Pros And Cons Of Driving While Black

However, the events of the last few weeks paint a different story. In our society, it is common practice to profile, stop and frisk drivers and randomly (Epp & Maynard-Moody, 2013). For the good of the country, there is a greater opportunity to find guns, stolen merchandise, drugs, etc. when these stops occur. This appears to be great because everyone wants to themselves and their loved ones to be safe. Consequently, in the wage against drugs, racial minorities are stopped all over the country more than whites. For investigatory stops, people are normally stopped because of how they drive and if they are black. A “black man, who is age twenty-five or younger, has a 28 percent chance of being stopped for an investigatory reason over the course of a year; a similar young white man has a 12.5 percent chance, and a similar young white woman has only a 7 percent chance” (Epp and Maynard-Moody, 2013). The focus is on younger African-American males; because they are three to five times more subject to investigatory

The article “Driving While Black” discusses the ongoing problem of blacks and minorities being stopped on the road for no reason besides that they’re black. In the text it states that “On I-95 if you’re black and driving a nice car, you fit a so-called “drug courier profile”. The color of a person’s skin should under no circumstances be a cause for suspicion if someone is driving a nice car. They should have to be doing something wrong or have past legal issues. Police officers need a valid reason to pull someone over, white or black, and a reason that they can defend. New stop-and-frisk policies encourage officers to make random stops on frisk people that they deem suspicious even with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. Police

The judicial system in America has always endured much skepticism as to whether or not there is racial profiling amongst arrests. The stop and frisk policy of the NYPD has caused much controversy and publicity since being applied because of the clear racial disparity in stops. Now the question remains; Are cops being racially biased when choosing whom to stop or are they just targeting “high crime” neighborhoods, thus choosing minorities by default? This paper will examine the history behind stop and frisk policies. Along with referenced facts about the Stop and Frisk Policy, this paper will include and discuss methods and findings of my own personal field research.

This reason of “driving while black” is a prime example of an invalid reason of probable cause. “Driving while black”, is an unjustified reason towards African American to be confronted by police officers. Why is it that because the man is Black he has to be committing a crime? Is it hard to believe that a group of black males may be on their way to a job interview, a men’s conference out of town, a family affair, or just going to have a good time? “Studies have proven that when police officers present a warrant, due to their idea of probable cause, they are 80% more likely to discover evidence, whereas without a warrant and just following their judgments, the rate is decreased to 12%” (Minzer 913-62). As long as they have valid licenses, tags, and car insurance and are not committing a moving violation, African Americans should not be observed more closely

In an analysis on racial profiling, criminologist Shaun Gabbidon discusses the racist practices of the Maryland State Police and how the department was able to reduce profiling by changing its policies. He explains, “The policy targeted Black drivers who were felt to provide ‘the biggest bang for their buck’. As a result of the suit, in 1993, the Maryland State Police was required to track its traffic stops” (Gabbidon). This requirement produced shocking data which revealed that officers could determine the race of drivers just by their vehicles or driving patterns and that officers refrained from pulling over many white traffic law violators who should have been stopped. For instance, it is possible for police officers to distinguish what neighborhood a driver is from based on the parking permit stickers affixed to their cars. If someone is from a predominantly minority neighborhood, then it is clearly more likely that they belong to a minority race. Additionally, in regards to driving patterns, they found that it is more likely for a Black person to not wear their seatbelt than a White person and it is more likely for a White person to speed than a Black person. As a result, to pull over more Black drivers, there may be greater emphasis put on pulling over drivers who are not

A study done by the University of Kanas shows that African Americans are 3 times more often than whites to be pulled over by a police officer. It was also found that that black males have a 28% chance of being pulled over which is 15% higher than white males. There’s a phrase called “Driving while black” which means that just because of your skin color you can be stopped by a police officer for no reason at all. Racial profiling which means to” use of race or ethnicity as for having a reason to suspect someone of having committed an offense”. And it is one of the biggest issues recently to come into light. With the murders of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown social media has brought the issue of racial profiling and police brutality to an

Driving while black, stop and frisk, racially motivated shootings. These phrases epitomize a practice that has become all too common place in today’s society. President George W. Bush summarized it best when he was quoted during his first address to Congress. "Too many of our citizens have cause to doubt our nation 's justice," he said, "when the law points a finger of suspicion at groups instead of individuals." Though highly controversial and viewed by most as unjust, racial profiling in the U.S. remains a harsh reality that has resulted in an excessive share of minorities being questioned by law enforcement, a disproportionate arrest rate, and unequal treatment of African Americans.

In relation to the debate of ‘racial profiling,’ Taylor and Whitney define racial profiling as “the practice of questioning blacks in disproportionate numbers in expectation that they are more likely than people of other races to be criminals” (Taylor & Whitney, 2002). Statistics show that African-Americans and Hispanics commit more crime than Caucasians, with 90% of the 1.7 million interracial crimes stemming from the hands of African-American men. Even looking at these numbers, does that make it okay for the police to arrest and interrogate these racial minorities at such a high frequency? Where are these statistics coming from? How accurate are they? Does the media provide a skewed analysis of these findings? These are the types of questions that need to be addressed in regard to evaluating the validity of racial profiling.

Law enforcement officials often confront situations where it’s an almost certainty that illegal activities are taking place despite not having sufficient resources to investigate every possible perpetrator. Research on race and vehicle stops by police show that African American drivers are disproportionately stopped in traffic by police for driving violations (Kowalski & Lundman, 2007). The reason is because law enforcement officials use characterizations or

"Driving while black", abbreviated as DWB, is a phrase in American English that refers to the racial profiling of African American drivers. The phrase implies that a motorist might be pulled over by a police officer, questioned, and searched, simply because of a racial bias.Racism and Racial profiling is everywhere in homes, Religion, and even states like Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Illinois. Imagine you 're an African American male or female driving down a street minding your own business then suddenly you 're stopped for the car you 're driving and or the color of your skin.Racial profiling — as well as profiling based on religion, ethnicity and national origin — continues to plague our nation despite the

Racial profiling is an example of police brutality, which is defined by Gross and Livingston (2002) as “the practice of some officers of stopping motorists of certain racial or ethnic groups because the officer believe that these groups are more likely than others to commit certain types of crimes” (p.1413). Therefore, individuals are treated unfairly by law enforcement solely based on their race. This type of mistreatment is unmerited and ultimately a violation of an individual’s rights. However, in many instances the courts do not find it a violation of their civil rights based on the fact that racial profiling is difficult to prove. Often, prosecutors are disinclined in bringing forth a case against officers on this particular matter. Officers are permitted to stop and search individuals and their vehicles whenever there is reasonable suspicion, however, there has been studies that prove that some law enforcement officers restrict these rights primarily to minority groups. Bowling and Phillips found that although there was no formal monitoring of use of these powers, it was concluded that it was particularly heavy use of these powers against ethnic minorities, largely of young black people (as cited in Sharp & Atherton, 2007, p. 747) . In several cases, officers argue that they reasonably pulled an individual over for other probable grounds such as: traffic violations, suspicious behavior, etc., with race never being an

Evidence of the disproportionate percentage of minorities incarcerated is readily available. According to Katheryn Russell, author of Color of Crime, blacks make up 12% of the overall U.S. population. Yet they represent 30% of arrests and 50% of those incarcerated (28-29). The most amazing statistic comes from Marvin Free, Jr. whose research found that African Americans living in cities with a population of 250,000 or more have a 51% chance of being arrested (African Americans..., 8). Russell listed many of the ridiculous reasons minorities have been pulled over by police officers: 1) Driving a luxury car, 2) driving with a white woman, 3) driving in a white neighborhood, 4) driving late at night and several others. The reasoning behind many traffic stops of blacks were so ludicrous that Russell believed a new charge should be established: DWB or "Driving While Black" (Color...,33).

In New York City’s police department report in December 1999, the stop and frisk practices showed to be greatly based on race. In NYC, blacks make up 25.6% of the city’s population, Hispanics 23.7% and whites are 43.4% of NYC population. However, according to the report, 50.6% of all persons stopped were black, 33% were Hispanic, and only 12.9% were white. As you can see, more than half of the individuals who were stopped were black, 62.7% to be exact (ACLU, 2013). In Orange County, California Latinos, Asians and African Americans were more than 90% of the 20,221 men and women in the Gang Reporting Evaluation and Tracking System (ACLU, 2013). Clearly this database record shows racial profiling occurred when the total population in the database made up less than half of Orange County’s population. This is when the California Advisory Committee of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and the ACLU stepped in. One other instance of racial profiling I’d like to discuss occurred in Maricopa County, Arizona. A court ruled in May 2013 that “sheriff Joe Arpaio’s routine handling of people of Latino descent amounted to racial and ethnic profiling”; according to CNN, the sheriff’s office had a history of targeting vehicles with those having darker skin, examining them more strictly and taking them into custody more often than others (CNN, 2014). Judge Murray Snow ordered a monitor to oversee retraining in this

For as long as I can remember, there have always been numerous instances of civil injustices being committed against African American drivers stemming all the way back to the Rodney King Incident in 1991 to as recently as 2015 when a woman was wrongfully arrested in Texas for driving while black. Many people would argue that it is the war on drugs that has caused law enforcement to continually abuse their power, but in actuality the war on drugs is not even specifically targeting narcotics anymore, the government has shifted its interest in violating people and their constitutional rights, with African Americans and Latinos being the most affected by this. It has even shifted the ways that police look for potential criminals on our highways and in our communities, as they are now profiling people due to the color of the skin. This is why the phrase “driving while black” draws parallels to the term “driving while intoxicated” because this is a practice that has become very common by our law enforcement officials. “As we use the term, ‘racial profiling’ occurs when a law enforcement officer questions, stops, arrests, searches, or otherwise investigates a person because the officer believes that members of that person 's racial or ethnic group are more likely than the population at large to commit the sort of crime the officer is investigating. ' The essence of racial profiling is a judgment that the targeted group - before September 11, 2001, usually African Americans or

Yet when discussing race, its history, and present state, most misconceptions as seen above are accepted without question. These myths have been developed over a century of time and have become imbedded in our minds. When we think of racial profiling, we generally think of a person of color, perhaps a Black or Latino man or woman, in a car who gets stopped by police based on skin color. Often, a minor traffic infraction, like failing to signal when changing lanes, provides the legal rationale for such stops, when in reality the stops are motivated by race.