zlacker

>>colinp+(OP)
Honestly, I was blind to police racism against blacks. Until I watched this video.

----------------

This is a shocking video:

https://www.wral.com/ace-perry-pulled-over-by-sampson-county...

+ white cop pulls over black driver (North Carolina)

+ refuses to tell him why he was stopped until he shows ID

+ asks driver questions about company name on his tee-shirt

+ expresses incredulity when driver says he works at the company

+ asks driver other irrelevant personal questions.

+ tells driver he was stopped for driving UNDER THE SPEED LIMIT (doing 65 in a 70)

+ asks driver: "wouldn't you find it suspicious if someone were doing 65 in a 70?"

+ gives driver a WRITTEN WARNING for driving 65 in a 70.

+ brushes off driver's questions saying "I've got stuff to do"

+ Feb 2020

Googling about the case `"Ace Perry" Sampson` it seems no action was taken against the officer. If anyone has an "in" with the ACLU (or similar), the police dept. could use some publicity.

(Strange how some cases don't get the attention they deserve.)

(Note: in response to a now apparently deleted comment: I'm aware that some roads have minimum speed limits. I remember once seeing on a highway: max75 min40. However, 65 in a 70 is just prudence.)

>>reacts+4b
That sequence of events is a pretty run of the mill fishing stop. Cops learn how to do that "20 questions" (as I like to call it) routine in training as far as I know. It's designed trip you up into making conflicting statement. Good officers don't tend to make those kinds of stops and when they do it's pretty much a "oh no visible drug paraphernalia, here's a warning and be on your way" and the bad ones don't cut you a break for being white.

That said, it's well documented that blacks get singled out for fishing more but the officer probably treats everyone that way.

With that in mind, this is almost certainly a driving while black stop. The fact that he was stopped without a traffic violation as a pretext for fishing (usually they at least wait for you to go 5-over or touch the yellow line or something) leaves no other plausible explanation for why the officer pulled over a clean late model car and then proceeded to act like a jerk.

>>throwa+7f
Not only is it run of the mill questioning it is very specific to a driver in a rental. Where are you going/where you coming from? That shirt is that the company you work for? Where is the office? How long do you have the rental?

the questions combined with the stop suggest the cop was suspicious of drug trafficking because of a rental on the highway going under the speed limit (As you say fishing). Maybe race played a factor but odds are he pulled the rental over under that pretext before knowing the drivers race.

>>throwa+Vj
I don't give a benefit of doubt to any cop. Cops are biased; they are good at implanting evidence to ruin lives; if there is no third party evidence, cops can get away with anything they say and do. Finally, without coercion no state can function. Of course, political philosophers sell us "social contract" theories in order to hide 'coercion' of the state power. Police force is the manifestation of that coercion. That's why the wealthy/elites don't care about injustices committed against minorities and the powerless by the police and judiciary.

>>rainco+TA
> I don't give a benefit of doubt to any cop.

So in other words cops are guilty of being racists (And everything else) until being proven innocent?

Anyone charged with a crime is innocent until proven guilty because we feel as a society it is better to let guilty go free rather than convict innocent...Its why the standard in criminal law is beyond a reasonable doubt. Everyone should be treated equally under the law, regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation and occupation.

>>throwa+aG1
As long as there is "qualified immunity" for cops, "absolute immunity" for prosecutors, judges and legislators, the question of "racist until proven innocent" doesn't even arise. This notion of immunity came into being, because coercion( sold in the guise of "social contract") is the heart of any state.

This is why the powerless and minorities are heavily impacted. Who writes laws? Who edits laws? It is the powerful people with levels of indirection: lobbyists, politicians. That's why the elite is not impacted, because if they get impacted, they can change the laws.