Just a tip

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5XMdJWhDfMs - police planting drugs.

"Usually" smh

Yes I've seen that. The other side of the argument is that he had already found them, and was re-staging the find. However, he is under investigation and many of his previous arrests have now been called into question.
Now, do you have evidence supporting the claim that was actually made? That police "usually," plant evidence because the person they want to arrest is black?

Even if you're being arrested for your skin colour? Searched for something you can't control? You have to say yes sir and stand still even if it's the fourth time this week?

Are you a troll?

Are you? If you're saying you seriously don't believe there's issues with law enforcement and racism especially in America then this is pointless because you clearly don't pay any attention to the media.

The media is the worst about these kind if things. They actively make things worse.

If people are searched because of their skin color that is wrong. It is also unconstitutional, and any evidence obtained during such a search is inadmissible. But. Just because you or someone SAYS they were searched because of their skin, doesn't mean that's why they were searched.
Want to combat racism? Fantastic, so do I. We can even work together. But, you have to show me. You can't just say "Racism exists therefore this problem must be caused by racism." You have to show me where it is and who is doing it. Then we can work out together where we want to go, and what solution we want to take to get there.

" A report by retired federal and state judges tasked by the San Francisco district attorney’s office to examine police practices in San Francisco found “racial disparities regarding S.F.P.D. stops, searches, and arrests, particularly for Black people.” (Officers in San Francisco were previously revealed to have traded racist and homophobic text messages, and those working in the prison system had reportedly staged and placed bets on inmate fights.) In San Francisco, “although Black people accounted for less than 15 percent of all stops in 2015, they accounted for over 42 percent of all non-consent searches following stops.” This proved unwarranted: “Of all people searched without consent, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest ‘hit rates’ (i.e., the lowest rate of contraband recovered).” In 2015, whites searched without consent were found to be carrying contraband at nearly two times the rate as blacks who were searched without consent. "

That's about 15 minutes of research. It's easy to find facts showing how races are treated differently by the police but if you don't listen to the media you won't find any. There's more if you'd like the link.

No need, found it myself. Vanity fair right?
"Non-consent searches," of motor vehicles require probable cause to be Constitutional. That is no small burden of proof on behalf of the officer.
If police are ignoring probable cause and neglecting to search because the person they stopped was white, that's racist.
If police are searching without establishing probable cause because the person they stopped was black, that's racist.
If police are finding probable cause to search a vehicle more often among black people, that isn't racist. Whether police find anything afterwords is irrelevant so long as they properly established the initial probable cause.
We need more than facts that tell part of the story. We need the whole story. We need proof that those differences are based on race, and nothing else.
If one can prove police are failing to establish probable cause it's basically a slam dunk.
Until then, it's conjecture.

Those numbers are worth investigating. Worth putting effort into seeing WHY those numbers are the way they are. But we don't know yet why they are that way, and assuming that the reason behind them is racism puts us at a disadvantage. If we assume it's racism and move to eliminate a problem that doesn't exist, then that won't solve anything. Those numbers will stay the same, but the people making those numbers a reality will be disrespected, smeared in the press, and treated as the racists that only they know they're not.

So the only way you personally would know for sure that racism exists in police forces is if you were given ocular proof? This would probably only happen if you were in the car with them. Or maybe the targeted person? Funny how the people who see racism blatantly and clearly by police - black people - are the ones saying there is racism and campaign against it. Because they've seen it. It's happened to them or a friend or a relative. I'm arguing this because I believe someone would know when they're being treated different for their colour and I believe the people's stories of racism because facts add up.

Not ocular proof. Proof. Proof that the REASON behind those numbers is RACISM, and not another explanation.
Here's an example using the same line of thinking you're using: "Black people are disproportionately represented because the police are racist"
"Of the 129 members of the USA Track and Field Team for Rio 2016, 71 of them were black. 55% of the team despite only being 13.3% of the population. The reason for this is because the USA Track and Field Team is racist against white people when selecting the team." Do you believe that as well, or do you think more proof is needed to make that claim?
.
"because I believe someone would know when they're being treated different for their colour and I believe the people's stories of racism because facts add up"
.
By that same reasoning I COULD say...
"because I believe the police would know when they're being racist and I believe their stories of not being racist because facts add up."
...but I don't. I want proof.

Okay tell me any other potential reasons behind why the police search black people more, why more unarmed black people are shot more than white, why black people are more likely to get handcuffed and restrained other than racism. I'd really like to know. And that last comment doesn't make any sense whatsoever because the facts do not add up to that conclusion.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no/

http://www.city-data.com/city/Baton-Rouge-Louisiana.html
.
http://www.city-data.com/

Regarding your first article, you are aware that there are numerous points arguing against you in it right? First of all, when factoring in the other races in the raw numbers they present, more non-white people are killed than white people. The example presented at the beginning of the article is admittedly very tragic but I would like to point out that it does seem there was reasoning between the police officers actions; I remember hearing reports on black children being shot by police for seemingly absolutely no reason. Obviously the ideal situations would be no shootings at all but that doesn't seem to be what this discussion is about. Furthermore, the article goes on to explain why even though it seems more white people are killed, the acts against black people are still a major issue (again obviously the whole situation is a massive issue) but I'm sure you know this as you are the one who posted the article. (tbc)

And yes the article does point out that more crimes take place in "black neighbourhoods" but I think this is indicative of a larger issue in itself. I also have a theory that more black people could be accused of these crimes while the actual numbers are more even than they seem. The article also cites a study that confirms that 'there was “no relationship” between crime rates by race and racial bias in police killings.' There are many more quotes that quite clearly and strongly go against what you're saying so I'm not really sure why you think this article supports your strange and slightly bigoted views.

First of all, lets stay out of "BIGOT," territory.That helps not a damn thing, and in this day and age just screams "If I can't beat your argument, I'll label you a bigot and then I've basically won anyway."
So, lets cordially agree that this is not the route we want this thread to take.

48% of this nation's murders are committed by a demographic that covers 4% of the population. (Black males 16-36)

@tj sorry but that's just how all of this came across to me and I hope you can see from the length of my comment that I wasn't trying to use that word as a cover-all argument and @pokethebear can I ask where you got that statistic? And if it is true I believe it could indicate some other issues like I said before

For some reason it isn't letting me comment under my profile. I've never hit my comment limit before, so either this is the first time for everything, I've been reported and had my comments struck until further notice, or something else I haven't thought of. Anyway this is TJ and here goes

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls You have to go through the FBI databases to get the offender (and victim) information. (Sadly; One of the leading causes of death of young black males is other young black males) then the census bureau can fill you in on the demographics. 52% of total murders (that the race of the offender is known, hundreds are unknown) are committed by African Americans, whom collectively account for 12.8% of the population, black males account for 6.2% and the 16-36 group is less than 4%. The data available is 2013-2015 crime stats and the 2010 census and census estimates. This does indicate a bigger problem. I think a portion of that demographic values their pride and "street cred" more than they value (black) lives. The previous article cited did in fact conclude that a higher ratio of

Blacks were killed by police than whites. However the population densities in cities where crime and conflict are more prevalent are more in the 45/45 range, done cities have a higher black population than whites. Tension from millions of people crammed into cities with other incompatible cultures will create a divide. Police encountering a demographic proven by the numbers to tend toward violence will be more cautious and concerned for their own safety than the ones pulling over Kaytee driving a minivan in the suburbs. Population densities cause tension. Violence begets violence.

@illflyifiwanto. Very well. I'll disagree with your interpretation, but I'll acknowledge you weren't intending it to be a catch all argument.
I'm not going to provide his sources for him, but it's accurate, or accurate enough. Though in reality it's worse than that because it's a small percentage (idk single digits this isn't important enough to my points to actually research. Yet anyway) OUT OF 6-7% of the nations population (accounting for all black males, not a select age group).

@miniegg
"Okay tell me any other potential reasons behind why..."
First of all, that's not how this works, and here's why. You've made a claim. A claim you have to prove. You've yet to do that. And you want me to disprove a claim you haven't proven. "The world is flat, prove me wrong." I actually don't have to from an legal POV, and in this regard a legal POV is probably the most relevant. The officers must PROVE "probable cause," for the case to continue. You must PROVE racism is the cause.

So far you have that there is a correlation between black people and what you list. And I can find websites that say the opposite or that there is no correlation. Correlation does not prove causation.

If this works, it was something else. Guess my comment was too long.

And I know I said I don't have to, but I will cause I'm a persistent SOB.
"why more unarmed black people are shot more than white"
"Unarmed," has nothing to do with it. Here's what an "unarmed," man can do to a cop. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicago-police-say-officer-didnt-shoot-during-beating-fearing-scrutiny/
The question that MATTERS, is are they justified. Don't come at me saying "Oh, they're shot more because racism." Show me the UNJUSTIFIED shootings. Spoiler: the vast majority of those "unarmed," shootings were in fact justified. If it is justified that a police officer shoots someone, then how can you claim racism?
To answer why "other than racism," and how the facts add up: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449505/police-arent-killing-black-men-out-racism
the most accurate way to determine what happens to someone isn't their race.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/17/white-dallas-officers-arent-more-likely-to-use-force-against-black-people-study-says/

Some moron keyboard warrior thinks that downvoting FBI and Census bureau statistics is fighting racism. Statistics are not racist.

I think you may be onto something, this doesn't solve anything on either side and unfortunately neither of us are probably going to change each others minds. Also I'm bored so I think I'm done, bye

Translation,"I simply refuse to accept facts and look within the community to solve the problem. I will continue to shout and throw tantrums and blame everybody else". Congratulations, that makes you part of the problem.

We're not gonna change each other's minds so why carry on. Just because you get off on internet arguments doesn't mean we do.

And that's fine. I just wish you'd actually answered any of my questions, instead of just me answering yours.

I don't get off on Internet arguments. I try to share what knowledge I can. Two of my brothers are cops. The "dead cop" chants by the blm protesters make me wonder where Gallagher is these days.

Confirmed: American police are actually gestapo

I like your sarcasm frostbite. Have a thumb.

Thanks dude

Except a black teenager did get beaten up by white supremacists. For not doing anything.

And I was beaten stabbed and robbed for being white while on a beer run

And that Trump supporter got scalped and tortured on camera. Or that old white guy that carjacked and beaten on camera, just because he voted for Trump.