Tolerance = 0

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Remember in school when one kid refused to stop talking when the bell rang to start class, so nobody got recess?  Remember how much that used to annoy you?  It still annoys me.

 There were rumbles at a dozen malls across the country.  Now comes the inevitable response: nobody gets recess.  Everybody gets punished.  The local PD acknowledges the mall fights were caused by “a pretty discrete group of people . . . it tends to be teenage boys,” but the new policy extends to everybody. 

 Look at the video.  The brawlers are Black teenage males.  They’re the problem group, they’re the ones who ought to be banned and everybody knows it.  We see the news, we know about FBI crime statistics, we know who the troublemakers are.  You’ve got a problem?  Solve the problem.

 But that would be politically incorrect and therefore society can’t do what everybody knows it ought to do, and also why nobody can talk about it.  Liberals claim they’d rather let 10,000 guilty men go free rather than convict 1 innocent man, but in practice they punish 10,000 innocent girls so the 100 guilty boys doesn’t feel they’ve been disrespectfully singled out.

 Black Lives Matter blocking State Fair traffic didn’t raise awareness, it raised blood pressure.  So will this new policy.  I don’t think it will help ease racial tension.  It will drive it underground, festering, same as when the idiot in class cost you recess.

 By the way – what group in society has more disposable cash to piss away at the mall than unaccompanied teenage girls?  This policy is deadly in more ways than one.

 Joe Doakes

It’s hard to pick just one policy that’s screwed up our schools. But Zero Tolerance on on the short list.

24 thoughts on “Tolerance = 0

  1. One more solid reason for anyone over 30 to avoid the malls altogether and shop online. Bright day for Amazon.

    btw Macy’s is a leading indicator, expect malls to start losing all their anchor stores and market share in the next 5 years. Being Minnesota the mall operators will eventually approach the legislature for some of that sweet LGA money so they can keep the doors open for those innocent underprivileged black males. The legislature will take a “forward-looking, inclusive and diverse progressive” approach; Rosedale will be turned over to the Central Americans, the Somalis will get Southdale, Ridgedale will go to the Mexicans, Maplewood will be WASP only, Nicollet Mall will be hipsters only, and the Catholics will get Northtown. Mall of America will be run by the Muslims with a wonderful taxpayer funded 10,000 seat mosque

  2. Are the police justified in stopping and frisking all young black men in certain neighborhoods, including (necessarily) all of the law-abiding ones? Do we owe individuals the chance to be statistical outliers?

  3. Back when my dad was young, people found that an adequate dress code was sufficient to prevent a lot of gang problems. You didn’t describe skin color, race, or ethnicity, but rather what they tended to wear.

    In looking at one of the videos, it strikes me that a dress code prohibiting underwear from showing (or requiring pants to come to the upper hip or waist) would help a lot, as would a requirement that the hoods on hoodies be down in the mall. I also noticed that a smartly dressed young man was giving a young hoodlum a nice little lesson in boxing technique. Was giving away 50 lbs at least, but the hoodlum was clearly getting the worst of it.

  4. If you heard a noise at your front door and opened it to find a tiger on your porch, would you invite it in (give individuals a chance to be a statistical outlier) or would you slam the door (discrimination on the basis of specie)? Using the information everyone knows about tigers and making a snap evaluation of the likelihood that one of them would be standing on your porch for an innocent reason, the rational course of action would be to slam the door.

    I’m willing to bet you a brand new nickel that you and I could walk down the streets of Minneapolis and I could point out to you the people who are likely to be carrying a pistol without legal permission. I’ll bet another nickel that an experienced police officer can do it even better than I can. We won’t be basing our opinion solely on race, but also on age, location, time of day, dress, hair and associates.

    A young Black male riding a bicycle near Como Park at 2:00 in the afternoon while wearing a white shirt and black tie could be a member of a street gang who is illegally carrying a gun. But it’s much more likely he’s a Mormon out knocking on doors. An intelligent person would know that at a glance. An experienced cop, the same.

    A Black male in dreads wearing low-hanging pants leaning on a Buick with Spreewells parked on Lowry Avenue at 2:00 in the morning . . . yeah, that guy’s going to draw negative attention.

    In real life, it’s not that hard to tell who’s likely to be a troublemaker and who is not, especially if you work with troublemakers for long. You know this and use it to make decisions in your own life – that’s why you live where you do instead of living in the ghetto. It’s only people who sit in ivory towers and fortified courtrooms who get confused about how to handle problems in the ghetto, and it’s directly due to lack of practical experience.

  5. Good morning Troy. Does a citizen have the right to be treated as an individual, as opposed to being treated as a composite of the various groups and classes of which he is a part?

  6. As I read the linked article I found myself thinking back to my teenage days of roaming the Castleton Square Mall in Indianapolis. It was a time of racial tensions, but Castleton was trouble-free (and probably 99% white). It was weird to get to the end of the article and see that “my” old mall was one that was experiencing issues.

  7. I have the right to be treated as an individual.

    The police officer has the power to stop me whenever he has a reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot and that I’m involved in it.

    He bases that suspicion on location, time, known gang apparel, furtive or suspicious behavior, all of which are generalizations but when applied to an individual, raise the likelihood the suspect is up to no good.

    And if the officer knows anything about crime statistics, it seems to me that race would rationally be another factor to consider.

  8. If you are a young black man from a poor neighborhood, you are much more likely to be carrying an illegal weapon and to be planning a criminal act. Are the police justified in stopping and frisking all young black men? This might be efficient policing, but is it fair, and does that lack of fairness poison police relations in that neighborhood? But as a citizen, do you not deserve the same treatment as any other citizen?

  9. Dindu’s and their self-loathing, white leftist enablers like to say “If ‘this’ happened in the suburbs, something would be done about it”, and they are right.

    But ‘this’ rarely happens in the suburbs, except in popular public areas that attract dindu’s.

    What they fail to see is, if they drag ‘this’ in the suburbs, and whip out their black privilege excuses, suburbanites will pay the price for their misdeeds…until the inevitable backlash.

  10. Emery, I can’t tell whether you’re intentionally playing tricks or innocently tangling your questions, so it’s hard to give an appropriate answer.

    You jump from a guy carrying an illegal weapon in a bad neighborhood to “all” young Black men, a broader category which includes young Black men singing in the church choir. No, the cops shouldn’t come busting in during worship service to frisk that kid. But you know that, and you know I haven’t asserted anything like that, so you’re either terrible at asking relevant questions or you’re trying to cloud the issue.

    Are police justified in stopping and frisking all young Black men? No, nobody ever said they were. Cops are justified in searching only those people who exhibit indicia of likely criminal activity, detailed above. But as to those who do exhibit the indicia of likely criminal activity – indicia which rationally should include race among others – then yes, the cops ought to be stopping them and frisking them for illegal weapons.

    Your own question presupposes the man is illegally carrying a weapon. What’s the objection to taking it away from him?

  11. My reading on the topic indicates that the problem seen by civil rights activists is not police fanning out to frisk Black men. The problem they see is police concentrating stop & frisk policies in areas where a randomly chosen sample of men subjected to stop & frisk will over sample Blacks — not with respect to the locality, but to the proportion of Black men in society at large.
    The cops, of course, say that they do stop & frisk in areas with the highest crime rates, and these areas tend to have higher a population of minorities than low crime areas.
    What ya gonna do?
    If you are asking for color blind law enforcement, you are asking for something that has never been in a multi-ethnic society. No one wants a color blind government, not Blacks, not whites, not Hispanics, etc. What people want is a system that treats them as members of group when it gives them an advantage, and treats them as individuals when that gives them an advantage.
    Where I live, there is an underclass but it is not Black. They print the daily “arrest report” in the local rag. I have come to the conclusion that police suspicion should naturally fall on people who have have a vowel/consonant ratio in their last name > 1, with a surname name ending vowel counted twice. I’m just 2/5, so I’m looking good.

  12. I find the use of data correlations to direct either government services, or law enforcement punitive actions, to implicitly deny citizens their right to be treated and judged as individuals.

  13. So, you are against Affirmative Action, Emery? At all levels?
    Government contracts at the federal level,state level, and local level favor or disfavor people by ethnicity and sex. Even public schools will have special programs that encourage people to enter certain occupations or take certain courses based on their ethnicity and/or sex. I do technical work for academics. The pressure to mentor and otherwise nurture women and some minority students (not East Asians, Jews, or Whites) is incredible, and is becoming more intense. I have heard deepartment heads openly discuss the best way to ensure that a woman is hired for a certain position. It is discrimination done openly with the support of the government at all levels and of big business.

  14. “Calling all cars, gang rumble at corner of Fifth and Main, shots fired, three down, suspects fleeing on foot described as ‘individuals.’ Be on the lookout.”

  15. “Okay, let’s call to order this meeting of the Mafia Task Force. Joe, what can you tell us about Mafia members, identifying characteristics, common traits, any items of significance we should be alert for?”

    “They’re individuals.”

    “Okay, that’s great, Joe. Alright everybody, let’s hit the bricks.”

  16. Mammuthus Primigenius: Yes, it is true that the government may be able to more effectively allocate carrots and sticks based on correlations to age, body measurements, race, religion, address, income, or marital status. But as a citizen, do you not deserve the same treatment as any other citizen? Does the government have the same obligation to each and every citizen, or is its obligation to provide services instead to the whole collective population most efficiently, which may mean short-changing some, so that those most able to gain advantage from those services will receive the most?

  17. “And so, as your President, I announce a bold new program that will eliminate poverty throughout the land.”

    “Mr. President, how will your new program identify recipients of this program?”

    “They’ll be individuals.”

    “Can you be more specific, sir?”

    “We won’t use any data correlations to direct the benefits, that would deny poor people their right to be treated and judged as individuals rather than as members of the class of people known as “poor.” Instead, we’ll blindly dump bins of C-notes from helicopters and let the gentle breezes distribute the money all across the land.”

  18. “Alright, listen up. Murphy, shut up back there! Okay, this here is Dr. Spenser Reed from the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit. He’s here to give us a profile of our serial killer. Dr. Reed?”

    “Thank you. Your unsub is an individual.”

    “Ah . . . okay . . . that’s not as helpful as it could be, Doctor. We generally get more detail from you guys, you know?”

    “Right, well, in the past, I’d have said the killer most likely was a White male, 23-35, employed in the trades, drives a white panel van and has a lisp or stutter. But that would have been based on a comparison of similar crimes in our historical database. Since the Bureau adopted the Emery Individuality Standard, we no longer use data correlation to direct law enforcement efforts. Instead, we treat everyone as individuals so we consider everyone a suspect.”

    “What? That’s ridiculous. My 86-year-old grandmother?”

    “Suspect.”

    “The Mayor, the 29 judges on the district bench, the rabbi at Temple Beth Israel?”

    “Suspects.”

    “They can’t all be suspects. What about radio talk show hosts?”

    “Highly suspect. Look, gentlemen and ladies, there are 3 million people in the Twin Cities metro area, they’re all suspects, and you only have 7 hours 13 minutes until the killer strikes again. I suggest you get cracking.”

    (end scene)

  19. Mammuthus Primigenius: Tip of the hat for your new Moniker.
    (•_•)
    <) )╯
    / \

  20. The tools are already there, Emery. There is a broad consensus that the government shall not discriminate based on race, ethnicity, religion, or sex. There is also the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    When government does so much, it is inevitable that groups form that seek special favors. See Madison’s Fed. 10 & 11 on factionalism. This is especially a problem at the federal level, because the federal government is the level of government least subject to democratic pressure. The federal government also self-defines a number of civil rights directives that result in de facto unequal treatment under the law.

  21. Oof. Joe up in here with the Big Beatdown.

    (•_•)
    <) )–,.!.. (((SSOLSEmery)))
    / \

  22. I see eTASS is out buggering his strawman again. And getting p0wned in the process. The uzhe. I see things have not changed much while I took a little vacay.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.