Driving While Black
I've recently enjoyed an Email dialog with friend and commenter "Paul" about this study:
"An analysis by the Illinois Department of Transportation found that minorities made up 28.5 percent of the driving population but accounted for 31.8 percent of traffic stops in 2005.
After being stopped, 68.7 percent of minority drivers got tickets. Only 59.5 percent of white drivers who were pulled over ended up getting tickets.
Police searches also were more common for minorities. The analysis shows 2.1 percent of minority drivers allowed police to search their car, compared with less than 1 percent of white drivers.
...
Among the cities with high rates of pulling over minority drivers were Berwyn, Champaign, Chicago Ridge, Decatur, Joliet, Peoria, Rockford and Springfield.
Some with notably low rates were Arlington Heights, Benton, Collinsville, Highland Park and Wheaton.
...
The study was supposed to run through the end of 2007, but Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed legislation this week extending it to July 2010. The legislation also sets up a board to oversee the study and analyze its results.
Stats are found here."
My initial comment:
"This shows both the benefits and perils of such studies.
On the bright side, we learn where there may be problems. On the other hand, we also see the immediate pressure to make the "temporary" study permanent.
What's bad about that? I still believe our goal should be a colorblind society, in which one's skin color doesn't affect the likelihood or the outcome of a traffic stop.
Such a goal cannot be advanced by requiring every officer in every traffic stop forever to log the skin color of the person stopped.
Due to the unavoidable randomness of variation in such statistics, the only way to guarantee no skin color is ever in any location stopped or searched more often than others is by changing the goal of our society from "equal opportunity" to "equal outcome" (i.e. quotas.) That way lies illogic - as in "That driver is reckless, but I've already reached my monthly quota of tickets for their skin color."
A better solution to our current efforts toward equal opportunity unavoidably yielding very unequal outcomes has recently been illustrated by the philanthropy of Bill & Melinda Gates & Warren Buffet. Having excelled at making money, they have now chosen (like some of the "robber barons" of a century ago) to now excel at doing good. I remember Bill Hybels saying the reason God allows some of us to attain huge assets is so we can do great good. It's nice to think the Gates & Warren Buffet understand that. Here's hoping that idea catches on more widely.
Having someone win financially by an obscene margin seems an unavoidable part of equal opportunity, yet "crabs in a bucket" (other crabs pulling back any crab who appears about to escape the bucket) is an even worse alternative, already thoroughly tested and proven to fail by socialist and communist societies around the World.
Teaching the "winners" in a fair competition to care enough about the "losers" to do great works of assistance is better than either liaise faire Capitalism or totalitarian Communism.
Further, since we haven't yet reached that goal of fair competition (especially among skin colors), our other goal remains to level the playing field - but not by requiring equal outcomes from every individual competition."
To that, Paul replied:
"So long as black drivers are 333% more likely to be searched than white drivers (statewide), you have to wonder if we're ready for colorblindness yet."
That led to my second comment:
"A bit of additional racial data might shed extra light on this - how do the search rates vary when the race of the officer is also considered?
If, for example, it were discovered that black officers also search black drivers more often than black officers search white drivers, white racism wouldn't be a sufficient explanation.
The problem of cabbies refusing to pick up black customers headed for the South side at night, for example, is not just a matter of white racism if black cabbies are also refusing such passengers. In that instance, there is also a safety concern involved, due to robbery and murder rates of cabbies at night that vary by neighborhood.
As mentioned before, I have no problem with a temporary periodic check to confirm we still have a "driving while black" problem, and measure its severity. My issue is with making "race" something we measure always, everywhere and forever.
For instance, some nations' passports at least used to indicate race and/or religion. I consider both inappropriate for a passport or any other semi-permanent ID card, both because they make unfair discrimination easier for bigoted public officials, and because both race and religion are somewhat artificial constructs. What race, for example, is Tiger Woods to list on such a passport? Similarly, what denomination am I, as a retired United Methodist minister and participating member of non-denominational Willow Creek Community Church?"
To that, Paul replied:
"How about institutional racism as an explanation in [the hypothetical case of black officers also searching black drivers more often than black officers search white drivers] as well as in the cab case? In a society where black males have such a negative stereotype, it affects the attitudes of even other blacks."
That led to one more comment from me:
"Merely labeling such instances as “institutional racism” is too simple an answer in my opinion. On that basis, pretty much everything with a disproportionate result on blacks, even unintended random statistical variation could be and already is labeled by some as due only to “institutional racism.”
I’d want to hold such a conclusion in abeyance until after also checking into other possible explanations, such as that black officers who pulled over more than a proportionate number of blacks might have what they consider just cause for doing so.
If we never notice such results and never inquire into the reasons for them, instead just labeling all such variations as due to “institutional racism”, we may fail to learn from information that was available to us and might have helped our society toward a fair and lasting solution of whatever problems were hidden in that data."
I recommend lots of analysis of the large amount of data. Let's see what it tells us. I'd expect there are a few bad cops that abuse their discretion. This record keeping may help expose them to their own department officials.