Somehow, I managed not to mention the most obvious and biggest reason why the raw statistic regarding police stops of blacks and whites relied on by the judge is too crude to prove much. Police officers patrol high-crime neighborhoods, which tend to be predominantly black, more often than they do safer ones, which tend to be predominantly white. This means they will stop many more blacks than whites.
This, of course, is an entirely reasonable approach to fighting crime. It also provides extra protection to the blacks who live in these neighborhoods.
The judge discusses this reason, but doesn't deal adequately with it, in my view. If you read his opinion, I think you will agree with me.
Fear not! I tread largely this same ground a mere 28 years ago, also in Virginia. An indictment brought by one of my colleagues in the Eastern District of Virginia was dismissed by the trial judge on grounds of racially selective prosecution. The case was appealable because it was a dismissal, not an acquittal. I won before a unanimous Fourth Circuit panel that included Sam Ervin, Jr., the son of Sen. Sam Ervin of Senate Watergate Committee fame. United States v. Olvis, 97 F.3d 739 (4th Cir. 1996), reprinted at: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-4th-circuit/1182516.html
A few things. First leftists (they aren't liberal at all) aren't interested in controlling gun violence. They are interested in using the right kind of gun violence to stop law abiding citizens from legally owning guns. They have no issue with blacks and other minorities owning illegal guns. Second, by the reasoning of this lunatic judge, if this perp had committed murder but been stopped in his car, he'd be free. Finally, I simply struggle to understand how these people think. Many people I know think that these lunatic leftists are part of an organized conspiracy to turn this country into anarchy so a communist tyranny can take over. I have always believed that what can be attributed to incompetence or idiocy should never be attributed to malevolence. So I reject those theories. But this is getting to be too much. I'm too young to remember the leftist moment of the sixties but even then I don't think it ever reached this far outside the campus and the den of the intellectuals. It's very worrisome.
It seems this judge must have attended the same judicial education conference as the 2 Court of Appeals justices in the recent California case out of San Diego that Paul recently discussed. It is not just Woke Kindergarten or DEI in colleges and universities where the force feeding of radical leftist ideology rules.
I’m not sure how to react because the problems with what happened are so significant. Can this judge be recalled? Defeated for re-election? Can the decision be appealed?
Somehow, I managed not to mention the most obvious and biggest reason why the raw statistic regarding police stops of blacks and whites relied on by the judge is too crude to prove much. Police officers patrol high-crime neighborhoods, which tend to be predominantly black, more often than they do safer ones, which tend to be predominantly white. This means they will stop many more blacks than whites.
This, of course, is an entirely reasonable approach to fighting crime. It also provides extra protection to the blacks who live in these neighborhoods.
The judge discusses this reason, but doesn't deal adequately with it, in my view. If you read his opinion, I think you will agree with me.
Fear not! I tread largely this same ground a mere 28 years ago, also in Virginia. An indictment brought by one of my colleagues in the Eastern District of Virginia was dismissed by the trial judge on grounds of racially selective prosecution. The case was appealable because it was a dismissal, not an acquittal. I won before a unanimous Fourth Circuit panel that included Sam Ervin, Jr., the son of Sen. Sam Ervin of Senate Watergate Committee fame. United States v. Olvis, 97 F.3d 739 (4th Cir. 1996), reprinted at: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-4th-circuit/1182516.html
A few things. First leftists (they aren't liberal at all) aren't interested in controlling gun violence. They are interested in using the right kind of gun violence to stop law abiding citizens from legally owning guns. They have no issue with blacks and other minorities owning illegal guns. Second, by the reasoning of this lunatic judge, if this perp had committed murder but been stopped in his car, he'd be free. Finally, I simply struggle to understand how these people think. Many people I know think that these lunatic leftists are part of an organized conspiracy to turn this country into anarchy so a communist tyranny can take over. I have always believed that what can be attributed to incompetence or idiocy should never be attributed to malevolence. So I reject those theories. But this is getting to be too much. I'm too young to remember the leftist moment of the sixties but even then I don't think it ever reached this far outside the campus and the den of the intellectuals. It's very worrisome.
It seems this judge must have attended the same judicial education conference as the 2 Court of Appeals justices in the recent California case out of San Diego that Paul recently discussed. It is not just Woke Kindergarten or DEI in colleges and universities where the force feeding of radical leftist ideology rules.
I’m not sure how to react because the problems with what happened are so significant. Can this judge be recalled? Defeated for re-election? Can the decision be appealed?
[PS: Note typo in title: "let's."]
Hmm. Maybe Trump should try that defense.
Another example of malignant white guilt.