How to Protect Yourself When You Suspect Racial Profiling
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
How to Protect Yourself When You Suspect Racial Profiling
Well, racial profiling is in the news again.
Prominent Black scholar and Harvard professor Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. was recently arrested after a forced entry into his own home. Dr. Gates alleges that he was arrested for spite after he'd presented his identification, then repeatedly insisted that the officer provide his name and badge number.
Racial profiling cannot be defended. It is a horrible affront to the constitution, the rule of law, and to every law-abiding citizen, but I'm not addressing that issue here. The one issue that is at least as important as racial profiling itself, is how to best protect yourself if you suspect you're the victim of racial profiling. After all, that could become a matter of life and death.
Many of the tragedies that stem from racial profiling, regardless to whether the profiling is the result of blatant racism, or simply gross ignorance, is greatly assisted by the blind outrage of the victim. So if you suspect that you're the victim of racial profiling, it is imperative that you keep a cool head. It could save your life.
When racial profiling is due to pure racism, there's very little that you can do other than make sure you don't allow it to escalate. A good rule of thumb is, whatever the situation, never give your enemy what he wants, and in the case of racial profiling, what the enemy wants most is for you to become enraged. That gives him carte blanche to carry out his agenda.
But in some cases racial profiling is a result of ignorance. It's not that the officer is a blatant racist, but he's acting on his stereotyped image of Black men - and in those cases he's often scared to death. If that's the case, you also need to control your rage, because you'll not only protect your well being, but it gives you the opportunity to take advantage of an educational moment, where you can demonstrate to this man that his stereotyped image of what Black men may be less than valid.
It's all about thinking instead of giving in to knee-jerk emotionalism, because it is that very unthinking emotionalism that leads to racial profiling in the first place, regardless to whether it's motivated by racism or ignorance.
While it was well within Dr. Gates' right to respond to his situation with outrage, I would have handled it differently. Dr. Gates indicated the following in an interview with The Root:
The officer asked, "'Would you step outside onto the porch.' And the way he said it, I knew he wasn't canvassing for the police benevolent association. All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger. And I said to him no, out of instinct. I said, 'No, I will not.'"
Although Dr. Gates was clearly within his rights, what's within your rights is not always the smartest thing to do - the graveyard is filled with people who were right.
By responding as he did, he not only injected a confrontational tone into an already tense situation, but he also challenged the authority of a man whose authority as a police officer might have been the most meaningful thing in his life. In addition, by repeatedly demanding the officer's name and badge number, he backed the man into a corner.
But again, Dr. Gates had every right to do everything that he did, but as I mentioned above, what is within one's rights is not always the smartest thing to do. What Dr. Gates didn't do was think. If the officer was indeed a racist, it might have felt good to imply that I'm a world renowned Black scholar and you're nobody, so I'm about to crush you like a grape, but it was a very dangerous thing to do.
On the other hand, if this was just a cop trying to do his job but had a misguided and stereotyped attitude towards Black men, Dr. Gates missed a prime opportunity to change that attitude. Instead, he became a catalyst to pushed the officer from simply misguided, to true racist - in which case, the next Black man that the officer runs across, who doesn't have Dr. Gates' clout, may have to pay dearly.
Had I been in Dr. Gates' position - and I have - when the officer asked me to step out on the porch, I would have said, "Absolutely." And as I was coming out the door I would have said, "I know this looks suspicious, so I want to thank you for being so conscientious in coming out to protect my property."
That way, if the officer had a racist agenda he wouldn't have anything to act on. But if the officer was simply misguided and acting on a stereotypical image of Black men, my behavior would have challenged that image and given him something to think about in his interaction with Black men in the future.
While we should continue to vigorously address racial profiling, we can't defeat it through the courts alone. We've got to address the root of the problem, and that root is deeply embedded in the mind of man.
We've got to address the problem of racial profiling on several fronts. Turn on your television and look at how we allow Black men to be portrayed in the media. Corporations pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for 30 second commercials to influence our minds. Now consider that there are entire networks beaming videos around the world, and around the clock, declaring that the Black man is a gangsta and Black women are whores. So is it the world's fault that they believe us?
The fact is, the Black community is not only promoting, but financing racial profiling. So who should we really be mad at?
Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Neal Cassady once remarked that "Even a mad dog won't won't bite if you talk to it right."
July 23, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. One element that has to be included is the high black crime rate, and people are scared. Are they scared to a sane equivalent to the actual threat? Humans seldom assess risk sanely. The crime rate overall and the black crime rate especially came down severely from its peak in 1993, some crimes 1/3 of their former level. Did we adjust our fear meters accordingly? Likely not. Hollywood undoubtedly didn't.
But we also have post-9/11 supercop syndrome to deal with as well. No longer is a little talking back allowed. People hear about Gitmo, and they say, "they had it coming". Sympathy for victims? Less and less. Go through an airport? Prepare to strip. Get in a car, not even as a driver? Before you lost your rights. Now you're in a precarious situation.
But the basic point in your post is that in each of these encounters, besides being in danger, you're an ambassador. We move from an old set of stereotypes to a new one, or a new impression. I've been calling military offices lately, and man are these the nicest people in the world to deal with on the phone. Sure, if I meet them on the battlefield things will be different, but it's just kind of unexpected. Special training or just happens? I don't know, but on the phone, they're sweet as can be.
Anyway, I don't think this latest incident progressed us much.
July 23, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh...we're talking about a police officer here, standing in the home of a 60-ish, well-dressed university professor who's just shown ID demonstrating...he's standing in his own home. What does the "high black crime rate" have to do with the Gates incident?
July 23, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
You were thinking exactly what I was thinking. This had noting to do with crime statics. We actually have a person; Dr. Gates.
It seems when there a problem in the black community someone goes spouting off statics--that shows me that person spouting statics don't know a damn thing about black people. I got news for those who use statics. There are human beings behind those numbers. Someone lives behind all those statics. I think Statics dehumanize the people in the discussion.
I just seems to me that Prof. Gates was exhausted from his trip and wanted desperately to get into his house and relax after a long trip. Didn't he say he was coming from China?
I know when I fly to the east coast and back I am in foul mood after being cramped up in that flying piece of metal
July 23, 2009 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, the case reminds me of polls before Dumbya sent us into Iraq in 2003, 70% of African Americans opposed the war, while 70% of whites swallowed the Bush lies and supported it.
A Black man quoted in a Philly paper said the reason Blacks didn't support war was because they had seen too many white cops shoot unarmed men, with the excuse "I thought I saw a gun". They were right. There were no WMD.
July 23, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
WORD!
July 23, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant!
July 23, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
For those who don't know, ACLU offers good guidance for dealing with the police. They used to give away wallet cards with these instructions, but I don't know if they still do.
This is from their website.
Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
Don't get into an argument with the police.
Remember, anything you say or do can be used against you.
Keep your hands where the police can see them.
Don't run. Don't touch any police officer.
Don't resist even if you believe you are innocent.
Don't complain on the scene or tell the police they're wrong or that you're going to file a complaint.
Do not make any statements regarding the incident. Ask for a lawyer immediately upon your arrest.
Remember officers' badge and patrol car numbers.
Write down everything you remember ASAP.
Try to find witnesses and their names and phone numbers.
If you are injured, take photographs of the injuries as soon as possible, but make sure you seek medical attention first.
If you feel your rights have been violated, file a written complaint with police department's internal affairs division or civilian complaint board.
1. What you say to the police is always important. What you say can be used against you, and it can give the police an excuse to arrest you, especially if you bad-mouth a police officer.
2. You must show your driver's license and registration when stopped in a car. Otherwise, you don't have to answer any questions if you are detained or arrested, with one important exception. The police may ask for your name if you have been properly detained, and you can be arrested in some states for refusing to give it. If you reasonably fear that your name is incriminating, you can claim the right to remain silent, which may be a defense in case you are arrested anyway.
3. You don't have to consent to any search of yourself, your car or your house. If you DO consent to a search, it can affect your rights later in court. If the police say they have a search warrant, ASK TO SEE IT.
4. Do not interfere with, or obstruct the police -- you can be arrested for it.
IF YOU ARE STOPPED FOR QUESTIONING
1. It's not a crime to refuse to answer questions, but refusing to answer can make the police suspicious about you. If you are asked to identify yourself, see paragraph 2 above.
2. Police may "pat-down" your clothing if they suspect a concealed weapon. Don't physically resist, but make it clear that you don't consent to any further search.
3. Ask if you are under arrest. If you are, you have a right to know why.
4. Don't bad-mouth the police officer or run away, even if you believe what is happening is unreasonable. That could lead to your arrest.
IF YOU'RE STOPPED IN YOUR CAR
1. Upon request, show them your driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance. In certain cases, your car can be searched without a warrant as long as the police have probable cause. To protect yourself later, you should make it clear that you do not consent to a search. It is not lawful for police to arrest you simply for refusing to consent to a search.
2. If you're given a ticket, you should sign it; otherwise you can be arrested. You can always fight the case in court later.
3. If you're suspected of drunk driving (DWI) and refuse to take a blood, urine or breath test, your driver's license may be suspended.
IF YOU'RE ARRESTED OR TAKEN TO A POLICE STATION
1. You have the right to remain silent and to talk to a lawyer before you talk to the police. Tell the police nothing except your name and address. Don't give any explanations, excuses or stories. You can make your defense later, in court, based on what you and your lawyer decide is best.
2. Ask to see a lawyer immediately. If you can't pay for a lawyer, you have a right to a free one, and should ask the police how the lawyer can be contacted. Don't say anything without a lawyer.
3. Within a reasonable time after your arrest, or booking, you have the right to make a local phone call: to a lawyer, bail bondsman, a relative or any other person. The police may not listen to the call to the lawyer.
4. Sometimes you can be released without bail, or have bail lowered. Have your lawyer ask the judge about this possibility. You must be taken before the judge on the next court day after arrest.
5. Do not make any decisions in your case until you have talked with a lawyer.
IN YOUR HOME
1. If the police knock and ask to enter your home, you don't have to admit them unless they have a warrant signed by a judge.
2. However, in some emergency situations (like when a person is screaming for help inside, or when the police are chasing someone) officers are allowed to enter and search your home without a warrant.
3. If you are arrested, the police can search you and the area close by. If you are in a building, "close by" usually means just the room you are in.
We all recognize the need for effective law enforcement, but we should also understand our own rights and responsibilities -- especially in our relationships with the police. Everyone, including minors, has the right to courteous and respectful police treatment.
If your rights are violated, don't try to deal with the situation at the scene. You can discuss the matter with an attorney afterwards, or file a complaint with the Internal Affairs or Civilian Complaint Board.
Produced by the American Civil Liberties Union.
July 23, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really good advice.
July 23, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll take door number four:
4. Do not interfere with, or obstruct the police -- you can be arrested for it.
4. Don't bad-mouth the police officer or run away, even if you believe what is happening is unreasonable. That could lead to your arrest.
(4)If your rights are violated, don't try to deal with the situation at the scene. You can discuss the matter with an attorney afterwards, or file a complaint with the Internal Affairs or Civilian Complaint Board.
And for a bonus prize: "Don't get into an argument with the police."
But that's just me (an idealist not unaware of realpoitik).
I agree that changes are needed, but did the response to Professor Gates' actions really exemplify profiling?
July 24, 2009 4:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
While I generally agree with you, let's not give short shrift to Dr. Gates' position. He had just flown back from China; probably tired (if not exhausted) and a little irritable. He's just coming off hip surgery, so probably in pain. He just found that he couldn't get into his own house via the front door, so a little frustrated too. Add those three things together and we have a man who is probably not inclined to be ambassadorial, let alone diplomatic.
All things considered, race probably wasn't foremost on Sgt Crowley's mind, but I suspect that it was lurking back there and it came to the fore when Dr. Gates proved to be less than inviting. So, again, I generally agree with your point.
My parents gave me good lessons on dealing with cops: Speak only when spoken to, always saying, "yes sir" and "no sir." Look them in the eye, give them any identification they require, and then sit and listen, taking note of their badge number and name pin if they have one. Stay calm.
July 23, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's pretty much my take on it, too. The details are sketchy at this point, but from what little I have read, I don't think either party handled this confrontation particularly well; neither seemed to make any attempt to step back and tone things down.
That said, like you, I am willing to cut Dr. Gates a good deal of slack, because I can well imagine from my own travel experiences that having just returned from a long overseas flight he was almost certainly already tired and irritable; finding his door jammed shut would only have increased his level of irritation, and having a policeman confront him at his door may well have just been the last straw.
The policeman should have handled it more professionally, should have made an effort ratchet things down, even though I'm sure he was irritated when Gates demanded his badge number and apparently was trying to report him to the police chief right on the spot. But he should have simply given the man his badge number -- writing it down if, as he claimed, Gates wasn't letting him get a word in edgewise -- and then left him alone, since it had been established that the guy was in his own house and that there was no illegal break-in.
Unless Gates threatened or physically accosted one of the police officers, he should never have been placed under arrest, however much he may have shouted at them.
July 23, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
This piece wasn't intended to criticize Dr. Gates, it's about survival. But the fact that Dr. Gates is who he is, it did provide for an excellent opportunity to show that even the most intelligent among us can place ourselves in jeopardy by not using our heads.
As for the Dr. Gates' mood after a long trip, I'm sure if instead of a police office he'd been confronted by a criminal he would have managed to pull himself together. In addition, one moment of civility might have prevented him having to endure public humiliation and four hours in jail. That sounds like a pretty good trade-off to me.
July 23, 2009 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have known many blacks who can seamlessly go from the "hood" demeanor ("Can I axe you a question") to that of "white" society ("Can I ask you a question").
It's a tragedy that many bright, articulate, college educated blacks -- many who have were brought up solidly middle class -- see a need for this.
I would also throw the whole "gangsta" imagery that many middle class whites aspire to into this discussion as well.
We really need to create one society and get rid of the notion of separatism. It will be the country's undoing if we do not.
July 23, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
African-American English is a legitimate dialect with its own perfectly well-defined variations on English grammar. The pronunciation 'aks' for 'ask' is the result of a very common phonological process known as 'metathesis'. It's absolutely fantastic that the people you're referring to feel at home in two different dialects.
The real shame is that most immigrant groups assimilate almost completely into Anglo-American culture within a few generations. It's our loss.
The only reason you see their use of African-American English as a tragedy is because you have been brought up in a racist society. Unfortunately, while affirmative action has helped those who are willing to master Anglo-American culture, it has done very little to legitimize African-American culture. Someone who says 'aks' in a job interview, regardless of skin tone, will have a hard time getting hired. This issue is a pretty good index of the intransigence of racism in our country.
July 23, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
A celebration of ignorance is not culture. You'd know that if you didn't have to reach for a "racism" meme to defend your point.
July 23, 2009 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't mean to imply that you're any more racist than the rest of us. But, for instance, it's quite likely if you're American that you say 'comfterble' instead of 'comfortable', or 'julary' instead of 'jewelry' - that doesn't make you ignorant, it just sounds correct to you because that's how your parents spoke...
I think this little issue of pronunciation generalizes to culture. More broadly, I agree that separatism is bad. One way to bridge the gap would be to include a unit on Ebonics in elementary school education...
July 23, 2009 10:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Incredible. It's like I'm reading the primer on "How to survive in a police state." I'm not anti-police...there's some great cops out there on the streets, and one attribute of greatness is that they would never end up in a situation like the events on Gates front porch. But a lot of cops are simply thugs, and they love to provoke.
I remember the Sausalito police, who were required to go through group therapy because of their record of abuse to visitors to the city. It was the business community that called for therapy, because they were losing business because the police were harassing their customers. The therapy worked - the Sausalito PD became paragons of virtue as well as an effective law enforcement agency.
July 23, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently the Cambridge police need to be instructed on how to politely respond with their name and badge number even if the citizen is irate.
July 23, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
What we all tend to forget is the police are not superhuman, they're simply people. They suffer from the very same shortcomings, insecurities, and prejudices as the rest of us - and we all have them.
I like to think of myself as free of prejudice, but the fact is, I have caught myself saying things in private that I would hate to have to defend in public. So I think that most of us, no matter how well intentioned, are a work in progress.
July 23, 2009 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think your advice on "how to protect yourself" is very good, Eric. As a matter of fact there was a school of psychology...I'm really digging in some old memories...something like "the pyschology of interaction" and I think Tim Leary's friend Richard Alpert was involved with this. At any rate, it was about "social scripts" that proscribe how we interact with each other, and the focus of the writing in this field was on confrontational encounters, such as interactions with law enforcement personnel. Within each script were a series of expectations that each party had about the behavior of the other. If you understand the script, and the expectation, you can easily take charge of the encounter and diffuse hostility.
I'll be you could get funding to start a training program in LA to teach people how to survive police encounters - right along the lines of your advice here. But that's my minor point of criticism - that it requires a lot of thought and guidance to arrive at the point where you realize, with confidence, that you can control police encounters. There's an incredible amount of power in that sort of control. Many people are simply not going to believe that there are social scripts behind the encounter. It seems so spontaneous and inevitable that the cop is going to say x and project his expectation that you are going to say z, and you say z.
July 23, 2009 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I commented on another post, the cop "has a badge and a gun" so listen to him respectfully. Get the badge#, the name, car# etc., but do not provoke him. He is a trained to be a bully and for some the training di not take.
Great post, Wattree. I really enjoy your vision of how things are. You're very level-headed.
One thing I think is odd in Gates' account. He felt he was in danger, yet he wanted to stay in his house? Poor judgment. In the yard is where witnesses can see the exchange. It is why we have a picture of him on hie porch from a neighbor. In the house, there are only the accounts of the officer and the suspect, if the suspect can in fact provide a voice. Sure, basic survival is NOT an unreasonable concern for Gates, but wanting to stay in his home shows poor judgment. In fact, the whole SNAFU is one great exercise in poor judgment by the officer and the profeesor.
July 23, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I must say I agree with neoboho comment above.
This post and the entire thread shows such deep-seated animosity between the people and the police, it's simply incredible to observe everyone calmly exchanging advice on how to survive a police encounter.
The fact that anyone would feel compelled to issue a primer on how to PROTECT YOURSELF while dealing with the government law enforcement service, that this public service would be accused of racial profiling against the citizens that fund it, - to me is just incredible.
July 23, 2009 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seconded, though I think the original post makes some very good points as well.
There are many societal issues that this situation (as well as this blog/thread) highlights on both sides of the issue, but the fact that we feel the need to protect ourselves from police encounters such as this is perhaps the most startling.
When did that start?
It seems to me that as I approach forty it has always been that way in America. Perhaps a little less confrontational in the 70s, but the police have always seemed to engender no small amount of fear in most citizens in my lifetime. Can someone on this blog remember a time when that wasn't so or is it more of a product of having grown up mostly in cities?
Interesting topic.
July 23, 2009 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been accosted for being in a building in a community where there aren't many African Americans. I was in the building legally, as part of an event being held there. But I was detained by building security nonetheless. (The building was a high school.)
I've been stopped by police three times in the last six years while lawfully operating my legally inspected car. No hits on the tags. No marks against my license. Registration and insurance in order. In every single case, I was driving in a middle- or upper-class White neighborhood. (The cars I was driving were a Jeep Grand Cherokee and an Audi A6, both in good condition.)
I've been arrested one time in my life. I was told that I matched the description of someone who stole a sign at the entryway of a park in Waukegan, IL. The year was 1990. I was 16 at the time. The sign was made of interlocking logs with the letters carved into them, and weighed about 300 pounds (or 80 more than I did at the time), according to the detective who interviewed me. And physically, I resembled Arnold Drummond more than Arnold Schwarzenegger. (I was questioned for 45 minutes, then let go when some bright light in the Waukegan PD figured I wasn't the guy.)
It should be noted that I have no criminal record. I usually wear oxford or french cuff shirts, slacks and dress shoes (or jeans and polos on weekends). Short hair, groomed facial hair.
I tend to speak very precisely, and without slang, as it's what my mother taught me to do. I've never consumed alcohol or recreational drugs.
And no, I've never been aggressive with a police officer. Doesn't seem logical or helpful to me, though I could understand Gates being angry enough to perhaps be highly undecorous.
In other words, there's no characteristic about me that would necessarily precipitate a run-in with the police.
Well, except for one, that is.
Far from being "incredible", the advice given in this post and comments section is indispensable to any citizen in this country - doubly so if you're not White.
July 23, 2009 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jason,
This has always been the case. In fact, the police are much less brutal today than they use to be. They use to beat confessions out of suspects.
July 23, 2009 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a wise post and most of the victims of police harrassment should follow your advice because of the far more dangerous possibilities they might be subject to.
However, in the case of Dr. Gates I think his protestations were not only his right, but that he was right to do what he did. IMHO if he were screaming and yelling and foaming at the mouth he would have had every right to do so. It was his house for the love of God! He has a right to be left alone and he was insisting upon it like a good citizen ought to and should.
As you can see by watching tv and reading even on this site, there are plenty of whites who obviously and clearly don't get it when it comes to why Gates was angry. By being angry and acting as though he actually possesses the rights we are all supposed to have, Prof. Gates has done us all a favor because now everyone has to become aware (at least temporarily) of the issue of how African Americna citizens are treated in this country on a daily basis. Gates has had to put up with this kind of crap for 58 years because that is how long he has been alive and in America. When it happens in your own house, that should be the last straw and it was for Gates. Good!
Again, I agree that your advice works best for most people, but I'm glad Gates did as he did and I salure him for it. I would have done exactly the same if not more under such circumstances if I were him.
July 23, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
My son, who is a 19 year-old Latino, and his twin brother were talking in a parking lot of a shopping mall after their first day in our local community college. (They drove separate cars) and had stopped to chat.) One had on a hooded sweatshirt (evidently a potential crime) and the other still had his long hair from his high-school football days. As they were standing, leaning on one car, and chatting, they noticed a policewoman looking at them. They continued to talk. She swung her car around and from inside her cruiser, asked them for ID.
Since when do you need an ID to stand in a parking lot? My one son, (the big FB player, and somewhat of a hot-head) asked her in his most charming voice if there was a particular problem. She said no, took their ID's and "ran them" from an instrument in her car. They said that they felt like she was reassured when they spoke, since they are clearly American and educated, but she ran their id's, handed them back, smiling, and wished them a good day.
The other son just told me this story today when we were discussing the Gates issue. He said he had been afraid at the time that his brother would get mad and make things fall apart, and he was glad that he didn't. I was surprised to hear that this has happened to them several times on the downtown pedestrian mall in Charlottesville.
I'm sure it is even worse for black men, but I really wonder why any pedestrian should ever have to show a driver's license unless the police are specifically looking for a criminal who has the same description.
This whole thing just highlights how far we still have to go; the fact that Obama is in the white house, while a step in the right direction, has just given the true bigots something to organize themselves around.
I told my son to just cooperate because it isn't worth it to buck the system; I guess that is the point of your blog as well, but it is hard to accept that this is still happening.
July 23, 2009 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm glad that Rosa Parks didn't think that way.
Duck and cover is the safe plan, but it also helps the status quo.
If there were no "No Loittering" signs to be found, the policewoman was out of line. An easy thing to do is to write the mayor and the local newspaper -- if there was a specific badge/name all the better. Make the police respond to this type of action. In public.
July 23, 2009 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Believe me, when there is a fight to be fought I will stand with them. But this particular situation simply isn't worth it in my opinion. If I had been with them, I would have questioned the cop, but sometimes it really isn't worth it. This wasn't a Rosa Parks moment, as far as I'm concerned.
I agree with you, though about getting the police to explain generically why they ID pedestrians, and how they choose which ones to ID.
July 23, 2009 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
My point is that there are other ways of fighting rather than direct confrontation -- hence my suggestion about shining a public spotlight on the incident to the community.
July 23, 2009 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't quite see this as a case of racial profiling, which is commonly understood to mean the use by police and others of race to raise an inference that a person is more likely guilty of criminal behavior than others, in the same universe of potential suspects, who are white.
The police received a call that two black men might be breaking into the house. So they came looking for black men. There was no profiling, unless you want to assume that the caller would not have made the call if the guys trying to open the door had been white. But, again, that would not be the police engaging in racial profiling, and I hope nobody thinks that the police should have cross-examined the caller to suss out a possible racist motive behind the call.
July 23, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't quite see this as a case of racial profiling, which is commonly understood to mean the use by police and others of race to raise an inference that a person is more likely guilty of criminal behavior than others, in the same universe of potential suspects, who are white.
The police received a call that two black men might be breaking into the house. So they came looking for black men. There was no profiling, unless you want to assume that the caller would not have made the call if the guys trying to open the door had been white. But, again, that would not be the police engaging in racial profiling, and I hope nobody thinks that the police should have cross-examined the caller to suss out a possible racist motive behind the call.
The arrest was certainly bullshit, but that's a different issue
July 23, 2009 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is heartbreaking to need a thread like this in America.
July 23, 2009 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
How to Protect Yourself When You Suspect Racial Profiling?
Video.
+
Youtube.
July 23, 2009 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent advice in how to survive an ignorant thuggish cop. Being a long haired, shaggy bearded hippie I've used these methods at times. Sometimes they are necessary. But I have a different view. Civil rights, use them or lose them.
I start every encounter expecting to be treated with respect. I will then return respect. But I've had enough negative experiences that I have a chip on my shoulder and at the first sign of disrespect I will push back as hard as I think I can get away with. Cops want submissive behavior. I don't give it to them. I'm a free citizen and am not required to treat anyone as my superior.
I'm a white hippie. I rarely drink alcohol or do illegal drugs. By rarely I mean less then once every few years. My car is always legal. So the risk is minimal. I feel its a public service. Cops need to learn how to treat people with respect and not bully them. I attempt to teach them that lesson.
I almost always argue with cops, almost always make smart mouth sarcastic insulting comments, almost always disobey some of their orders, sometimes curse at them. Its a good learning experience for them. When they learn to treat people with respect when they stop them I'll be willing to treat them with respect as well. Not deference, not submission, just simple respect.
July 23, 2009 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right. You do have a chip on your shoulder. :-)
July 24, 2009 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I already said I did. It was put there by thugs who masquerade as law enforcers. As far as I'm concerned people who don't just haven't been paying enough attention as we spiral down into a police state. I don't expect any here to support me, that doesn't bother me one bit.
July 24, 2009 12:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I support you, oceankat, and since I believe we already live in something of a police state, you don't have to argue very hard to convince me about that.
However, I personally don't feel I can take the physical risks you are willing to take for yourself. I know what my limitations are, as I recently came face-to-face with some jacked-up, hyper-aggressive (and possibly illiterate) cops who were several times larger and stronger than me. I saw immediately how the situation could escalate, and my instinct was to stand my ground to the best of my ability and protest calmly. If I'd tried to match or surpass the cops' aggression, I would have gotten hurt, and risking physical harm was not worth it.
Because I am concerned (and angry) about the ever-encroaching police state (what do you think I'm ready to blow a gasket about?), I choose to work for civil rights issues—not just mine—using different methods and on different fronts. Your way might be fine for white male hippies, but it's not fine for everyone, especially if they are confronting the cops all alone, as Gates did.
I was teasing you about the chip, btw, but maybe you paid a painful price to earn it. If so, sorry about that.
July 24, 2009 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow surprising. I thought if anyone replied it would be to condemn such an extreme position. I do feel we are losing many of our rights. With time, place, and manner restrictions and the creation of "free speech zones" the right to free assembly is if not gone virtually meaningless. My experience and reading and watching videos of others experiences convinces me that law enforcement is getting more oppressive year by year.
I think we need more peaceful confrontational action but there just aren't enough who agree with me to make a difference. I don't condemn any one for that, people have to make the choices that seem best for them. I don't look for trouble and I try to take sensible risks, but I won't submit easily.
July 24, 2009 2:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oceankat,
I know exactly what you're saying, but there are other ways to challenge abuse of authority, and on the street is not the place to do it. And beyond that, it greatly strengthens your case when you carry yourself well.
If Dr. Gates would have carried himself with dignity, than lodged a complaint after the incident, he would have not only been in a much stronger position, but he could have avoided a public humiliation.
In addition, the thoughtless way in which Dr. Gates handled this situation is surely going to diminished him in the eyes of many people. The poor judgment that he demonstrated in this matter reflects badly on his judgment as a scholar.
July 24, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric, you might be interested in this truthout article called Sometimes Even When You're Right, You're Wrong by Dr. Wilmer J. Leon III. I think it very much echoes your post. You both present a calm, steady argument. Too bad you and Dr. Leon are not cops!
July 24, 2009 12:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm posting this here because you became upset that I lumped you in with Lou Dobbs and pat Buchanan. To be honest from your posts, I could not tell the difference between you and a Conservative blogger. I posted a response, but the previous post is no longer up at TPM:
I was once said to be channeling Cheney when I said that the constitution was a set of suggestions> My point was that the Taney court's rulings ushered in Jim crow because discrimination was illegal only if practiced by the government. The Japanese prison camps were upheld by the Supreme Curt in 1944, thus made Constitutional. The halting of the Florida recount, ushering in the election of GW Bush, was Constitutional, certified 5-4 by the Supreme Court.
But my wording was attacked as supporting GW Bush.
Of course, I a not channeling Cheney. But that was the accusation.
Your stance on the Gates issue does sound like positions that would be taken by Dobbs or Buchanan. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
July 24, 2009 12:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm. It sounds to me like there were misunderstandings arising from insufficient information in both cases (both the Cheney and the Buchanan cases). Therefore, I think the cases cancel each other out, and should be dismissed due to bogus charges. Does that sound agreeable? :-)
July 24, 2009 1:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great
July 24, 2009 7:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Readytoblowagasket,
I want to thank you for bringing this article to my attention. It seems that we're a little more than simply on the same page - it almost seems that we're of one mind. I've e-mailed the Harvard professor who wrote it.
Thanks again.
July 24, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great thread and helpful advice. I am what would normally pass as a suburban white guy who grew up in the south. From time to time in HS I engaged in drinking activities which one would describe as unlawful, Many times these parties were broken up, if someone was acting unruly then of course the police acted but many times they made us poor out our beer and go home (they made sure everyone was alright to drive). I remember when I was even younger and the city I lived in decided to have a curfew for kids under 17 and the local cops would find us up past curfew playing basketball or some other activity. They would not bring us in, they would not cite us for curfew, they would tell us to go home and often they would call our parents to let them know of the incident. This is protecting and serving. I think one of our problems is simply a lack of cohesiveness between the community and its government and city officers. I realize in a big city it may be hard ask for this sort of inclusiveness between the police and the public, but this is what I believe it means to 'form a more perfect union'.
July 24, 2009 12:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I once asked a a co-worker who told me that he couldn't get promoted due to racism, is it possible that it's not racism, but the fact that they just don't like you? It seems that we rarely consider that possibility.
My late wife used to say to me that it's amazing to her how I can get stopped for the most blatantly stupid violations, yet, never get a ticket. I told her it's simple, you just have to acknowledge what you've done, and know how to talk the police - and I'm as Black as they come.
I even went to traffic court once and told the judge that I didn't think I was speeding, but I was sure that the officer would lie about the reading on his radar. Then policeman testified that the radar might have been in error. It wasn't always accurate during testing.
So in many cases it's not so much about race, but the ability to communicate, one human being to another.
July 25, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Make that, "would not lie."
July 26, 2009 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
What happens if the citizens asked for the officers badge number and the officer doesn't cooperate?
The citizen is suppose to cooperate with the officer in providing identification, no?
State laws, at least Massachusetts, requires the officer to produce identification if they are asked just like the citizen.
I think this where this situation devolved into what we have now.
July 24, 2009 7:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Late for comments, but I still agree with Wattree I think 100%. Someone mentioned Rosa Parks, but Ms. Parks had worked with the ACLU for a long time, and knew that they were ready to tackle this kind of case in court. With someone who was presentable. The ACLU refused a similar case from a young woman who was pregnant out-of-wedlock. It would have distracted from the clarity of the case, and the ACLU wanted a slam dunk.
July 26, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Crap, NAACP, not ACLU, Thurgood Marshall.
July 26, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink