Conversation in Davis Pushes toward Defunding Police; Mayor Pushes Back, However, Arguing the Problem Is Far Broader

For two hours the council listened on Tuesday night as the public weighed in on police funding—many of the public urging for major cuts to the police department, and some calling for outright defunding.  In the end, the council supported more modest measures and passed the budget as proposed.

Councilmember Dan Carson did note that the adopted budget included $1 million in police department reductions.  The motion passed would take a look at current operations, to look beyond the police department as to how they can deliver services to the people of Davis.

“There was consensus last night that we would look at the broad range of issues that we would address in the strategic plan for the police department,” Carson told the Vanguard on Wednesday.  He noted that for the most part the tone of the conversation has been “respectful” and “reasonably voiced” about a wide range of ideas for reform.

Mayor Brett Lee, however, believes that the problem is not the police, it is society and that we need to address the broader implications of race and poverty rather than focusing on defunding the police.

“The complaint is because the police behave in a way that is representative of society,” the mayor told the Vanguard.

The Vanguard spoke with four of the council members on Wednesday, following the meeting.  The council members are willing to look at changes, but none seem clear on what defunding would mean and most would be willing to look at focused and specific changes if they make sense.

The four most recent emails received by the city reflect the nature of the public’s ask.

Liliana Valladares expressed concern about the Davis Police share of the general fund at $34.9 million “taking away desperately needed resources from essential city programs and services.”

She argued, “The investment in policing has not made us safer, especially for Black Indigenous, People of Color, and LGBTQ+ community — Davis PD remains an embarrassment to the city and a lethal threat to Davis’ Black and Brown communities, while increased police spending shows no correlation to decreasing crime levels over the past 20 years. It is clear that we must defund the police.”

Micah Lee added, “It is inappropriate and dangerous for Davis Police to be have any responsibilities related to homelessness, mental health, or public schools. The city’s limited resources should be used to actually solve our problems instead of making our community less safe and more vulnerable to violence and racial profiling.”

Cristina Puente, a student at UC Davis added, “Continued and excessive police funding leaves Black communities in Davis vulnerable and no safer than before.”  She added, “In a time that police brutality and militarization disproportionately harm Black Americans, the City must address and incorporate the needs of our marginalized communities.”

The council, however, while taking a serious look at this issue, is not jumping into any sort of major change at this point.

Mayor Pro Tem Gloria Partida told the Vanguard, “I don’t like the title of defunding the police because it creates an expectation for people.”  She said, “There is a large spectrum of what people want under that.”

Some people want the police department completely abolished while others simply want cities to invest in other departments “that would interrupt the need for people to get to the point where the police need to step in.”

One big common thread is the need for social workers and mental officials.

“I absolutely think we need more social workers to be on board when there are mental health crises,” Partida said.

Councilmember Will Arnold noted that whatever they determine is the best way to provide public safety, “it must be the result of a community-driven process.”

Councilmember Arnold continued, “There is no question more funding to combat homelessness, for mental health services, drug rehabilitation, and others that have been suggested I support wholeheartedly.”

He noted, “These are all things by the way that have been massively defunded over the decades by the federal and state governments. And it’s clear that many—if not all of them—have a positive effect in reducing crime.”

The councilmember added that “it’s also fair I think to say that there are responsibilities we require of our police that are not a natural fit or couldn’t benefit from reimagining.”

Dan Carson said that the main social services provided by the city are programs to help the homeless from the Respite Center to Ryan Collins, who works with the police on homeless outreach and coordination.  They also have the need to create a permanent overnight shelter.

With specific regard to policing, Carson is open to looking at various ideas.

He said there “have been a wide variety of ideas coming forward to us about how we reform our system of policing.”

“Every email I see defines what they mean by defund the police differently,” Carson said.  “I don’t know honestly what that term means.”

Dan Carson said we should look at the ideas coming forward with “a wide lens” and “err on the side of including people’s ideas” and then narrow in on the ones “that make sense for Davis.”

A number of people expressed concerns that the actions taken by the council on Tuesday did not go far enough.

“We’re working hard and earnestly to address the concerns in the best way that looks out for the best interest of the city,” Carson said in response.

But Mayor Brett Lee went a lot further in pushing back on this conversation.

Mayor Lee noted that the Ban the 8 push doesn’t really fit Davis.  In fact, as the Vanguard reported a few weeks ago, the city police have already done that, completing the last of those steps when it banned carotid control holds a few weeks back following the governor’s announcement.

“For some communities (Ban the 8) is going to be a heavy lift,” he said.  “For Davis it’s done.”

“Defunding the police, the fact that someone cuts and pastes this slogan and it applies nationwide,” he said.  “I think there needs to be a little more nuance.”

He said pointedly, “The reason we’re here is not because of the police.”

Instead, he believes the problem is “because people are racist.”  He said, “That’s not confined to the police department, but America.”

He believes, instead of focusing on defunding the police and putting that money toward social services, “let’s put money toward social services.”

He called “ridiculous” the idea that the police should be blamed for all of the social ills of society.

“The police are a reflection of our society,” he said, noting the rising prevalence of white supremacy groups.  “Putting it on the shoulders of the police is ridiculous.”

The problem he sees is “we don’t put that lens back on ourselves.”

For example, he cited when the city proposed a respite center for the homeless which would provide flush toilets, a shower, and a place to do laundry.

“All the people come out of the woodwork and say, how dare you put that in my neighborhood,” he said.  Then you have people “in public comment unabashedly calling people who are less fortunate sleeping by the tracks, just with a broad brushstroke, call them what they are.”

He said, “Somehow we let that slide.”  And yet, “I guarantee you if I walked down the street with a confederate flag, people would be in my face up in arms.  But somehow when we dehumanize people who are struggling… for whatever reason… the (people) in our community get a free pass.”

He said, “This whole incredibly selfish behavior.”

He said, “UC Davis, the students, the pestilence.  Never mind that in our region probably the biggest agent of social change is UC Davis.”  He said, “40 percent of the students there are from first time college families.”  And “we have people in our community, comfortably calling students a pestilence.  That’s not the police.  Why aren’t those people called out?”

Pacifico, he said.  “We have people calling this a ghetto.”  He said, “That has nothing to do with the police.  But that viewpoint allows the police to be the way they are.  Because they are the protector of the rich and privileged in many cases.

“They have no choice,” he said.  “That’s what they get pressured to do.”

He noted the resources go to crime in the rich white neighborhoods of the suburbs, not the poor neighborhoods of the cities.

“They’re a reflection of society and the political process,” he said.

—David M. Greenwald reporting


Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$USD
Sign up for

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

116 Comments

  1. Ron Glick

    “’The complaint is because the police behave in a way that is representative of society,’ the mayor told the Vanguard.”

    As the elected representative of the city, the mayor, who has defended the police on everything from the MRAP to not releasing the Picnic Day investigation to the public needs to look in the mirror.

  2. Jeff Boone

    Mayor Brett Lee, however, believes that the problem is not the police, it is society and that we need to address the broader implications of race and poverty rather than focusing on defunding the police.

    “The complaint is because the police behave in a way that is representative of society,” the mayor told the Vanguard.

    He is exactly right and brave for saying so as speaking the truth today can get you canceled by the radical leftist Twitter mob.

    I was just thinking about this idea for reparations as a way to put this damn ongoing political-media driven racial conflict to bed.  I would pay to make it stop.  But there would need to be a contract.  BLM is defunded and made to go away.. and so are any other entities that have any mission that is defined by race.  Leftists can no longer label their political opposition as racist without clear evidence or they would be guilty of a hate crime.  Using the word “black” or “white” as a human label would result in an immediate $100 fine with 50% payable to Catholic Church and 50% donated to Greenpeace.  And we would need to also ban the use of hyphens in describing Americans.  You are either American, or you are non-citizen.

    But the problem I have is that people today had no responsibility for slavery.  In fact, most of the population of the US is made up of those from ancestors in opposition to slavery or immigrants from other countries that had no ancestors living in the US prior to abolition.  Certainly the population of people living in the US with past relatives that owned slaves is very small.

    So the blame game is a non-starter.

    The other problem is that the US has already paid and is still paying for the previous mistakes of some of its early citizens.  When you consider the aggregate costs of crime and all the social services controlled by race, the black demographic is significantly over-represented in those costs.  But then there is the benefit side of the ledger… all the positive contributions of the black race to the American condition.    And those are profound.

    I would like to see a full-blown financial analysis of the costs and benefits, with a proposal for any additional reparations.

    And while we are thinking about that… let’s consider that we just spent $3-$5 trillion including the virus relief and the cost of all the related looting.  Ironically those costs have been primarily promulgated by the side of politics most eager to exploit the black human condition for their political gain.  Might we have had a more thoughtful and targeted response to the virus while considering the impact of the most vulnerable communities?  Might we consider that now as those costs appear to be continuing.

    1. David Greenwald

      Is he also right on his overall view of how racist society is? In his critique of Davis elitism and anti-homeless sentiments? In his commentary on white supremacy and the need to call it out? Or are you simply focusing on a partial quote that you like and ignoring the rest?

    2. Ron Oertel

      And we would need to also ban the use of hyphens in describing Americans.

      How about those people who get married, and “incorporate” their spouse’s last name into their own?  (Why not just keep one’s original last name?)  Are those who make that choice “punishing” themselves via extra-long signatures, from that point forward?

      And, what would their kids’ last name be, then?  And, what if their kids then get married and do the same thing – thereby creating a 3- name behometh – with no less than two hyphens (for their last name, alone)?

      Someone has to put a stop to this.  😜

      1. Jeff Boone

        T. Roosevelt was big on doing away with the “hyphenated American”.  We should have listened to him.  But that would pretty much wipe out the entire modern Democrat political playbook.

    3. Richard McCann

      But the problem I have is that people today had no responsibility for slavery.  In fact, most of the population of the US is made up of those from ancestors in opposition to slavery or immigrants from other countries that had no ancestors living in the US prior to abolition.  Certainly the population of people living in the US with past relatives that owned slaves is very small.
      So the blame game is a non-starter.

      That statement is largely false. Having been working on my own family tree, I can see how we have ancestors that trace back to the early days of the Republic. One side of my family came from Ireland in the midst of the Potato Famine, the other during the early 20th century migration from eastern Europe. But there are other interlopers who came earlier as well. Plus they had various family associates through marriage that have earlier connections. And my wife was surprised to find out she had ancestors back to the 17th century in America.

      Further, most of the wealth of the South was built on slavery. (A few freeholders recognized that they were being undercut by slavery, which is why West Virginia was formed and Tennessee was a reluctant member of the Confederacy.) The merchants in the South also profited from slavery. Further the textile manufacturers in the North profited from slavery as well as the financiers who traded cotton and tobacco exports to Europe. Just drawing the line at slave owners is arbitrary and false.

      I have no idea why you’ve attributed the pandemic economic stimulus packages to address past racial bias. Those programs have been focused largely on propping up small businesses and large corporations along with intervention from the Fed to maintain financial markets. The goal has been to maintain consumer demand so investors don’t lose their valuations. Any other expenditures to address this issue have been pretty minor, probably on the order of a few billion dollars in total.

      As to reparations, I described earlier the easiest way to get at this. The median wealth per household for whites is $170,000 while it is $17,000 for blacks. If we institute a 1% net asset tax for 10 years, and then rebate that tax to households that identified as African-American in the 2010 Census, we would be able to move towards equating household wealth. That would probably be the single most effective economic policy.  https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/fiscal-fact/median-value-wealth-race-ff03112019

      1. Jeff Boone

        Nothing I wrote was largely false. But what you wrote was so narrow focused to be worthless.

        About 10% of black are recent immigrants.

        Second, what percentage of the US population today is from immigrants that arrived here after 1865?  Probably more than 50%.

        Your family tree might connect with slavers, but not mine.  My relative Andrew Jackson Meyers was a member of the Iowa 39th regimen and fought in the battles of Altoona and General Sherman’s march to the sea.  Other relatives were active in politics of the north at the time and were abolitionists.  My family tree connects with ancestors that had been enslaved by the Ottomans.  Maybe I deserve some money too!

        One idea is to create a trust fund for all blacks with ancestors that were slaves in America and fund it with a windfall-profit tax of all the big tech companies and other large corporations that got a big boost in business from the Coronavirus shutdown.  You could fund the trust fund to pay monthly reparations over a period of time.  It would be stupid to hand over large piles of cash to people that have no idea how to manage it.

    4. Alan Miller

      Using the word “black” or “white” as a human label would result in an immediate $100 fine with 50% payable to Catholic Church and 50% donated to Greenpeace.

      OK, that’s just weird, especially the Catholic Church part.  WTF?

      the black demographic is significantly over-represented in those costs.

      I think you just used “black” as a human label.  $50 to Greepeace; $50 to Catholic Church

  3. Keith Echols

    Did I just get called out by the Mayor?  lol.  What exactly am I getting called out for?  What do my feelings about students have to do with the Police?  His comments sounded like a lot complaining about the people of Davis.  That’s not great leadership.  I get that he wants to highlight the problems he wants to solve and what some of the forces that maybe working against solutions for those problems.  But he comes off as looking to blame people for the problems instead of leading with a solution that can be agreed upon.  He’s complaining that he can’t come up with a solution that meets with the approval of the people or that he can’t convince (as a good leader should) that his solution is for the best and get those people that opposed him to accept his solutions.

    I do not get the advesarial tones this discussion has taken with Davis PD.  Now, I don’t keep up with all of what Davis PD is up to so I could be wrong…but does Davis PD have any history of problems dealing with minorities and the homeless?  Where does this comment come from?

    She argued, “The investment in policing has not made us safer, especially for Black Indigenous, People of Color, and LGBTQ+ community — Davis PD remains an embarrassment to the city and a lethal threat to Davis’ Black and Brown communities

    Does Davis PD have a problem with minorities?  Again, I’m not aware of one but then I’m not paying attention to this kind of thing.

    I understand the homeless problem needs to be addressed better…but is that the police’s issue?  I don’t see or hear about them storming in and harrassing and causing problems for the homeless in Davis.  Does moving some funding (from the police or from somewhere) to social services make sense?  Certainly.  That sounds a less advasarial to the Police then “Defund the Police”….which is what the Mayor said before going off on his side tangent rant.

    1. David Greenwald

      I don’t think you realize how many people have called you out in the last few weeks or how many people you angered with the comment. Students called you out last week at the Planning Commission.

      1. Keith Echols

        Whatever….

        Can you bother to answer the important question I posted about Davis PD.   Is there an actual problem with Davis PD and people of color?  Like I said I’m not aware of any…but then I mostly have the privilege to not pay attention to it’s going on.  So I’d like to know if it’s an actual issue.

        Or you can focus on a comment that’s gotten the sensitive folks’ knickers in a bunch.

        1. David Greenwald

          To answer your question: Yes there is an actual problem with the Davis Police and people of color. Talk to students of color. Talk to long time residents who are Black or Latino, they will have stories about racial profiling, driving while black or brown, walking while black or brown. These perceptions are backed up complaints and traffic stop data.

        2. Keith Echols

          Thank you for the reply…this is the kind of info I was looking for.

          Are the issues within the last 10-15 years?  As you can (unfortunately) go into most towns in CA that aren’t right on on the urban coast and find systemic racial problems in the past.

          The only incident with students I know of was the pepper spray incident.  But that was UCD Campus police wasn’t it?  Campus police is a separate department from Davis PD isn’t it?

          I’m interested to hear about recent statistics and accounts involving Davis PD and racial and homeless issues (or any other significant issue).  In the very least I’ll be keeping an eye out on news concerning Davis PD.

          1. David Greenwald

            Yes – the issues are within the last 10 to 15 years. 14 years ago I actually started this site due to police issues. More recently complaints in 2017-18 led to the create of the Police Accountability Commission.

            Campus police are separate from DPD.

            The most recent police stop data I have is from like 2012 or so. I recently tried to get something, but DPD is not willing to release that data until they are mandated by the state to do so, which I think starts in 2021 per state legislation.

        3. Keith Olsen

          driving while black or brown, walking while black or brown

          I’m a white male and I’ve been stopped for doing both in Davis.

          But I must admit I’ve never been questioned for mowing a lawn while white.

           

        4. Keith Echols

          I look forward to the info when you get it.  keep up the reporting.

          sounds like some reform of the Davis PD and some shifts in approach and funding are warranted.

        5. Keith Olsen

          Are you intentionally trying to prove that you don’t get it?

          I’m just pointing out that as a white man I’ve been stopped several times in Davis while driving, ticketed too.  I was once walking a path in a park and I had two cops stop me and question me because they said I looked like a suspect.

          Sorry, but not everyone buys into your cops are bad spiel.

          I think the Davis cops are doing a great job.

          Maybe it’s you that doesn’t get it.

          1. David Greenwald

            “I’m just pointing out that as a white man I’ve been stopped several times in Davis while driving, ticketed too. ”

            But that’s not what we’re talking about. You’re not describing a pretext stop. You’re describing a moving violation.

          2. David Greenwald

            “I think the Davis cops are doing a great job.”

            You are a 60-something, white man.

          3. Don Shor

            I could count on less than two hands the number of times I’ve been pulled over in my life. The last time, the officers called me ‘sir’ and ‘Mr. Shor’ and actually apologized for the inconvenience. That’s sort of my working definition of white male privilege.

        6. Keith Olsen

          David, have you ever thought of using your blog to unite instead of divide?

          I think that would be a much greater service than continually tearing down law enforcement causing divide in communities.

           

        7. Ron Oertel

          You are a 60-something, white man.

          There appears to be some white men of that age (as well as younger, and older) who don’t necessarily think that way.

          Just as there are people with other skin colors and genders who probably think the police are doing a good job.

          You are not an “ambassador” of other people’s views (whether they’re “people of color”, or one of the “sub-groups” of that group, students, or any other group). 

          Ultimately, one can only speak for themselves. Now, if there’s a general pattern (e.g., among various groups), that’s certainly possible, and probable.

          How about letting individuals speak for themselves on here, or provide references to patterns.

        8. Keith Olsen

          You are not an “ambassador” of other people’s views (whether they’re “people of color”, or one of the “sub-groups” of that group, students, or any other group). 

          Good point Ron.  I’m a 60 something white man so David thinks I have no idea and my opinion doesn’t count.  So wouldn’t the same apply to David as a 40 something(?) white man?

          1. David Greenwald

            Yes the same thing applies to me. The last time I got pulled over by a cop, I was driving too fast on F St, the cop immediately recognized me, addressed me as Mr. Greenwald, asked why I was speeding, I was honest and he let me go with a warning. As Don said, white privilege at its finest.

        9. Ron Oertel

           So wouldn’t the same apply to David as a 40 something(?) white man?

          Or, woman.

          I suspect that the majority of people who weren’t happy with the Picnic Day incident are “white”, and include a broad age range. But, that doesn’t mean the majority of that population itself are dissatisfied.

          There’s all kinds of ways to “group” people (e.g., by age, skin color, gender, political orientation, etc.).

          There’s also other ways to group people (e.g., homeowners, renters, business owners), with views differing between those groups as well (regardless of skin color, to some degree).

          I don’t doubt that the “average” response will differ between groups.  And, I don’t doubt that African-Americans (as a group/average) would have a different view of interactions with police, than some other groups.

          There would also be differences between different “groups of color”.

          But, I am getting a little tired of David claiming that he can speak for others.

        10. Ron Oertel

          The last time I got pulled over by a cop, I was driving too fast on F St, the cop immediately recognized me, addressed me as Mr. Greenwald, asked why I was speeding, I was honest and he let me go with a warning.

          As Don said, white privilege at its finest.

          You cannot conclude that.  It may have been based upon his recognition of you, your “honesty”, or the reason you provided for “speeding”.

          I can tell you that this NEVER worked for me.  But, it helps to be getting older (and not speeding in the first place).

          Do you think that Gary May “may” have been provided with the same “privilege”? (Assuming that you think “privilege” was involved?) (If I was a cop, I’d be more inclined to let “him” go than you, based upon recognition.)

          Actually, I’m surprised the police didn’t ticket you, based partly upon recognition. 😉

          1. David Greenwald

            I have heard all sorts of stories over the years from wealthy and high ranking African Americans – UCD and DJUSD.

            Reminds me of my favorite Willie Brown story. He used to live in SF and commute to Sacramento and so somewhere on I-80 as he was driving his sports car in the early 70s he gets pulled over by the CHP. The office says, “Where did you get the car boy” and the word is he was so pissed, he slashed the entire budget for the CHP, in order to get it reinstated, the head of the CHP put his cops under orders not to pull over Willi’s vehicle.

        11. Ron Oertel

           “Where did you get the car boy” and the word is he was so pissed, he slashed the entire budget for the CHP, in order to get it reinstated, the head of the CHP put his cops under orders not to pull over Willi’s vehicle.

          I remember you relating that story.  There’s “two” wrongs, in there.

          I suspect that no CHP officer would ask a question in that manner, these days.

          Now that I think about it, there was a time that I was (surprisingly) let go without even a warning.  (Everyone, include me, knew I was “wrong” and wouldn’t be doing that again.  Involving a semi-dirt bike when I was young, which perhaps the cops could relate to.)  I was so appreciative at their response. They even kind of joked with me, about it. (That alone had some impact on my own views. It is a forever, and rather fond memory.)

          You’ve got to wonder if there’s any way that the cops in Atlanta could have just let that guy walk home, as he offered.  I’m not sure what they’d do about his car, though.

          1. David Greenwald

            “ I suspect that no CHP officer would ask a question in that manner, these days.”

            Oh they do… And worse. Google YouTube videos and you can see it.

          2. David Greenwald

            Also look at the SF text scandal, Ferguson email scandal, and there are videos there of cops using racist language in traffic stops. This stuff is still happening.

        12. Keith Olsen

          Yes the same thing applies to me. The last time I got pulled over by a cop, I was driving too fast on F St, the cop immediately recognized me, addressed me as Mr. Greenwald, asked why I was speeding, I was honest and he let me go with a warning. As Don said, white privilege at its finest.

          Are you saying the same thing never happens for people of color?  You don’t know.  But on that note as a 60 something year old white man every time I’ve been pulled over I’ve been ticketed, so there goes that theory.  In fact I once even got a seat belt ticket in downtown Davis for no seat belt.

          1. David Greenwald

            An African American UC Davis professor got pulled over 47 times and received no tickets. He finally left town.

        13. Keith Olsen

          You’ve got to wonder if there’s any way that the cops in Atlanta could have just let that guy walk home, as he offered.  I’m not sure what they’d do about his car, though.

          Part of the problem Ron is if they let the guy go and he managed to get another car and drive it and hurt someone the cops would be in big trouble for letting a DUI go.

           

        14. Ron Oertel

          Oh they do… And worse. Google YouTube videos and you can see it.

          I’ll take your word for it, but it does surprise me (in California, at least).

          I end up getting kind of depressed when I look at this type of stuff.  The riots, too.

        15. Ron Oertel

          Part of the problem Ron is if they let the guy go and he managed to get another car and drive it and hurt someone the cops would be in big trouble for letting a DUI go.

          That’s probably true, in regard to the possible scenarios.

          And presumably, he was “drunk driving” to end up there in the first place. Which was a risk to others’ lives.

          My understanding is that police are trained to respond with a force greater than what’s presented to them.  They’re not in it to get into a “fair fight”. And if the gun comes out, they’re shooting to kill.

          Maybe they should have just let that guy go for the moment, though.  They already knew who he was.

          It was almost a surreal scene, to see that unfold. Especially since he was so polite and respectful, at the beginning.

          1. David Greenwald

            Several police chiefs and police experts said that they should have done precisely that – let him go, and cite him later. The chance of him getting another car was minuscule.

        16. Keith Olsen

          The chance of him getting another car was minuscule.

          But if he did and being it’s on record that he had been stopped and breathalyzed for a DUI any subsequent accident the city would be liable.

          1. David Greenwald

            As opposed to now that he’s dead and the cop is fired, on trial for murder, and the city will get sued and paid out millions – is this really your argument? The alternative of letting him go is considered best practice in this case.

        17. Ron Oertel

          The alternative of letting him go is considered best practice in this case.

          The “timing” of letting him go is probably key.  (That is, after he made a break for it, the cops could have let him go rather than employ deadly force.)

          1. David Greenwald

            There are several good articles where they interview police experts and chiefs that go over the options the cops had. Worth reading if you are interested.

        18. Alan Miller

          You are a 60-something, white man.

          Racist and ageist comment.  Unless you believe there is no such thing as so-called reverse racism, due to the power structure.  Is there also no such thing as reverse age-ism?  If not, why not?

          1. David Greenwald

            Unless I pointed out that in 13 years I will be a 60-something, white man? Truth hurts.

        19. Alan Miller

          Just as there are people with other skin colors and genders who probably think the police are doing a good job.

          You are not an “ambassador” of other people’s views (whether they’re “people of color”, or one of the “sub-groups” of that group, students, or any other group).

          Ultimately, one can only speak for themselves. Now, if there’s a general pattern (e.g., among various groups), that’s certainly possible, and probable.

          How about letting individuals speak for themselves on here, or provide references to patterns.

          Comments spot on!

          One of my main complaints with progressive critical theory politics is this tendency for annoying whites to speak “On Behalf Of” other groups.  And they often are only speaking for the similarly progressive members of those groups.

          I don’t want to get this person called out, so I’ll be vague — but a person of color that I know, defends the police, and gets down on people de-humanizing them.  They also say they are regularly pulled over by police due to the color of their skin, and its clearly racially-based and really annoying.

        20. Alan Miller

          KO:  I’m a 60 something white man so David thinks I have no idea and my opinion doesn’t count.  So wouldn’t the same apply to David as a 40 something(?) white man?

          DG:  Yes the same thing applies to me.

          Since you just admitted the same thing applies to you, shouldn’t you commit blogicide and stop subjecting the world to your 40-something white man ideas?

          > the cop immediately recognized me, addressed me as Mr. Greenwald, asked why I was speeding, I was honest and he let me go with a warning. As Don said, white privilege at its finest.

          Might be blogger-privilege as it’s finest.  As the dated saying goes: don’t piss off the guy who buys ink by the gallon.

          1. David Greenwald

            The original comment: “I think the Davis cops are doing a great job.”

            My response: “You are a 60-something, white man.”

            In other words, a 60-something white man is probably not going to experience the issues we are talking about here. But hey, it’s amazing how comments get taken out of context. My response was that I too have not personally experienced problems from the police. I have had nothing but good personal experiences with the police in Davis, including yesterday. But unfortunately, I have had too many conversations and seen too many videos of those who have not had the same experience as me, and so I know that my personal experience is not universal. That’s my point. But when you take comments out of context, it definitely changes the point.

      2. Ron Oertel

        I don’t think you realize how many people have called you out in the last few weeks or how many people you angered with the comment. 

        Just wondering why they don’t (for the most part) comment on this blog, since they’re apparently reading it.

        Are they commenting elsewhere? I’d like to see what they’re saying, in general.

        1. Alan Miller

          They are commenting on Satan’s Electronic Biblical Scrolls:  i.e., Facebook

          They are too scared to comment here due to potential triggering from white supremacy and toxic masculinity.

      3. Alan Miller

        The office says, “Where did you get the car boy” and the word is he was so pissed, he slashed the entire budget for the CHP, in order to get it reinstated, the head of the CHP put his cops under orders not to pull over Willi’s vehicle.

        A better solution to get CHP funding reinstated:  put all cops under orders to not call black men “boy”, and not assume a black person driving an expensive car has stolen it.

  4. Ron Glick

    “I understand the homeless problem needs to be addressed better…but is that the police’s issue?”

    It shouldn’t be but it often is by default because they are the organization called to deal with it. DPD has tried to be pro-active and hired a guy to deal with homeless issues and get them housed and other services. The guy is very good at his job and we are lucky to have him but why does this position need to be housed in the police department?

    As for calling you out I find the mayor to be generally intolerant of the citizenry. The limitations he imposed on public comment reflect his disdain. Its why I am so hard on him. Its fine to be intolerant of the people in Davis. I find the NIMBYism and intolerance of poor people and students disdainful myself. But I’m a private person not a public representative of the city. As a leader, chastising and cutting off the people you are elected to serve and represent, doesn’t demonstrate good leadership.

    1. Keith Echols

       DPD has tried to be pro-active and hired a guy to deal with homeless issues and get them housed and other services. The guy is very good at his job and we are lucky to have him but why does this position need to be housed in the police department?

      That’s good to know.   He probably needs more help in his one man department.  It’s an interesting question from an Org structure standpoint if this department should fall under the Police’s control and influence.  Obviously social services will have to work closely with the police.  But to what degree I don’t know.  Should a social worker go out on their own to work with homeless?  Probably for non-threatening non- law breaking calls/jobs.  But in potentially dangerous and cases of suspected law breaking; I could see a social worker and police showing up together.  But I do not know how intricate the relationship is needed between social services and police…so if the department should stay under the police; I don’t know but I’m interested in learning more.

      All I  can say is that the Mayor may have had some good ideas (I don’t know) but his disdainful comments for the public (and I don’t really care about the potshot at my comment) does nothing to convince me that his ideas and solutions are the right ones.   You’re right as a private citizen you can be frustrated and even angry at those that you disagree with.  But as a public leader it’s your job to work with your opposition; either convince them your solutions are the right ones or compromise in someway to get some of your solutions implemented…that way both parties go home happy/unhappy relatively equally.

  5. John Hobbs

    “Again, I’m not aware of one but then I’m not paying attention to this kind of thing.”

    Truth, and so here’s the  opportunity to make up for your inattention (or more accurately your malignant indifference).

     

    1. Keith Echols

      That’s why I posted it and asked.

      or more accurately your malignant indifference

      Now there’s some misplaced self righteousness.  Care to explain?

      1. Jeff Boone

        Don’t bother. There are some people that cannot stop with the personal attacks against those that don’t subscribe to their political views.  Typically it means they have nothing worthwhile to contribute except to remind us what bitter cynicism looks like.   You will not got any thoughtful posting, only criticism.

        1. Keith Echols

          I’m fine with criticism.  I’m fine with opposing views (in fact I find them more interesting to discuss than views that are similar to mine).   At this point I’m hoping get behind the attitude and hope there’s something to be learned.  The person is clearly upset about something.  If he can keep it civil, I’m open to hearing what he has to say.  If not…I’ll just move on.

  6. Edgar Wai

    Should this be true?

    When a social worker is called to resolve an issue, the social worker is not allowed to refer any observation to the police without consent.

    A police officer is called to resolve an issue only if there is clear suspect of violating the law to make an arrest or to issue a ticket.

    1. David Greenwald

      “A police officer is called to resolve an issue only if there is clear suspect of violating the law to make an arrest or to issue a ticket.”

      This is untrue. Police often come in situations of mental health crisis where an individual presents a risk to themselves or others, even if no law is broken.

      1. Edgar Wai

        Given that it is untrue right now, do we want the police or social workers to handle those situations?

        My opinion is that those should be handled by social workers, and reserve the police only for enforcing the law.

        “Presenting a risk to others”: Who should decide what to send to deal with the situation? The caller or dispatcher? What should be the guideline?

        In my opinion it should be the caller. If the caller asks for social worker, dispatch shouldn’t send the police. Vice versa. If the caller can’t decide, then dispatch may send either and not be held responsible for “misjudging” when there is no clear guideline.

  7. Jeff Boone

    This is untrue. Police often come in situations of mental health crisis where an individual presents a risk to themselves or others, even if no law is broken.

    Yes, and cops don’t get any media attention nor credit for all that added social work outside of law enforcement.  Instead they get demonized for the de minimis number of tragic events in a sea of 10,000,000 public encounters per year.

    Cops are increasingly having to clean up the mess from decades of failed liberal policies while also being targeted as the scapegoat for those failed by a dishonest establishment political-media industrial complex because those embedded in that industry need to keep their racial-division money train alive.  If you lift the covers off all of this social unrest… it is ALL about money.  Every bit of it.

    1. David Greenwald

      I agree with one point that Jeff makes here – that police are being asked to do things that frankly they shouldn’t. In part that is what the defund movement is about for some folks

      Where I strenuously disagree:

      1. One bad incident out of any number is too many
      2. It is more than one bad incident
      3. When there is a bad incident, police officers have been reluctant to speak out against it
      4. There are a large number of problem officers
      5. My complaints about policing go well beyond a few problem officers

    2. Ron Glick

      I guess de minimis is in the eye of the beholder.

      If I get murdered by a cop it isn’t deminimis to me. In fact I’d consider it de Maximus because I only have but one life to give.

      1. Jeff Boone

        I think that is an over simplification and misses the larger point.  Almost twice the number of cops were killed by suspects in the line of duty than cops killed unarmed suspects.  The job is law enforcement where many of the suspects are prone to violence.  In consideration of the actual job requirements and the actual risk relative to the number of encounters, the number of incidence is in fact de minimus.  That does not make then any less serious, but it does not support the general attacks against the police.  Why are people projecting victim status on criminals in general and criminal status on cops in general?  It seems an indication of some form of insanity.

        1. David Greenwald

          “Almost twice the number of cops were killed by suspects in the line of duty than cops killed unarmed suspects.”

          That’s not even close to being accurate. In 2019, 1001 people were killed by police. (link) 48 officers died as the result of felonious acts. (link)

  8. Tia Will

    “The complaint is because the police behave in a way that is representative of society,”

    While I agree that we still live in a racist society and that the police, being human, are merely a reflection of that society, Mayor Lee consistently omits a major consideration. Only the police are given the right to detain, jail, use force, and ultimately end a citizen’s life if they feel the circumstances warrant that action ( “I feared for my life”). None of the rest of us have that kind of power. With that exceptional power, in my opinion, must come exceptional responsibility and accountability. Yes, we are aking the police to do to much. But we have also provided them with excessive power over our lives. This does not manifest equally for all of us as it would in a truly just society.

  9. Edgar Wai

    Only the police are given the right to detain, jail, use force, and ultimately end a citizen’s life if they feel the circumstances warrant that action ( “I feared for my life”). 

    My opinion: The Government should be less violent than the people. No one should be detained. If someone is a threat such that they “shall be detained”, the law should just allow the people to use force against that person. Then, it is to that person’s benefit to call the police or to run to the police station (to turn himself in) to stop lawful use of force (the citizens don’t need to arrest the suspect, but as long as the suspect chooses not to arrest himself, the citizens may continue to use force.)

    Once the suspect jails himself, the suspect could expect less violence and a fair trial.

    No one’s job is “too hard”, when the jobs are designed right.

  10. Jeff Boone

    That’s not even close to being accurate. In 2019, 1001 people were killed by police. (link) 48 officers died as the result of felonious acts.

    Not even close?  LOL

    I do admit that I made an error.  I mistook the 96 cops died in the line of duty number.  41 died in accidents (indicative of how dangerous the job is without being shot.  I suspect a blog editor’s job is less dangerous).  And this does not include suicides.  228 current and former police officers took their own life.

    The rate of suicide of police officers exceeds the general population by an order of magnitude except maybe for soldiers.  And I know from personal experience that people with your views and activism  contribute to that high number of law enforcement suicides.

    But getting back to your claim.  I agree that the “killed by suspects and criminals” number is 48.   So 48 to 56.  Hardly “not even close”.

    But you are all about the black killings by cops.  I don’t hear much of a peep from you about anything else.

    In 2019 the police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks and 19 unarmed whites in 2019 down from 38 and 32, respectively, in 2015.  But even this is high because by “unarmed” they are counting, for instance, a suspect in a car-chase with a loaded gun in the car.

    So 9 black unarmed suspects killed by police in 10,000,000 police-suspect encounters.  48 cops killed by suspects.  In term of the race of the cop-killer, a police officer is 18.5% more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.

    By the data we have currently seem to have a problem with black violence against cops.  And a societal bias against cops that contribute to their high rate of suicide.   But there isn’t much political advantage for the activists to talk about those problems.

    1. Alan Miller

      And I know from personal experience that people with your views and activism  contribute to that high number of law enforcement suicides.

      I’m surprised this didn’t get a response.

  11. Jeff Boone

    I agree with one point that Jeff makes here – that police are being asked to do things that frankly they shouldn’t. In part that is what the defund movement is about for some folks.

    Well then… “defund” is an idiot slogan.  Don’t you think all you activists should use accurate speech?  Seems you are taking a page out of Trump’s book while you complain about Trump doing the same.  How would you respond to “defund the schools” because teachers discipline black students and a much higher rate.  And boys an order of magnitude more than girls.??  If you don’t mean “defund” and want reform instead, then why not use the slogan “reform the police”?  That would be much less divisive.

    Where I strenuously disagree:

    1. One bad incident out of any number is too many
    2. It is more than one bad incident

    Hold that thought

    3. When there is a bad incident, police officers have been reluctant to speak out against it

    I think there is some truth to this.  But when the mob attacks a group, the group pulls together in solidarity.  Maybe stop attacking the group and deal with the individual officers that are bad.

    4. There are a large number of problem officers

    Define “large number”.  Otherwise it is too subjective to be of any value.  For example, are their more or fewer problem officers than problem employees in any profession?  I will give you my opinion.  There are FAR many more problem teachers than there are problem officers.

    5. My complaints about policing go well beyond a few problem officers

    Do tell.  What is your problem with policing other than a few problem officers?  You mean they are asked to do too much?  You mean that unions are a problem preventing the firing of bad cops.  Will you admit in all they years we have known each other I have been saying the same?  It is good to hear you finally agree.  What else?

    Now back to that thought.

    I think you consider your self a qualified statistician.  Someone that can look at and analyze data and draw factual conclusions based on the data.  If you are going to light up on a fractional few incidents that the media runs because they got a good sensational click-bait bit, then you should hang up your claim of being a qualified statistician.  I get that you have a very active moral filter on harm and fairness, but if you cannot take a step back and consider the big picture of related facts, you are only an ideologue and not a critical thinker.

    9 out of 10,000,000 is not a big number.  It is .0000009 or .00009%

    Now, 7,407 out of 36,000,000… that is more worrisome.  .0002 0r .02%

    I think you should put your statistics hat on and put all your effort in the later number if you really care about lives over politics.

    1. Bill Marshall

      There are FAR many more problem teachers than there are problem officers.

      Well, you’re talking “stats”… total # or %-age?  Please clarify, if so inclined…

      Given that there are FAR more teachers than police officers, even if %-ages of “problem” ones was the same (not conceding that, one way or other), you are correct.  Unions are a problem, to deal with problem employees, and the “rules/procedures” they ‘negotiated’, in either case, are another impediment to ‘reform’, for either…

      Yet, teachers seldom have ‘weapons’, per se, and have little of “the power” or ‘color of law’, and seldom inflict corporal injury or death.

      So, again I ask, numbers of problem employees, or incidence rates (%-ages)?

       

      1. David Greenwald

        Reminds me of Jurassic Park. The park owner said, Disneyland had problems when it first opened up. And the guy responded, yeah but when Pirates of the Caribbean goes awry the pirates don’t eat the guests.

    2. Don Shor

      Well then… “defund” is an idiot slogan. Don’t you think all you activists should use accurate speech?

      Yes. And accurate grammar. And definitely proper punctuation. I’m seeing apostrophes all over the place.
      And could we clean up those graphics? I mean, settle on one font type, for god’s sake. Arial, Helvetica, something nice and clean.
      C’mon, protesters, if you want to get the attention of old white dudes, you really need better messaging and signage. Because that’s what really matters. Not cops killing unarmed black men. That’s apparently just a statistical blip.
      Protest right, or don’t protest at all. And get off my lawn.

      Some people literally mean defund the police.
      Others mean reform the police.
      Since these are largely local decisions, I’d guess we’ll see a lot of experiments around the country. It used to be that the U.S. Department of Justice would step in and try to oversee police departments that were violating civil rights. Not sure how much of that is happening these last few years.
      So in the absence of federal response, I’d guess there will be a number of initiatives arising at the local and state levels as different jurisdictions respond to their own local situations. As a conservative, I’d think you would actually support that.
      As a citizen, I’d like to see careful consideration of alternatives and options. But as with gun control, there are a number of common-sense measures that enjoy broad, even bipartisan support. it’s pretty clear that the tide is changing. A huge majority of Americans now support policing reform.
      https://www.cato.org/blog/americans-agree-policing-reform

      1. Keith Olsen

        But as with gun control, there are a number of common-sense measures that enjoy broad, even bipartisan support.

        After the protests and seeing the cops back down letting the rioters create havoc gun control will never happen for a long, long time if ever.  The last few months gun sales are going through the roof and people will never give up their guns in this environment.

        1. Don Shor

          gun control will never happen for a long, long time if ever.

          It was just an example and I wasn’t trying to trigger (ha!) a side trip onto that topic, just saying that polling shows overwhelming public support for some gun control measures just as polling shows very strong support for some police reform measures.

        2. Ron Glick

          Gun control or lack thereof is the unspoken elephant in the room. The country is armed to the teeth and the cops don’t know who is packing and who isn’t.

          Of course in these two incidents where a cop was sitting on George Floyd’s neck while he was handcuffed and in the Brooks case where he was shot in the back while running away armed only with a non-lethal taser after being searched for weapons the I thought he had a gun argument isn’t going to fly.

        3. Keith Olsen

          Brooks case where he was shot in the back while running away armed only with a non-lethal taser 

          Under Georgia law a taser is considered a deadly weapon.   In fact if you watch the video  Brooks is seen turning and firing the taser (you see the flash) shortly before he’s shot.

          1. David Greenwald

            This is all covered in the article on the press conference by the Atlanta DA. It was third charge, there were none left. He was running away at the time and fired it widely over his shoulder. The article has a pretty thorough account.

        4. Ron Oertel

          In fact if you watch the video  Brooks is seen turning and firing the taser (you see the flash) shortly before he’s shot.

          I suspect that this is the reason he won’t (and probably shouldn’t) be convicted, under the law. Which makes you wonder why they’re charging him with breaking the law.

          And then, there might be more riots if he’s not convicted.

        5. Jeff Boone

          The Democrats gave gun control back to Trump and the Republicans with their support of the protests, riots and now the cry to defund the cops.

          I have been talking to a lot of never-Trumper friends that are moving over to Trump because they can now tell that the other side is either insane or so hypocritical on just about everything that then cannot be trusted.

          Really…

          “You should not need guns because we have law enforcement to come to your rescue!”

          That was the left logic.

        6. Keith Olsen

           It was third charge, there were none left. He was running away at the time and fired it widely over his shoulder. 

          David, you do know that one of the cops got tased and suffered a concussion.  At that point the other cop was on his own.  Brooks maybe fired wildly over his shoulder but that doesn’t mean he can’t still hit his target.  If the one cop was hit with the taser than Brooks would have access to his gun.  As far as being the third shot you don’t know if the cop knew that, after all they were all three just involved in a scuffle.  Brooks initiated the fight, grabbed the taser and shot one cop with it.  Brooks brought this upon himself.

          1. David Greenwald

            Brooks was 18ft from the officers when he was shot in the back – twice.

            “I believe that at the time of the shooting, Mr Brooks did not represent a threat,” DA Howard said, noting that police rules prohibit firing a Taser at a fleeing suspect. “So he certainly cannot fire a handgun at someone running away,” he said.

        7. Keith Olsen

          noting that police rules prohibit firing a Taser at a fleeing suspect. “So he certainly cannot fire a handgun at someone running away,” he said.

          But the fleeing suspect was firing a taser (a deadly weapon under Georgia law) at the cop.  That makes a huge difference.

          The cop gets exonerated if the jury is fair and impartial.

          Then Atlanta will burn.

      2. Jeff Boone

        Don…  you are a hoot.

        So, you then accept that “build a wall” is a just a slogan for doing a lot of things to reduce illegal immigration.

        Thus you would agree that Trump has successfully built that wall since Mexico increased its border guards and agreed to keep asylum seekers in Mexico.  Noticed no more caravans from South America!?

        Or will you keep harping that Trump has failed to build the wall… the other 500 or so miles to add to the 650 or so that Obama finished?… because after all, a wall is a wall and words have meaning.

        1. Ron Oertel

            Noticed no more caravans from South America!?

          Now that you mention it – yes.  I had forgotten about that.

          (But, probably could get off-topic if it’s discussed in detail.)

          Would make for an interesting topic, though.

        2. Bill Marshall

          Yes words have meaning

          Al Gore:  “I invented the internet…”

          The Donald:  “I made Juneteenth famous…”

          Two liars, who ran for president… one got there…

          Have a good Juneteenth tomorrow, and you can probably stream some of the observances on the internet…

          [I knew of Juneteenth ~ 45 years ago… and its “significance”… apparently, ‘the Donald’ thinks he made it significant… yeah, right]

    3. John Hobbs

      ” But when the mob attacks a group, the group pulls together in solidarity.  Maybe stop attacking the group and deal with the individual officers that are bad.”

      Right, only “the mob” is wearing blue and carrying semi-automatic handguns and “the group” is Black people.  Cops have been killing people of color with impunity since Reconstruction and at an ever increasing rate, knowing that the justice system doesn’t apply to them, only to OTHERS.

       

      1. Jeff Boone

        I might join the protests at that point.  Because at that point the protesters will finally be on target for the real source of most of their problems.

        Did you hear that Beverly Hills administrators had a meeting and had to make the difficult decision that they would not allow any protests there?

        There are some neighborhoods in Pasadena that are dripping with mountains of liberal media money that if the protesters tagged those neighborhoods, the media narrative would change in a heartbeat.

        This is their giant mistake.  And the mistake of all the businesses and all the sports franchises that have decided that they need to capitulate to the mob… to virtue signal into their safe space.  The mob is going to keep going.  It is not a rational movement.  It is one of anarchists that cannot understand how after they graduated from the campus with a degree in nobinary studies and intersectionality they are going to get served a sandwich from their mom while they game all day in some cannabis smoke filled room in CHOP…. and they are freakin’ upset about it.  The mob is going to turn on the political and media establishment and then they will all start blaming the cops for not complying with their oath to serve and protect.

        The old liberals that think this is cute… a replay of their hippy days… they are ignorantly setting themselves up for a bigger mess that they were never qualified to handle.

        1. Ron Oertel

          I might join the protests at that point.  Because at that point the protesters will finally be on target for the real source of most of their problems.

          Have to admit that I find this amusing.

          with a degree in nobinary studies and intersectionality

          And this, too.

      2. Ron Oertel

        But, this is what I think you’re miscalculating:

        The mob is going to keep going. 

        I think the mass protests will disappear, probably soon.  (With police departments making some minor changes, as a whole.) I have been surprised that they’ve gone on this long.

        I also suspect that the scale of the protests has some relationship to the mass layoffs (and “stay at home” orders), as a result of the coronavirus. Which is also ultimately “temporary”.

        The mass protests consist of “normal” (non-violent) people, for the most part. There’s an element who are not.

  12. Jeff Boone

    Reminds me of Jurassic Park. The park owner said, Disneyland had problems when it first opened up. And the guy responded, yeah but when Pirates of the Caribbean goes awry the pirates don’t eat the guests.

    Funny.  I get your point.

    But it is not thoughtful enough.

    Here is the situation.  The black urban community is a mess because of lack of economic opportunity and father-lessness… primarily.  There are mounds of research and studies from sociologists and psychologists and psychiatrists that most children do not develop in to well-functioning adults as readily as those with a two-parent household… especially a mother and a father.  The evidence is overwhelming.  Again, put on your statistician hat.  The cops are at the end of the line for that mess… and they have an already difficult job dealing with the mess as these are now big and strong adults trained to be violent to survive and thrive in their non-mainstream social system.

    So, why not correct these problems when the people are school children instead of allowing them to devolve into a non-mainstream mess with a high likelihood of having to tangle with the cops?  Why not point your ire at the school system for failing to reform to fill the gaps these kids are missing?

    Is it because there are not enough videos that can be put on the screen to create outrage?

    Is it because the teachers unions donate Dem and the teachers vote Dem… and you don’t want to see your politics impacted?

    You are of course wrong here… a bad teacher destroys the lives of many children every day… especially those without a strong parental support environment and in terrific need of mentors and teachers and coaches and …..  A bad teacher indirectly, but quite efficiently, puts people in the cross-hairs of the cops as directed by the politicians to keep the law and order.

    In business we talk about risk as being both the failure to recognize and leverage an opportunity, as well as the risk of making a bad decision.  From my perspective you are guilty of both in this case.

    If black lives really matter, and they certainly do as much as any other lives, we should be reforming the public school system in the poor urban community (note that I did not say “defund”).

    1. Bill Marshall

      And what party is (in)famous for funding police unions?

      Pubic employee unions are self-serving, and dues go to highly paid attorneys and lobbyists…

  13. Ron Glick

    “But the fleeing suspect was firing a taser (a deadly weapon under Georgia law) at the cop.  That makes a huge difference.”
    “The cop gets exonerated if the jury is fair and impartial.”
    “Then Atlanta will burn.”

    Time will tell but I’ve seen enough westerns to be conditioned that shooting someone in the back is bad karma.

    Of course there were eleven charges. One of them had to do with firing a gun and hitting an occupied car that had nothing to do with the incident. Police are not supposed to do this. They are not supposed to fire when they could endanger innocent bystanders.

    As for Atlanta burning it wouldn’t be the first time. Sherman did it a little over 150 years ago over freeing the slaves and promised blacks forty acres and a mule. Reparations that were never paid.

        1. Jeff Boone

          Again, data is not racist.  Ya’ll need to stop with this BS.  There are plenty of white families on decades of family assistance too.

          https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-97.html

          If you cannot talk about a problem because of hypersensitivity and speech code politics, then it will be impossible to ever solve the problem.

          At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.

          The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.

          Now I suppose you can make the argument that since these benefits are provided everyone, it isn’t correct to single out them going to one race or the other.  But my point is only related to the reparations idea.  If any other group was demanding reparations I would bring in the same statistics for those groups.  Because these benefits are paid to help lift people up and out of low social and economic circumstances.  Isn’t that exactly the argument in support of reparations?

        2. Keith Olsen

          “Decades of public assistance” is a racist stereotype.

          What’s the English language down to now, about six words that aren’t considered racist, a racist stereotype, a dog whistle, subliminal racism, have underlying racist tones, subtle  racism, etc?

      1. Bill Marshall

        Homestead Act, originally, was instituted 1n 1862… before slaves were freed… only after 1866, were Blacks allowed to participate… the Homestead Act is more correctly referred to as the Homestead Acts.  Most slaves did not read or write… what evidence is that they had an equal opportunity to pursue that?  In the South, and elsewhere, the few Blacks who did avail themselves for the Acts were often “run off the land”, before they could establish their rights, or thereafter.  Facts.  History.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Acts

        Two strikes as to “reparations”… (others have addressed the “public assistance” angle).

        In short,  failure as to your post…

  14. Alan Miller

    After reading through all this, it’s down to this:

    I recently was reading a speech given by a black women a protest who said, “This isn’t a black or white issue.  It’s about all of us against the racists!”

    Yay, anyone?

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for