This American Life: The Problem We All Live With
New York Times Magazine Reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones about school integration. The episode concentrates on Normandy, Missouri, where Michael Brown attended high school.
Right now, all sorts of people are trying to rethink and reinvent education, to get poor minority kids performing as well as white kids. But there’s one thing nobody tries anymore, despite lots of evidence that it works: desegregation. Nikole Hannah-Jones looks at a district that, not long ago, accidentally launched a desegregation program.
The town hall audio is epic.
Oghier
1782
The Normandy School District was decertified last year.
Yes, part 2 will cover what ultimately happened.
ddtibbs
1784
I wouldn’t go that far. Firefighters have the same human failings as cops do, we just don’t have to deal with the psychological issues of everyone hating us.
Aleck
1785
I thought this was pretty great (I mentioned it over in the Presidential thread). I was a little disappointed in the obvious bias of the reporter at the end (suggesting that the parents were simply afraid of students of another color, rather than being afraid of having the schools they has clearly valued a great deal being bogged down in other issues), but overall I thought it was really, really good. Perhaps that was simply a mis-statement on the part of the reporter, or perhaps I took it in a way it wasn’t intended. Fear of the other is not always the same as racism, but that’s a discussion for another day, I guess.
I was surprised that at no point did they mention the obvious: integration works because separate-but-equal invariably means separate-but-unequal. However, if you have a system where integration is forced and drives flight (either to private schools or other towns), you ultimately end up re-creating the same problems over and over again. You need to find ways to integrate schools where all parties involved want to make it work.
I haven’t looked up anything about the Normandy district yet because I’m looking forward to the next episode.
CraigM
1786
I only speak from my direct experience. My father and grandfather, as well as the best man in my wedding, were all firefighters. From the literally hundreds of police and firefighters I have met there was certainly a difference in attitude and personality type.
Granted I am not a neutral perspective though.
Nesrie
1787
You’re right. He says it’s a registered to a woman, so then the only odd thing the officer did was reach into the car which would really be for his safety not the driver’s. There’s a reason why they usually demand you get out of a car not bodily pull you out of it. That would put him at a real disadvantage if the guy grabbed his arm which is when the struggle happened. There had to be some sort of struggle for the body cam to move like that.
ShivaX
1788
To be fair, firefighters tend to shoot a lot less people in questionable situations.
One reason is because they’re not put into that situation or given that authority. It may sound trite but power does corrupt. Certain people are attracted to the job, but the job also shapes behavior. I recall studies where assigning randomly selected members of a group power results in some very unsavory behavior.
CraigM
1790
Yeah, like the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment.
Remember those charming Santa Ana cops who were caught on video eating pot edibles and making fun of disabled people after raiding a pot dispensary? With the help of their union, they’re suing to prevent the video from being used by their own department as evidence for disciplinary action:
The lawsuit argues that the video doesn’t paint a fair version of events. The suit also claims the video shouldn’t be used as evidence because, among other things, the police didn’t know they were on camera. “All police personnel present had a reasonable expectation that their conversations were no longer being recorded and the undercover officers, feeling that they were safe to do so, removed their masks,” says the suit.
The dispensary also did not obtain consent of any officer to record them, the suit says. “Without the illegal recordings, there would have been no internal investigation of any officer,” the suit says.
And: a judge has, for the time being anyways, agreed with the cops’ argument.
It’s a temporary order given that there are facts in dispute. The judge agreed that the harm is irreparable if it is released now and then later found to be improper. That’s logically true—you can’t put the cat back in the bag, but temporarily witholding it can be cured later by releasing it. I wouldn’t read too much into it.
I’m going to have to try that next time I get a speeding ticket.
The officer did not obtain consent of any motorist to record them, the suit says. “Without the illegal radar readings, there would have been no investigation of any motorist,” the suit says.
Timex
1794
In truth, if you choose to challenge the radar readings on a ticket, you will almost always get off.
There are tons of things which will end up invalidating the readings… Often, the radar guns aren’t recently certified, or they can’t find the paperwork of the certification.
Oh I know, but of course so do they.
In three decades of driving I’ve gotten and grand total of four tickets. Two of those were incurred in the last two years, both in North Carolina and both on a trip down to my eldest daughter’s new university. I’m convinced that in both cases they pulled me (with my Virginia plates) over even though NC-tagged cars were going faster than I was. And in both cases, I don’t think I was going anywhere near the speed that they say I was.
But my choices are: (a) pay the $180 fine through the mail and plead “guilty”, or (b) take a day or two off work, drive six hours south, pay for a hotel, wait for hours in a courtroom, and drive another six hours back… all on the assumption that my ticket will be tossed out. Nah, not worth the bother… and the cops know it.
CraigM
1796
Similar story when I went to Yellowstone. On the way out, in the middle of nowhere Wyoming, I got a ticket as I was leaving a town. the speed limit changed at the start of a big hill, so I started to accelerate. Cop pulls me over, says I was speeding. Except I was just going the new speed limit. cop is a dick about it, and there’s nothing I can really do. Seriously dude, the speed limit went from 35-45, and I accelerated as I entered the new speed zone.
Even under his most strict interpretation I only started accelerating about 20 yards before the sign, and was only travelling 5 over (at which point the speed changed to 45, and I was under). I dispute his assessment, but even accepting his version it’s a dick move, one that he can do knowing I couldn’t challenge it.
Hell, cops have been using speeding tickets as revenue generators for as long as there have been speed cops. They’ve been targeting out of state tags for as long as well. It sucks, but I’ve yet to see anything anyone can do about it.
CraigM
1798
Yeah, pretty much. Our only option is go on and bitch about it to friends and online.
These are Americans right? How come they can’t have legal access?
Chicago police detained thousands of black Americans at interrogation facility:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/05/homan-square-chicago-thousands-detained
Remarkable story about LA Times firing and publicly smearing a political cartoonist over a claim about a 14 year old encounter with an LAPD officer:
tldr: cartoonist claims cop roughed him up over jaywalking, LAPD provides doctored recording to LA Times suggesting otherwise, cleaned-up full version vindicates cartoonist’s account, LA Times refuses to even comment further.
