a light pigmented black or a caucasion with a dark tan?
You’re entering the equation too late. Again the question is why are so many being stopped not what the cops should do once they have made a stop.
BP
At least you are consistent and true to form. Ignore the value of any evidence to continue posting ridiculous scenarios as though making a valid point. Now it is true that everyone who posts here myself included uses anecdotes to attempt to illustrate their points. Sometimes these anecdotes have relevance, sometimes not. You, however, seem to have turned the latter scenario into an art form.
As you point out I also see anecdotes and anecdotal stories posted on here all the time. IMO you just don’t like mine because it doesn’t fit with your views. We all have our own views, and yes I often use sarcasm as many others do, but I think your protest is misplaced.
as with the gate discussion the time has come to do hard data analysis rather than conduct public policy via anecdote.
I agree. First, we need to address the mis-classification / dual classification of Latinos. (see above)
Second, more objective studies like they conducted in New Jersey.
the new jersey study doesn’t necessarily refute what you think it refutes. it’s also 15 years old and limited to new jersey. in the time since, as i pointed out the last time you posted this, there was a major settlement in california where the chp admitted to racial profiling – something you never bother to point out when you cite the 15 year old new jersey study – and more importantly they changed their policies and yet, the recent study shows disproportionate traffic stops but a lower rate for actual arrests.
With all the cost reductions in Law Enforcement, and the extra paperwork they have to accomplish to track people, cops will just
) not bother pulling people over
) not arrest or ticket people
) and a new law will just make the problem go away, just like last years 1000 new laws did.
“…and a new law will just make the problem go away, just like last years 1000 new laws did.”
Agree with your sarcasm here. Brand new laws don’t work. Cops have all the discretion to choose on which citizens to enforce the new law.
miwok: unlikely. that’s really a strawman.
David – as a statistician that likes to “control for”, you are really messing up not including any mention of the ACTUAL crime rate difference in communities over-represented by blacks and Hispanics.
Is this just an inconvenient statistical correlation that detracts from your agenda to attack law enforcement as racist and racially-biased?
And the lack of media coverage of this fact surely plays a role in the inaccurate opinion of racial bias by the cops.
It turns out that cops have a CRIME BIAS. Imagine that!?
But luckily the survey is for all registered voters and not likely voters.
you’re continuing to make the same mistake as your compatriots here, the study accounted for that: ” A 2015 report by a police department in California found that blacks were stopped twice as often as their driving age demographic representation,and that blacks and Latinos were searched at three and two times the rate of whites, respectively. However, those searches showed that blacks and Latinos were less likely to be arrested.”
in other words, more likely to be stopped but less likely to be arrested. but not you, barack palin, nor tbd want to address this point. you want to post from old articles on conservative sites, but ignore the current information. the problem is that you have no actual knowledge of this, you’re just copy and pasting from ideologically similar sites to your own. we can all google, but without insight, you’re not actually saying anything. and because of that you keep the point over and over again.
DP–re: “in other words, more likely to be stopped but less likely to be arrested.”– are you asking that people get arrested for an ordinary speeding ticket or stop sign ticket or other minor traffic violation for which cops stop people, or conversely that cops just ignore traffic violations and not pull over people?
you’re making the same mistake as the others and drilling down too far into this equation. the question that needs to be better understood is why do we have such a disparity in traffic stops by race and why those stops are so high when arrest rates are lower. those are two red flags. until we address what kinds of stops are leading to those rates, we can’t answer your question.
My ex-girlfriend/Sheriff Deputy told me once they just arrest the “dumb ones” – so if true, education is the problem, not the crime they commit? If you take drugs or deal them, don’t carry it on you down the street. Stay inside until you sober up?
Since this article talks about driving, I still know kids who never touch a steering wheel until they are 15 or 18. That is dumb, IMO, because they are a danger to themselves and others. Get them in a gokart or something like e Barbie Jeep early and often. Driving schools at race tracks are even better, and they don’t always use YOUR car!! haha
Drivers ed taught at Anaheim Union High School District back in the 70’s (always by the gym teachers) was outstanding! But my dad is the one who taught me to parallel park.
I’m shocked kids today don’t get all the mandatory driver training hours I did in Anaheim, with our instructor, one on one. Now the wealthy kids get private lessons, the low income kids are taught by a parent or sibling or buddy.
Do Davis cops believe this is the best way? Maybe some could volunteer to teach driver training to low income kids?
A conversation with an ex-girlfriend does not necessarily represent the sentiments of 600,000 other folks.
The mainstream media is largely Liberal, and they control the message. Hence the way the civil rights groups snuffed out the use of “black-on-black crime:” discussions, which accounts for much of the crime statistics. The issue of black-on-black crime thus removes the supposed racial element the Left alleges.
I am less well read on crime in the Latino community, but I’m sure a big chunk is gang related (gang versus gang, gangs protecting their drug turf / their barrio, etc.).
It took imperfect messengers like Ann Coulter (recent book !ADIOS America!) and Donald Trump to communicate the large and disproportionate crime numbers committed by illegal immigrants. The killing of Kate in San Francisco put a human face to that hidden fact.
the mainstream media is not liberal. the only reason you think it’s liberal is you’re so damned conservative.
Talk about a difference in reality. Bill Clinton got 92% of the media vote, was that just an accident? If the media reflected society, they’d vote what, 45% Clinton, 19% Perot, and 35% Bush?
And there were 22 articles in the New York Times covering Air America (failed liberal radio) by accident?
When you argue against a well-known fact, you lose credibility. It would be like my arguing that talk radio or Fox News aren’t conservative. To me, many people on Fox are quite moderate, but I realize the larger context, so I wouldn’t lose credibility by arguing nuance or a non-reality to most.
Fox News exists because ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, the New York Times, LA Times, PBS, etc., are almost exclusively liberal. Maybe you want them to be radical?
Or maybe you don’t realize it because you’re so damned liberal.
KEY FINDINGS:
81 percent of the journalists interviewed voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every election between 1964 and 1976.
In the Democratic landslide of 1964, 94 percent of the press surveyed voted for President Lyndon Johnson (D) over Senator Barry Goldwater (R).
In 1968, 86 percent of the press surveyed voted for Democrat Senator Hubert Humphrey.
In 1972, when 62 percent of the electorate chose President Richard Nixon, 81 percent of the media elite voted for liberal Democratic Senator George McGovern.
In 1976, the Democratic nominee, Jimmy Carter, captured the allegiance of 81 percent of the reporters surveyed while a mere 19 percent cast their ballots for President Gerald Ford.
Over the 16-year period, the Republican candidate always received less than 20 percent of the media elite’s vote.
Lichter and Rothman’s survey of journalists discovered that “Fifty-four percent placed themselves to the left of center, compared to only 19 percent who chose the right side of the spectrum.”
“Fifty-six percent said the people they worked with were mostly on the left, and only 8 percent on the right — a margin of seven-to-one.”
KEY FINDINGS:
89 percent of Washington-based reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only seven percent voted for George Bush, with two percent choosing Ross Perot.
Asked “How would you characterize your political orientation?” 61 percent said “liberal” or “liberal to moderate.” Only nine percent labeled themselves “conservative” or “moderate to conservative.”
Fifty-nine percent dismissed the Republican’s 1994 Contract with America “an election-year campaign ploy.” Just three percent considered it “a serious reform proposal.”
Tierney found a strong preference for the liberal Kerry: “When asked who would be a better president, the journalists from outside the Beltway picked Mr. Kerry 3 to 1, and the ones from Washington favored him 12 to 1. Those results jibe with previous surveys over the past two decades showing that journalists tend to be Democrats, especially the ones based in Washington.”
http://archive.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp
Gosh, that’s sure a lot of current information. Some of those results are older than many Vanguard participants. Just for the record, I agree with you up to a point: journalists who work for legacy media tend to be liberal by a solid majority, at least per surveys I saw a few years ago, and that has been true for a long time. But “media” has become very fragmented. We don’t all sit around together and see what Walter Cronkite has to say tonight.
Link to image: http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/PersNewsCycle-Reporting-source-by-topic.png
Source: http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/publications/reports/survey-research/personal-news-cycle/
you make your point based on things 20, 30, 40, 50 years old – really?
BP, notice how quiet Davis Progressive has become when his assertions were proven false?
Bernard Golberg’s book “Media Bias” was updated in 2014.
http://www.amazon.com/Bias-Insider-Exposes-Media-Distort/dp/1621573117/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1439577620&sr=1-1&keywords=media+bias
i’ve posted five comments in here that you guys haven’t responded to, so i’m not sure where you’re coming from.