Skip to content

A racial profiling footnote

March 11, 2012

Great blog marches on. Powerline documents and summarizes frequent leftie lunacy scam.

New Jersey Turnpike logo

A racial profiling footnote. |  The New Jersey Turnpike gave rise to much of the “driving while black” controversy of the 1990′s.  That particular controversy was resolved by state authorities entering into a 1999 consent decree selling out law enforcement.  Sentence first, verdict afterwards, as the Queen says in Alice in Wonderland.  The verdict came too late to do any good, and it was kept under wraps when it arrived, but Heather Mac Donald  blew the whistle on the whole production when she got hold of a serious study of driving patterns on the New Jersey Turnpike.   The whole regime of “disparities” is premised on the simple falsehood that the various racial groups championed by the race industry behave identically to whites and Asians.  It ain’t necessarily so.  The traffic stops fiasco is a sort of reductio ad absurdum.  In a 2002 New York Post column Mac Donald wrote about the study that disclosed the unspeakable truth:

According to the study commissioned by the New Jersey Attorney General (and leaked to The New York Times), blacks make up 16 percent of the drivers on the turnpike, and 25 percent of the speeders in the 65-mph zones, where profiling complaints are most common. They speed twice as much as whites, and speed at reckless levels even more. Yet blacks are stopped less than their speeding behavior would predict — 23 percent of all stops. The devastation wrought by this study to the anti-police agenda is catastrophic. It turns out that the police stop blacks more for speeding because they speed more. Race has nothing to do with it…. http://bit.ly/yTWVxF

United States Department of Justice Official Seal

But our U.S. Justice Dept. has been a serial rejector of a valid scientific study which might make a preferred minority feel less than equal. They nobly stick to their leftie lunacy principles regardless of the party in executive and/or legislative control. Finally:

The institute has proposed a solution to the impasse: Let us submit the study to a peer-reviewed journal or a neutral body like the National Academy of Sciences. If a panel of our scientific peers determines the research to be sound, release the study.

No go, says the Justice Department. That study ain’t seeing the light of day.

And so it goes. ibid.

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: