“Jaywalking” Shouldn't Even Be a Thing
strongtowns.org
strongtowns.org
- the only explanation for the proportion of jaywalking tickets to minorities being larger than for other groups is racism or other unfairness
- the only explanation for the proportion of jaywalking tickets to 18-25 year olds is a bias against innocent young people.
Um. Perhaps in New York, population 8 MILLION, the 316 tickets for jaywalking (representing 0.004%) were just handed to people who really deserved it. I mean if you, and I, and everyone else walks in the street from time to time, you'd expect about 7,500,000 jaywalking tickets, not 316.
Suppose however, whites (non hispanic) make up a 1/3 of New York and rarely get tickets. So you'd still suspect like 5 million tickets given out. Sounds like jaywalking is either very rare (contrary to the author's opinion), or tickets for jaywalking are very rare.
Here's my alternate theory: 18-25 year old certain non-white young men have a much higher propensity to obstruct traffic and walk in the street to a level that they annoy the fuzz, and then refuse to back down to a point of getting a ticket, than do other demographics. It appears tickets are exceedingly rare and must be earned by some extraordinary jackassery, which would certainly explain the 18-25 demographic. Let me go out on a limb and guess that out of 316 tickets about 314 where given to intoxicated males too.
You simply CANNOT assume that committing crimes (or in this case trifles) is evenly distributed across demographics. So if "tickets" are not evenly distributed, it does NOT imply bias in enforcement, it could also very simply mean a bias in committing. Certain demographics may like to jaywalk a lot more, the data proves it more than it proves bias.
And should this be a crime? Probably, but it isn't. It's an infraction. Don't brazenly walk in the street and obstruct traffic and refuse to budge when the po-po tell you to move if you don't like it. Pretty sure doesn't matter what color you are, assholes should continue to get ticketed for this.
The latter. I believe the photos are meant as evidence that jaywalking is common.
> Let me go out on a limb and guess that out of 316 tickets about 314 where given to intoxicated males too.
Okay, you're on the limb. The actual data, at https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2020/01/08/nypd-targets-blacks-a... , says that 15 of the people were female a 2 were "unknown".
Looks like the limb broke. And that's not even explaining why 27 of those ticketed were <18 - is underage drinking really that common in NYC?
Also, your interpretation doesn't explain the disparity across areas. Manhattan has the most pedestrians but fewest jaywalking tickets.
Quoting the streetsblog link "Some precincts which formerly issued a large amount of such summonses have abandoned the practice. For example, the 94th Precinct in Brooklyn issued 30 summonses in 2015, but zero in 2019."
That more in line with jaywalking being a common practice which the police ticket only when they want to ticket someone but don't have another reason.
And yes, I'll accept that other than drunk asshole (underage or not) males, younger adolescent male assholes may also likely contribute a bit. Vast majority (by your numbers) still 18+ males.
Yes, I agree that jaywalking is totally a common practice and almost nobody (99.996% per-capita) gets ticketed. So people that jaywalk harmlessly in bustling business districts like Manhattan are more likely to get hit by a falling cartoon piano than get a jaywalking ticket.
Yes, I totally completely agree that the only people that get ticketed are those that the police want to ticket for some reason (when they don't have a better one). Do you not understand that is always the way the police operates? On purpose. We pay them to do this.
My central point is: I think that reason is that they are being obnoxious dicks in some way to a fairly extreme level apparently several standard deviations outside the norm and therefore deserve what they get. I think the reason for the geographical difference is that there are simply more people acting like these assholes in certain districts.
Or, maybe, the po-po just thinks these young males are looking and acting like drug dealers or pimps and would like to "have a word" and need a legal pretense to do this. This would also be consistent with your evidence. Guess what? I'd applaud the initiative. If it turns out they were actually just on the way to Sunday school, then they are probably not part of that elite 316.
So then, in either case, what's the problem? Sounds perfectly fine to me.