Zero Tolerance initiative continues its abuses of people of color. Last night (Tuesday, April 29th) an ARM (Rochester's Anti-Racism Movement) member was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct after questioning officers who were racially profiling his 16-year-old brother and assuming him "suspicious of dealing drugs" when he got out of a car on his way into Extreme Graphics with his brother, saw a friend and gave him a cultural handshake familiar among black males.
Jordan Brown, a 21-year-old ARM member, came out of the store noticing that his brother Stephen Strachan was not right behind him but was being patted down by police outside who refused to answer why they were converging on his younger brother. Instead, he was told they shouldn't be in the drug infested bad neighborhood. When Jordan challenged the officer for making discriminating statements demonizing an entire community of people he was verbally abused and ordered to shut up and stay back. When he insisted on an explanation for profiling his 16-year-old brother he was called a smart ass, thrown against the car and taken downtown and charged with disorderly conduct. Ironically, these cops then decided to pat down every black male that was following Jordan in a second car, finding nothing. Sadly, there was no drug deal happening, no drugs or alcohol present on any of these young men that warranted the stop and the way they were treated and subsequently "put through the system."
ARM has been an opponent of refunding of Zero Tolerance because of repeated racial redlining and abuses of ordinary citizens of color in vulnerable neighborhoods. They recently, (a week ago) spoke out at a City Council meeting drawing attention to the abuses reported by over 100 citizens at a December 19th Speak Out on the initiative. These are sad times in Rochester when a quiet tolerance for racial abuse, redlining and mistreatment of people of color has become acceptable by the powers that be. It is not clear whether the resistance to deal with this issue is connected to fear of backlash or racial philosophies about what people of color should have to endure to obtain public safety. Nonetheless, ARM expects Mayor Duffy and Chief Moore to address this issue and stop asking tax paying people of color to pay for their own abuse.
Myra Brown, ARM
Source:
www.minorityreporter.net/web_edition/May_3_2008/May_3_2008.pdf
Comments
Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
08 May 2008
Re: Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
08 May 2008
Re: Re: Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
08 May 2008
I'm sorry, but if im driving down the road and i see a guy give another guy a handshake like the one described in a drug infested neighborhood I'm going to pull up and talk to him (if i was a police officer) If the guy is acting nervous I may think he has something to hide so i may want to pat him down. If I have a loudmouth standing next to me questioning everything im doing and berating me I may think that I'm actually on the right track and that I interupted something going down so I may search everyone in the car.
It makes perfect sense to me. The only reason that guy got brought downtown was because he was interrupting a police investigation and was disorderly in public. If he would just shut up for the 30 seconds it takes for a pat down search then he and his friends would have had a much smoother night.
Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
09 May 2008
You (Mr. Pro-racial profiling), are a troll of rochester indymedia; you're an ideologue; your assumptions drive EVERY argument you make. You have nothing to teach us; we have nothing to teach you. Go back to the D&C, the NYT, the GOP website--where you belong.
Please take an anthropology class, a sociology class, or a U.S. history class. I'm begging you.
Re: Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
09 May 2008
If you disagree with what I'm saying then argue your point and tell me why I'm wrong and back it up with evidence. And if you can't find anything to pick apart -- then there is the great possibility that I am right.
I actually have a great deal of experience both as a person who has been profiled by police and as an individual working with law enforcement. I understand both sides of the coin and appreciate the varied points of view involved. The police are there to serve and protect and they have been instilled with this power and authority by the government and the community from which they serve. It is a concern of all people the rampant use of drugs -- and the violence that begets a drug-infested community. We the community have asked the police to take action, hire more officers and work overtime in order to instill our community with a sense of peace -- by ridding our neighborhoods of drug dealers, drug users and other criminals.
And the proof is in the pudding. Our communities our safer and violence is subsiding. All of this is a result of operation zero tolerance and the work of our police department.
Re: Re: Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
09 May 2008
I'd be curious if you felt the cops in NYC were justified in pumping an unarmed, man of color--Sean Bell--full of bullets?
I get the impression you'd be happy to live in an absolute police state, huh. Oh, wait...!
Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
09 May 2008
If people are really serious about reducing crime, specifically drug-related xrime, they MUST be in favor of a scrappingof the notorious Rockefeller drug laws--the senseless (except as a way to enforce racism) criminalization of socially harmless drugs such as marijuana and other draconian measures in this area have served primarily to give police a free hand in 'minority' neighborhoods. This intereferes with legitimate police activity aimed at "hard" drugs, gang or mob involvement in the trade, and related violence.
To the (exaggerated ) extent such militarization of drug policy has succeeded, it has done so at an unacceptable cost: increased hostility between nighbors and police, further erosion of civil liberties for individuals, and Orwellian "solutions" (like spycams!) that are worse than the problem.
Indeed the police are there "to serve and protect", but the question is: whom? Im not denying that cops serve a useful and necessary function sometimes, and that most cops honestly believe they they are there to serve and protect ordinary folks. In reallity, professional police (less than 200 years old, actually) were invented exactly to serve and protect the propertied class; any positive functions they perform are secondary to their mission. Im not saying that we shouldn't try to work with police and support them when they do something right; I'm saying let's never forget whose side they're on.
Re: Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
09 May 2008
Now in regards to the brother asking what is going on from the officers perspective its a dangerous distraction. He's there with a car full of people any one of them could be armed and potentially kill him if he gets distracted.
Now I also don't know if scrapping the Rockafeller drug laws would do anything to help the issues related to drug use, abuse and the illegal activity that goes along with it -- but I do believe that once drug abusing criminals get into the system they should be put through the most rigorous rehabilitation program possible because studies have shown that if these people can lick their drug habit the criminality that they are a part of will go away as in many cases it was fueled by the drug abuse.
On a personal note my father-in-law was a lifetime abuser of drugs and alcohol on a minor to moderate level. He had never been arrested, but spent most of his life drifting from job to job, stealing from employers and being homeless. I think if he had been arrested and forced into a long term treatment experience he would be alive today and functioning like your average citizen.
Re: Re: Re: The Continuing Abuse of Zero Tolerance policy
11 May 2008
1) I have seen many, many people shaking hands on street corners. If you really think that the only reason people shake hands is drug deals, then I don't know what to say.
2) The article we're reading is giving us an example of people just shaking hands. Do you think the author is making this up?
3) The handshake was really a side story here. The person went to jail because they asked questions and didn't do whatever the officer said -- plain and simple. It's not a question of if the cop thought the person was breaking a law or not, they felt like they weren't getting "respect" (meaning obedience) so they arrested the guy. If you want to defend the police, let's talk about the real issue.
You say the person was a loudmouth and berating the police officer, but you have really no evidence of that. Besides, if you have any experience with the way cops treat people in the inner city, then you know that people are arrested all the time for trying to assert their rights in a way that's not disrespectful at all, simply not what the cop likes.
world without cops!
11 May 2008
society would be unquestionably better without the state supported armed thugs!
down with the police!!!!!!!!!
Surveillance Cameras
12 May 2008
Here's the link: www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article