[flagged]
https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2020/05/veil-darkness-redu...
That's a pattern/data point/statistic, for sure, but I'd happily assert it supports my point effectively.
Nice niche cherry pick too bad there isn't even a mention of "same amount of crime" if you just look at average crime rates by race, logic would tell you why that might be the case, in the same way men are WAY more likely to be pulled over than women.
The article you linked does not support this claim. It says the proportion of blacks stopped is less in the dark around 7pm.
Even this study showed that Black motorists commit more traffic offenses than White motorists at night.
What about profiling based on sex or age? Should there be a perfect equal amount of times a 8 year old girl or a 80 year old man be question by the police just so you can feel good about yourself?
>bullshit 13%
At least your are transparent that facts and real world statistics don't matter once they clash with your ideological world view.
> Black Californians are more than twice as likely to be searched as white Californians, at about 20 percent versus 8 percent of all stops
https://www.ppic.org/publication/racial-disparities-in-law-e...
IMO, the toughest study to argue with is https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2020/05/veil-darkness-redu...
They studied traffic stops around the daylight savings transition, which is a perfect natural control for "could the cops see the car occupants?"
When DST switches, the on-paper racial disparity moves by an hour. The Earth's orbit, obviously, does not.
Sure, some number of police officers are racist. I've never denied that, and it's sad, as no one should be racist.
In my experience, the ones who mention race first, are usually racists themselves.
> In my experience, the ones who mention race first, are usually racists themselves.
How does one address racism without first mentioning its existence?
What does your oddly aggressive reply say about you? Other than your username is at best, aspirational, and good luck with that.