By David M. Greenwald
Last week the council only really got to the hear the proposal and recommendations from the joint subcommittee and then 162 public comments—over 80 percent of which were supportive of changes to the police, as recommended by a joint subcommittee comprised of members from Social Services, Human Relations and the Police Accountability Commissions.
Now the question before the council—what will they do about nine recommendations?
The recommendations:
- Determine why racial disparities in arrests, recommended charges, and stops exist in Davis.
- Encourage the Davis Police Department to dialogue with the Police Accountability Commission (PAC) on the content of its Use of Force policy.
- Evaluate the impact of de-escalation, crisis intervention, procedural justice, and implicit bias trainings.
- Shift non-violent service calls to unarmed personnel.
- Reinvent the police-community conversation.
- De-prioritize, decriminalize, and offer restorative remedies for minor, victimless offenses through warm hand-off programs, an expansion of the specialty court system, and other measures.
- Work with County partners to build an integrated “Crisis Now”-type model for behavioral health emergencies.
- Expand the City’s community navigator workforce.
- Commit to a vision of reimagined public safety.
The council is not yet being asked to act on these recommendations—instead they are being asked to provide “initial feedback to staff with direction on next steps.”
In the wake of the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis at the hands of police officers, communities across the country have called to “defund the police.”
Staff notes: “There was widespread concern in the nation about racism in law enforcement and questions about when police officers, rather than unarmed individuals, should be sent to a call.”
As staff notes: “Recommendations 1-8 passed in a straightforward manner. Recommendation 9 took a different path. The joint subcommittee originally voted to include three structure types as possibilities: new programs within the existing police department, a new department for social services, or a new structure to include police in a larger and broader public safety department.”
However, “they reconsidered their original vote and ultimately opted to remove the first structure (new programs within the existing police department) from the recommendation. The concern was that the model of new programs within the existing department was too close to the status quo.”
Staff acknowledges “the subcommittee prefers the two options included in the report but notes that it is customary to provide a full range of options to the City Council and would thus not recommend the removal of the new programs within the existing department from consideration.”
The 162 public comments took most of the evening last Tuesday. As the Vanguard’s Emily Dill reported, the majority of commenters—137 of the 162—supported a step in a new direction.
“I support a new independent public safety department that handles non-violent calls and social services,” said one public commenter, encapsulating the feelings of most who voiced their support Tuesday night.
Dill also reported that a number of commenters “voiced a need to have “an investigation and elimination” of the alarming racial disparities that data has brought forth.”
CAHOOTS remains a possibility—the Eugene, Oregon, based non-profit has served that community for 30 years, taking up to 20 percent of calls for service with most not requiring police backup.
Commenter Emma Carney stated that the unarmed mobile crisis team responds to “24,000 calls in one year and only 150 of those calls required police backup,” proving that “less than one percent” of these calls turn violent, Dill reported.
Here are the full proposals:
Recommendation 1: Determine why racial disparities in arrests, recommended charges, and stops exist in Davis.
The percentage of Hispanic and Black arrestees in Davis over the 2015-19 period is strongly disproportionate to the population shares of these groups in the City, a finding which holds even when considering arrests of Davis residents only. Black people are arrested at a rate 5.9 times more, and Hispanic people times more, than their population share; when considering only Davis residents, Black people are arrested at 5.0 times and Hispanic people 1.4 times their population share. Both sets of figures far exceed the racial disparity in arrests in the United States as a whole. Similar racial inequalities hold with respect to the overall number of recommended charges filed by Davis Police Department (DPD) officers in the city, and Hispanic and Black people are also subject to traffic-related stops and searches at a much higher rate than their respective population shares in Davis (though roughly proportional to regional population shares). We recommend a detailed study of the determinants of racially disproportionate stops, arrests, and recommended charges in Davis, including an analysis of the relative contributions of potential bias in policing, potential bias in community reporting, and socio-economic factors. This will likely require a regional analysis in partnership with agencies from Yolo County and surrounding counties.
Recommendation 2: Encourage the DPD to dialogue with the Police Accountability Commission (PAC) on the content of its Use of Force Policy.
We laud the DPD for taking proactive steps towards the “8 Can’t-Wait” reforms on use of force best practices. Conversation with the PAC may help to identify aspects of the policy that could be improved to elevate the best practice standard even further. Possible changes may include:
- Specifying de-escalation techniques in more detail;
- Specifying the timetable for crisis intervention re-certification and de-escalation, procedural justice, and implicit bias re-training;
- Prohibiting the use of physical force in the case of fleeing subjects who have not committed a serious crime and do not pose an active threat; and
- Adopting more restrictive guidelines for the use of deadly force.
Recommendation 3: Evaluate the impact of de-escalation, crisis intervention, procedural justice, and implicit bias trainings.
We encourage exploring opportunities to partner with University of California, Davis, researchers working on community development, racial equality, and other relevant issues. The first project could be an evaluation of DPD trainings. We laud the DPD for its commitment to crisis intervention, implicit bias, and procedural justice trainings for its officers. However, recent research calls into question the long-term impact of implicit bias and crisis intervention trainings, although procedural justice trainings do have strong and consistent effects on reducing the use of force. We recommend continuing to hold all of these trainings, but using rigorously designed evaluations to determine the enabling factors that would lead to lasting impact.
Recommendation 4: Shift non-violent service calls to unarmed personnel.
We suggest that some service calls received by the DPD could be shifted to unarmed personnel outside the DPD without increasing risk to the community or to responders. The nuisance/code enforcement, minor traffic violations (to the extent permitted by State law), and property theft categories are the primary candidates for near-term diversion to unarmed responders, with mental health/welfare check calls a possible medium-term goal. Between 2015 and 2019, these four categories comprised 23.9% of service calls received by the DPD. Any such shifts would be led by considerations of both client and responder well- being.
Recommendation 5: Reinvent the police-community conversation.
We recommend the City establish an ongoing, confidential public input process centering communities of color, the homeless, and other at-risk groups. We recognize that a trove of information from past public input processes on policing exists. However, these past efforts suffered from two weaknesses. First, they did not adequately provide accessible yet confidential means for marginalized communities to share their views; we believe that a proactive outreach component is essential. Second, they were not rigorously evaluated for their impacts on police-community trust and perceptions of police legitimacy; strong evaluation will better inform the design of input processes and trust-building initiatives more broadly. We also recommend the City carry out an anonymous survey of police officers to solicit perspectives about their work, racial bias, and building stronger relationships with the community. We suggest that the City connect with two ongoing community input processes on race and policing, one by the local group Yolo People Power and the other by the University of California,Davis’s, Center for Healthcare Practices. As a broader trust-building measure, we also suggest demilitarizing the appearance of officers, for example through permitting more casual clothing when appropriate.
Recommendation 6: De-prioritize, decriminalize, and offer restorative remedies for minor, victimless offenses through warm hand-off programs, an expansion of the specialty court system, and other measures.
We recommend de-prioritizing the enforcement of a broader set of minor, victim-less offenses and, working with the Yolo County District Attorney, de- criminalizing as many minor offenses as possible. We also recommend implementing warm hand-off programs along the lines of the substance use model deployed last year by the DPD, the Yolo County Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA), and local behavioral health care providers. We also recommend expanding the successful specialty court system; the interest in participation in the alternative courts exceeds the opportunities currently available.
Recommendation 7: Work with County partners to build an integrated, “Crisis Now”-type model for behavioral health emergencies.
The characteristics of Davis—a low violent crime rate, an acknowledged growing behavioral health and substance use crisis, and a strong existing relationship between the DPD, Yolo County HHSA, nonprofit agencies, and other stakeholders—are ideal for implementing a diverse approach to behavioral crisis response. This entails several steps. First, bolster the menu of options for crisis response: provide resources to allow existing and planned DPD crisis intervention and co-responder teams to be available 24/7; train ambulance-based personnel in behavioral health; and support the development of unarmed mobile crisis teams. Second, pilot a crisis call hub to route calls to the appropriate crisis response team, building on Davis’s in-house 911 dispatch system. Third, work with health providers to set up a joint behavioral health receiving facility that is safe and supportive. We urge that the a Crisis Now-type approach be accompanied by a robust evaluation framework exploring the impact of interventions on client health outcomes, responder attitudes and skills, overall stakeholder satisfaction, and financial sustainability of City and County agencies.
Recommendation 8: Expand the City’s community navigator workforce.
We recommend continuing and expanding the community navigator pilot initiative in the Davis Emergency Shelter Program. The DPD’s Homeless Outreach Services program is effective and well-respected, and additional human resources would greatly help improve coverage and frequency of contact with at-risk individuals, including the homeless, those with mental illness, and those with substance use issues. Navigators help build client trust in the care team, help the client navigate available social and healthcare services, and work to keep the members of the care team—clinicians, social workers, social service agencies, etc.—well-coordinated. The community navigator force would be led by paid professionals, but paraprofessional and volunteer involvement is viable given Davis’s unique human resources.
Recommendation 9: Commit to a vision of re-imagined public safety.
Many of the recommendations in this report could be addressed by the non-sworn side of the DPD. That would be the simplest implementation path and could result in mutual learning and stronger coordination between police officers and social service workers, but does not propose bold solutions to systemic racism. Instead, we believe that the two visions enumerated below are compelling alternative visions for addressing social service needs and taking action against racial disparities:
- a “New Department” (ND) model in which social services and non-violent aspects of public safety are placed under the responsibility of a new City agency lateral to the DPD;
- a “New Structure” (NS) model in which all public safety services, including the DPD, are placed under a single umbrella
The ND model affirms the City’s commitment to taking a public health approach to issues of racism, poverty, and public safety, but may present coordination challenges with the police department. NS may be the most powerful option to facilitate the development of a Crisis Now-type model and instill new public safety values into City institutions, but is also a more challenging transformation of City structure.
The initial impression of the joint subcommittee (TJS) is that the NS model is most promising. The NS model is an opportunity to build a new foundation of public safety on the values of anti-racism, transparency, and evidence-based decision making. The TJS notes, however, the importance of seeking further input from stakeholders and members of the public to inform which vision is best for Davis. Regardless of which model is chosen by the City Council, we recommend clearly articulating and committing to the vision. Finally, we recommend that all programs, current and planned, contain a strong monitoring and evaluation component, and that all public safety datasets be made available in a expeditious and transparent manner, ideally through a user-friendly online portal.
Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:
I doubt that the reason(s) for that would honestly be examined. Anywhere, really.
To do so would almost immediately incur backlash.
For a significant number of activists, the only “correct” answer is police bias and institutional racism. Why even bother to examine it, beyond that preferred answer?
Of course, this disparity might also apply to age and gender, but no one seems particularly concerned about that.
“To do so would almost immediately incur backlash.”
Ron immediately heads for the rabbit hole
The question itself is a rabbit hole, and one to which there is no politically-acceptable escape.
To make it easier (and avoid the activist’s rabbit hole), let’s just “agree” that the police are biased and racist, and that’s the reason for the disparity. 😉 Then, we can just tell the police to “stop doing that”. Problem solved.
Although I don’t doubt the disparity, I sometimes wonder how this data is collected. I also wonder if the police always identify the skin color of someone, before pulling them over. Or, if this only occurs afterward (and how).
Okay David, what response would you accept besides “For a significant number of activists, the only “correct” answer is police bias and institutional racism. Why even bother to examine it, beyond that preferred answer?”
Don’t you think there is truth to the notion that there is police bias and institutional racism? Can’t solve the problem, without diagnosing the cause. At the end of the day we need evidence based approaches otherwise we are simply spinning our wheels.
I thought we already “agreed” that this is the “cause” of a disparity? 😉
So Ron’s “rabbit hole” was exactly right and the only acceptable answer.
Got it!
I’m curious as to what the alternative data-backed hypotheses to racial bias are.
Interesting Stanford-led study showing that the disparity in traffic stops is greatly reduced after sunset when the veil of darkness masks race. https://news.stanford.edu/2020/05/05/veil-darkness-reduces-racial-bias-traffic-stops/
I can think of at least one, but again – I don’t see the point of putting that forth. (Same thing regarding disproportionate stops and arrests based upon gender and age, as well.)
Therefore, I would conclude that the police are also sexist and ageist. 😉
I’ve found that it’s so much easier to just go along, on here.
Problem is, the alternative you are no doubt thinking of doesn’t hold up when other factors are controlled for. Racial disparities still exist.
I looked at the headline of that article you posted, and don’t find it to be definitive proof of anything.
No single study is ever “definitive proof” of anything.
Of course, Ron O comments by innuendo and without any real proposals for alternative courses of action despite strong evidence that the current situation is intolerable and unsustainable.
So what is your proposed rationale for this difference? Let me start by stating what it CANNOT be and then you can craft your response: That non-whites actually commit crimes (vs. being convicted which is biased by disproportionate conviction rates caused by several key factors) at a disproportionate rate that matches the traffic stop rates so these groups represent a greater criminal threat in the community.
The many statistical studies out there in fact clearly demonstrate that traffic stop rates are disproportionate to any rational cause for the disparity.
Well, that’s “settled” then. Like I first noted. 😉
Like I said, it’s so much easier to just go along, on here. Especially regarding anything related to skin colors.
Racist, sexist, ageist cops who are doing the dirty work of white people, who have the same point of view. 😉
But now that we know what the “problem” is . . .
(Tongue-in-cheek again, in case that’s not obvious to some.)
Some whites just can’t talk about race without “fear of backlash,” irony intended.
Probably true, in the current political environment. Sort of the point.
Or, not so much fear, as it is pointless and without any benefit or resolution in doing so.
Only negatives.
There isn’t likely to be a time (anytime soon) in which that will change. But it’s too bad, because it probably does ensure that misunderstandings and problems will continue.
Probably a lot easier to just say that the police are bad.
No, probably easier and more honest to say this is a thoroughly racist society and the police are no different than any other members of society. Except, of course, they have guns and other force implements and can use them with heavy legal protection. I agree it is pointless to ask if police are racist. We need to acknowledge everyone’s trained to be racist from a very early age and move ahead with that always in mind.
Where, exactly, is that “training camp” held? And (assuming it exists) is it limited to “white” people?
Yeah, yeah – white males control all institutions, blah, blah, blah . . . And, they always “favor” other white males, blah, blah, blah . . .
Not what I’ve personally witnessed, but then that’s “anecdotal”, blah, blah, blah . . .
Meanwhile, Asians stay out of the fray, and are doing pretty well (thank you very much). Nothing wrong with that. (At least, some “sub-categories” of Asians.)
There was a request recently to carefully define terms. Please define “we”, “need”, “racist”, “move ahead” and “acknowledge” in great detail.
As to Alan’s post… (responding to Dave Hart, who wrote)
BS!
My great-great-grandfather and his bro’ ran a stop on the “underground railroad”… a number of folk who attended my grandfather’s funeral were Black, honoring him (not too many Latinx or Asians in State College, PA in early 60’s)… Dad and Mom definitely trained me to be open to anyone (race was not discussed, but dad and I wept when MLK Jr was assassinated)… our kids never used a racial adjective in describing their friends… Black, Asian, Latinx, were never part of their vocabulary… nor in mine or spouse’s, unless someone wanted a physical description…
I pity Dave Hart for his apparent upbringing (or other “issues”?)… but as for me and ours, he speaks non-sense (hypen intentional), and untruth (nah, should say “lies”) in his bolded quote…
I truly do not understand where the two Davids (H & G) are coming from when they say all “whites” are racist, or even worse, ‘trained’ to be so… perhaps they ‘protestest too much’, or are trying to atone for their past ‘sins’, and have to lay their ‘guilt’ on others…
But I’ll not judge… no point in that… I suggest they need to examine their own consciences…
While not agreeing with Ron O’s ‘conclusion’, I would point out that even a stopped clock is right twice a day…
If folk are serious about this, they should include in their recommendations looking for disproportionate stops/citations for teenage white males…
Ex. : two very “white” male teenagers pulled over on the pretext of a robbery @ a So Davis Credit Union earlier in the day… initial reports from the employees, was it was two black males… they were detained for questioning for ~ 10-15 minutes
Ex. : “very white” (looks Nordic) teenager was driving at normal speed residential street… pretext was that the reg sticker didn’t match the license plate (my, bad, two cars with same month of renewal, I put wrong sticker on wrong car)… how could an officer tell, until the stop had occurred?… must have had super eagle eyesight… or teenage male driver? The officer then obliterated the sticker, had it towed in impound, cited the driver… because of the deliberate obliteration, took me weeks to figure out what happened… the citation was dismissed, but still had to pay for two new stickers and an “admin fee” from the Court… [that officer was known to me (confirmed by getting citation)]… he hasn’t been with Davis PD for a long while, but not sure if he was dismissed, or allowed to resign in-lieu of dismissal… he was a “bad apple”, and many of us knew it.
To limit the review of contacts/stops/citations/arrests to only POC criteria. to determineif there is “bad-policing”, and working to end that, an honest, ethical person would want to expand it, and not limit the review, along purely racial lines… there are problems, have been problems, and we should address them… all of them…
For the record, my “conclusion” was made tongue-in-cheek. (Thought that was pretty obvious.)
Of course, we could also examine reasons that young males are pulled-over more often, or you could just ask insurance companies the reasons that they’re charged higher rates.
Might find that there’s some commonality between all of the underlying reasons discussed, on here. Which then explains bias, as well (in which some disproportionate number of innocent people are caught-up in that result).
But it might be hard to separate resulting bias from other, underlying causes.
While insurance rate differentials MAY spell some of the difference, it cannot capture the full disproportionality of the POC vs white pull overs. I agree that the police biases are likely showing up as ageism as well.
But why is anyone assuming that such a study will be done badly? Ron O.’s flip assertion is simply insulting to the rest of us who actually operate with an open mind to a question. This is case of rather than contending the actual issue because we all recognize that the likely answer is unfavorable to one’s world view, an attack is leveled on either the messenger or on the audience interpreting the findings. There’s no real effort to actually engage in a discussion; instead it’s a demand to capitulate to one’s view ahead of time.
The reference regarding insurance rate differentials was made in connection with young males. Which I would assume is solely due to their increased costs, as a group.
Note that I didn’t actually put forth an “assertion”. You filled-in the blanks, on your own. Not sure whose “world view” we’re referring to, at this point.
I don’t know what study you’re referring to, its cost, etc. But it is (as usual) not a “Davis-only” issue. Not sure what’s to be accomplished from it, the degree of the “problem” to be “solved”, etc.
What if the primary “answer” is that some groups commit more crimes than others, as you put forth as a “discounted assertion”? Would that be accepted by activists who have already determined the “cause”?
What do you think the chances are that all groups (e.g., ages, skin colors, genders) commit crimes on an “equal basis”? I’m going to go out on a limb here, and suggest that it’s “zero”. For what it’s worth, I’m not sure that “whites” are at the bottom of that range.
Ron O
I’m replying and guessing at your innuendo, which too often is the case here.
As I said, the differential in crime rates is highly unlikely to explain the differential in stoppage rates. But that begs an even bigger question–why do we have a system that imposes significant burdens on a class in which individuals have no control over the behavior of specific individuals in that class? In other words, why should Blacks as a class, of whom most do not commit crimes, have to suffer higher stoppage rates because that class has a higher crime rate? That type of generalized class discrimination is why Prop 103 that led to insurance regulation was passed to stop that practice in auto insurance. A simplistic answer isn’t the solution–this is the point of the exploration being asked for.
The very first question is whether such stops have any effect on either crime rates or on arresting suspects? So much current policing practice derives from anecdotal evidence and tradition rather than rigorous analysis. We have to break this cycle of bad policies.
Richard: You filled in the perceived “innuendo”, on your own.
“Disproportionate” stop and arrest rates (in-and-of-themselves) do not provide evidence of bias.
A reasonable question, but one in which the outcome may be an (almost-unavoidable) byproduct of others within a class.
Not familiar with that, but seems to imply that “other” groups have to pay for the practices of another group. (Somewhat similar to what you’re claiming regarding stop-and-arrest results.)
Also similar to “everyone” having to pay for the cost of fires and utility services, in fire-prone areas. (Rather than just those living there.)
If this is deemed worthy of exploration (and the cost thereof, depending upon the scope), I would start with how “large” of a perceived problem this is.
Regardless, I’m not hopeful that a single answer will be found, much less implemented. (Except for activists who already have conclusions.)
It might go back to disproportionate crime rates, which you put forth (and then discounted). If that’s “off-the-table” (politically), I don’t see much hope for honest analysis.
And truth be told, I strongly suspect that’s already the case, and has been for some time. I see evidence of that on this blog (and sometimes elsewhere), on a near-daily basis. But, I’m also sure that won’t stop the “process” from moving forward.
That, by the way, sounds like a bunch of “rubbish” itself.
Maybe they should let everyone out of San Quentin and Folsom prison, and see what happens.
I don’t assume that at all… I suggest it be more ‘inclusive’ as to variables, and sincerely hope it is done well… do you have any problem with looking ‘inclusively’? Other variables, other than ‘race’? Might take more time, effort, $$$, but if the effort is made, let’s do it correctly… cheaper once now, rather than in increments…
We want to identify and hopefully ‘solve’ (or strive to solve) problems…
If the ‘recommenders’ could accept,
Determine why disparities in arrests, recommended charges, and stops exist in Davis, including, but not necessarily limited to, racial, age, appearance, etc….,
I’d be more than good to support that recommendation… with the caveat of resources, costs, etc., to “get there”… some (T&**7) showed its own bias(es) in posting, something to the effect that there is perhaps a good reason why ‘certain groups are ‘contacted’… I’d be very interested to see what all the problems are… including disparity between racial factors, age (teenagers, Black, white, other POC, as ‘subgroups’).
As it stands, the recommendation may find a ‘cancer’, and subsequent efforts to selectively remove it, means the rest of the ‘cancer’ can metastize (sp?)… I am thinking, on that recommendation, “go all in”… if a ‘cancer exists’, try to excise it all…
[sidebar… John, your 10:23 post… as to ‘irony intended’… this judge gives you 9.2/10… FWIW…]
I’d give it “-1”, given the irony of the “backlash” usually coming from other white people (who perceive themselves as “enlightened”, but are usually anything but).
I’m also consistently amazed at those who believe they can act as spokespersons for those of other skin colors (or even their “own” color, for that matter). Those must be the truly enlightened, among us. I think we all appreciate these ambassadors of skin colors.
Show us on the doll where the comment touched you, Ron? If you can’t take it, leave the playground.
I did not necessarily assume that the comment “touched me”.
Just something I noticed regarding those who consistently point-the-finger, at others. Usually, sharing the same skin color.
Of course, with only one of them claiming self-righteousness. The enlightened ones among us, apparently. Hat’s-off, to them.
Referencing empirical studies that demonstrate discrimination against certain classes is not being a “spokesperson”–it is acknowledging a problem in our system that needs to be addressed. You can just withdraw into your own individual tribal identification and claim anyone deviating from your tribe is an inappropriate spokesperson for another tribe, or you can accept that to change the system requires that we acknowledge the information provided justifies a change, regardless of one’s class identification.
Well, that’s true, regarding not being a spokesperson. But, I halfway-expect someone on here to challenge me regarding how many black people I’ve spoken to about this, compared to how many they have. I’ve been challenged regarding similar questions related to students, in that manner.
So, I wouldn’t discount the possibility that someone on here believes that they are a qualified spokesperson. (For that matter, one cannot even be a spokesperson for their own skin color or gender, despite attempts to do so periodically.)
Without really defining the scope of the perceived problem in the first place (e.g., the population of local black people, vs. those who claim to be harassed by police, for example).
Also, with the glaring fact that it mostly seems to be a lot of middle-to-older age white guys on here, talking about other groups’ issues. 😉 Reminds me of an old Saturday Night Live sketch (as I recall), in which a group of men sitting around a roundtable were talking about “women’s problems”. (And according to them, one of the “problems” is that they become less-attractive, as they get older.)
Regarding tribal identification, I’m assuming that this comment is not made regarding me – unless you’re making an unfounded assumption.
And again, what “empirical studies” are you referring to? The fact that some groups are stopped and arrested more than other groups is NOT EVIDENCE of discrimination, in-and-of itself.
For a change of pace, my only comment is on Item 6. De-prioritize, decriminalize, and offer restorative remedies for minor, victimless offenses through warm hand-off programs, an expansion of the specialty court system, and other measures.
If we have not already, I suspect we will see an increase in the shoplifting of small essential items such as food, diapers, and sanitary products. While these are not victimless crimes in the technical sense, I am hoping our business and police will see them as the acts of desperation they are rather than deliberate criminal acts.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/10/pandemic-shoplifting-hunger/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/12/10/shoplifting-spikes-in-us-amid-increasing-desperation-as-pandemic-drags-on/?sh=1949dfdc216e
Possibly not the best solution to ‘desperation’, if we want to have stores.
Rampant shoplifting leads to another Walgreens closing in SF
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/philmatier/article/Rampant-shoplifting-leads-to-another-Walgreens-15654730.php
Not sure where it fits in, but probably under points 4 and 9, I sorely wish we could turn over all traffic enforcement to cameras. The reason I think this is important, aside from how an officer might interact with a person of color, is that automatic ticketing and fines would change the hell-bent-for-leather attitude of a critical minority on the road. That might be a nice change for pedestrians, cyclists, and even our political system where it seems the ability to get away with driving 60mph in a 25 or 35mph zone feeds the angry white male psyche. And, yes, it does appear to be mostly white males that drive like that and think they are entitled to do so.
Now there’s a scientific study. What do they call those “street takeovers” again, where there’s essentially a party in the street (complete with cars doing “donuts”)?
Is that limited to “white” people? (Certainly more males, at least.)
I truly doubt that “bad driving behavior” is limited to white people. Males – yes, younger males – yes. I guess I “must be” a sexist and ageist, to conclude that. 😉
If I’m not mistaken, someone was KILLED by a non-white male on 2nd Street, not too long ago. Traveling at an extremely high rate of speed, in a completely irresponsible manner. Sorry, I guess I shouldn’t notice skin color.
The word “primarily” needs to be inserted in there somewhere, in regard to younger males.
Pretty sure that I’ve witnessed bad driving behavior across the spectrum of the entire population, at one point or another. And for that matter, unsafe behavior regarding other modes of transportation as well.
And no – I’m not “perfect”, either. Haven’t seen anyone who is (but some clearly have less concern for others than they should). However, I doubt that the “latter” can be attributed primarily to white people (beyond their per-capita representation). Younger males in general, yeah.
But if you really want to nail down “who” is driving recklessly, all you’d have to do is look at accident rates in various geographic areas, and then compare that to demographic data.
Insurance companies know which areas generate more claims, for example.
Same thing with crime statistics. Unless one believes that all the murders and other crime that’s occurring is the result of “selective enforcement” – after-the-fact.
But I’m not sure what’s to be accomplished from that, other than to shoot holes in the implied claim that “white people” are the root of all problems for others, in the world.
Where do you get this stuff? And where do you drive? But the f*cked up reality is that you can make a racist comment like that against white males on this blog comment section without issue, but if I were to give you my observations about race and driving and report it here (never occurred to me until you made your racist comment) and it countered yours, it would be removed as racist. Do you all see the problem here?
Also, seriously, you want computers and cameras enforcing traffic laws? Do you not remember the for-profit companies and red-light cameras, now almost all removed, and that era of no-trial-necessary because “the camera never lies” . . . and yet there were cases it was proven to be mistimed both on the camera and the light intervals . . . all in the direction of profit. This is the world you want?
Amen. Je d’accord…
This (general) point of view predates the Vanguard itself, though it seems to be the underlying backbone of the Vanguard. (A “continuation” of it, in the form of the Vanguard.) Its “birthplace” might have been in the Bay Area, decades ago. It’s the same type of b.s. that’s been promoted by some, for years.
It is harmful, and (as a “bonus”) can sets-back race relations, for everyone. Interestingly enough, this point of view seems to originate primarily from other “white” people (who I derisively call the “enlightened ones”).
Unfortunately, this point of view can ultimately “infiltrate” elected officials (and policies), as well.
Totally agree….
Of course there is no chance that Davis will install traffic cams,(too 21st century and cameras are indifferent to social standing) but if they did I suspect your assessment would be validated. I see very few people of color driving C-8 Corvettes and 454/4:11 pickup trucks down residential street at ludicrous speed.
I have spent time in cities where almost every block is covered by traffic cams. I find them comforting.