Monday, March 8, 2010

Rev. Darby declares that Chicora-Cherokee is African American free

Posted by Chris Haire on Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:34 PM

Lately, I've been driving through the Chicora-Cherokee neighborhood quite a bit. Not the side streets, mind you. But straight up Spruill.

But after reading a comment from the Rev. Joe Darby in a Post and Courier report over the weekend on racial profiling, I'm wondering if maybe all that dryer lint smoking I've been doing lately has done way more damage to my brain than I previously thought. Because apparently, what I see when I drive through Chicora-Cherokee ain't what the good reverend sees. Read on.

The Rev. Joe Darby, vice president of the Charleston NAACP, said statistics prove there is racial profiling in North Charleston, which long has caused many blacks to steer clear of the area.

"I've got a son who goes to Trident Tech and he will be late to class rather than take a route that goes anywhere near Chicora-Cherokee or Dorchester Road," he said. "He understands if you are over there, you are going to be pulled over if you are black, whether you have done anything or not."

Wait. Wait. If you are black and you drive through Chicora-Cherokee "you are going to be pulled over"? That's horrible. In fact, that's racial profiling.

Fortunately, according to Rev. Darby, black drivers have learned, rightly or wrongly, to stay away from Chicora-Cherokee. And Dorchester Road too.

Of course, that's not what I see, though. I see lots and lots of black folks. And a whole helluva lot of them are in cars. Oddly enough, I was always of the opinion that Chicora-Cherokee was a, um, black community. But I guess I was wrong.

And it gets worse: According to NAACP head Dot Scott, if you're black and in Chicora-Cherokee or on Dorchester Road or anywhere else in North Charleston for that matter, I reckon, and riding a bike or walking, you're just as apt to get thrown in the pokey as if you were driving a car.

Scott said she also has received numerous complaints about police hassling black people on foot or on bicycles and tossing them in jail for nuisance violations such as disorderly conduct.

Geez. Maybe I really am seeing things. Because I could swear that aside from the blacks folks driving to and from work or the store or ball practice or church or the movies or dinner, I have seen quite a number of African Americans walking the sidewalks or riding bikes without being stopped by the cops and thrown into the pen.

Man, I've got to lay off the lint. My eyes just ain't what they used to be.

Comments (17)

Showing 1-17 of 17

Add a comment

I must be smoking the same lint - I actually agree with something this guy wrote. To paraphrase Jackie Gleason, "what in the HELL is this world coming to?????"

report   
Posted by trident90 on March 8, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Chris: This column is built on either a deliberate or sloppy mis-characterization of Scott's and Darby's comments. Neither said there were no black people in Chicora-Cherokee. Nor does the presence of black drivers and pedestrians prove that the area has no problem with profiling.

What would possess someone to write a column like this? Why not try a journalistic approach? Spend some time talking to black pedestrians in the area. Talk to the police. Demand public records. Report. This is a perplexing and mediocre hatchet job.

report   
Posted by Mario Delgado on March 8, 2010 at 8:27 PM

Mario, you haven't been paying attention. EVERYTHING Chris writes is smart-ass. Backtrack through his columns and read for yourself. Once in a hile he makes a salient point, but always smart-ass - it makes him cool. Didn't you know smartasses are chick magnets?

report   
Posted by pissedoff yankee on March 8, 2010 at 9:03 PM

www.dealwithwhites.com

report   
Posted by David Goldberg on March 8, 2010 at 10:50 PM

That website just wasted five minutes of my life.

report   
Posted by mat catastrophe on March 9, 2010 at 12:45 AM

Rev. Joe should honor the SC Boycott and move back North...

report   
Posted by screddawg on March 11, 2010 at 6:31 AM

"I've got a son who goes to Trident Tech and he will be late to class rather than take a route that goes anywhere near Chicora-Cherokee or Dorchester Road," he said. "He understands if you are over there, you are going to be pulled over if you are black, whether you have done anything or not."

I hope you see that absurdity of that statement.

Also, I invite you to read the opening of that particular P&C report. The example that Dot Scott's daughter gives of possibly being racially profiled is equally absurd. She was pulled over for having a light out on her license plate. The cop is nice. She was given a warning. And let go. And yet she wonders if she was racially profiled? What the Philip K. Dick-ens?

report   
Posted by chrishaire on March 11, 2010 at 9:34 AM

I hope you see the absurdity of your headline and apologize for the insulting tone of your article.

If you read the article you cite above it substantiates Darby's and Scott's concerns: "North Charleston police have pulled over black drivers at a disproportionate rate over the past two years, with black men twice as likely to be stopped as their white counterparts, police statistics show." So, black drivers in N. Charleston are pulled over in cases not involving tickets at a dramatically higher rate than white drivers.

Moreover, the police don't deny these facts, but argue this is part of a strategy to lower crime (though of course they cannot demonstrate a correlation between the tactic and the crime rate): "Police officials insist it's a reflection of a strategic, zero-tolerance crackdown on crime in several troubled neighborhoods where the population is predominantly black and where blacks commit the majority of crimes."

Scott and Rev. Darby report that this is dispiriting and humiliating to many African Americans--that it's a significant concern among them. Another hidden cost to being black in America.

That doesn't strike me as absurd, that black people would be troubled in 2010 by being targeted by an agency that has historically inflicted a good deal of pain on African Americans in this state. Even erasing the historic racism of law enforcement in South Carolina, there would still be a concern if a state agency treated a group of citizens differently based on their race, or religion, or gender, etc.

So, I draw two possible unsettling conclusions to the question I raised earlier as to why you wrote your column: You are either suggesting the statistics are wrong or that African Americans are not entitled to their feelings, which even the North Charleston police would acknowledge are rooted in a statistically provable lived reality.

Should it be the former, I can only ask that you provide data to call into question the state's figures. Should it be the latter, I might conclude generously that you were sloppy and careless, or that you were articulating an unacknowledged need to discipline black people who say things that white people don't want to hear and marginalize black leaders by painting them as misguided or delusional.

Apologize to Rev. Darby, Scott and yourself. I think you're better than this.

report   
Posted by Mario Delgado on March 12, 2010 at 7:31 AM

Mario,

Here's the thing: Chief Zumalt and Co. aren't targeting the Chicora-Cherokee and Dorchester roads areas bc the residents there are black. They are targeting those areas bc they are high crime areas. I'm sure that police stats prior to the increased patrols indicate this.

(And please don't confuse socio-economic issues with racial ones. Yes, there is some overlap, but poor impoverished areas around the freakin' globe are high crime areas. Not that the middle and upper classes don't engage in such. They just don't do it on the street corner.)

The headline is a valid, albeit satirical, criticism. Why? That is the logical conclusion that one must draw following Darby's statement, i.e. that blacks don't frequent those areas bc they will be pulled over by the cops.

Of course, you didn't answer my question: Do you or do you know see the absurdity in Darby's statement?

The problem is when leaders such as Darby make statements like these they damage the credibility of their organizations. And since this is the premier African American activist organization around, that is certainly a problem ... it gives the racist asshats and others ammunition.

report   
Posted by chrishaire on March 12, 2010 at 9:02 AM

Zumalt said, "I would think some of these folks would be a little more excited that the number of young African-American males killed went down last year considerably."

You'd think.

report   
Posted by word on March 12, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Mario, by the way, is selectively using statistics to support his argument.
He states that "black men (are) twice as likely to be stopped as their white counterparts, police statistics show", while ignoring the fact that they're also god only knows how much more likely to kill one another. Dot, Darby, and, yes, even Mario, should be grateful that someone is trying to save these lives. Because Dot and Darby certainly haven't proven to be helpful in that regard.

report   
Posted by word on March 12, 2010 at 12:15 PM

I see. So you were making an ass of Darby in order to save him from racists who would attempt to make an ass of him. I'm sure Darby, the NAACP, and all of black Charleston, appreciate your good efforts.



report   
Posted by Mario Delgado on March 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

and no, I don't see anything absurd in Darby's comments. I suspect it is well within the realm of possibility that black drivers avoid areas in which they feel they run a higher risk of being racially profiled.

Apologize rather than digging yourself deeper, or do better and join the Charleston Branch NAACP.

report   
Posted by Mario Delgado on March 13, 2010 at 12:32 AM

I wasn't making an ass of Darby to save him. I think the black community needs leadership that doesn't make statements like these.

And if you don't find Darby's comments absurd — perhaps you don't frequent Spurill or Dorchester or even Remount (another road mentioned in the article) — or can't see how they are, then there's no need for me to try to convince you any further.

Feel free to get in the last word.

report   
Posted by chrishaire on March 13, 2010 at 7:02 AM

At the risk of prolonging, here is my argument broken down into its basic elements in the following statements that I put in quotes:

"Black drivers are pulled over in N. Charleston for stops that do not involve infractions at a higher rate than white drivers." It is a matter of public record. We both agree on that, though I might call that racial profiling and you might prefer some less pejorative description.

"People the world over (and in N. Charleston) expect and struggle to be treated equally by law enforcement, other state agencies, businesses, and one another. A desire for fairness is a human impulse and something to strive for." I suspect you would not disagree with that.

"Some black people, including Rev. Darby and his family members, have expressed frustration at being stopped by the N. Charleston police at higher rates than white drivers in cases not involving infractions." This is a matter of public record. We have no disagreement here.

"African American drivers in N. Charleston have a right to feel frustrated at being stopped at higher rates than white drivers in cases not involving infractions as it serves as a painful reminder of the historic legacies of white supremacy." I agree that this frustration is a rational response to unequal treatment. You seem to suggest that black people have no right to those feelings--either that they are imagining discrimination or that their humiliation is a small price to pay for lower crime rates. If your argument is based on the former--it contradicts the evidence as profiling in N. Charleston is statistically measurable. The police do not debate the numbers. If your argument is based on the latter--I would only counter that there is no measurable link between the increased traffic stops and the crime rates, and more importantly that I think it is dangerous and offensive to disregard a group of peoples' experiences as delusional or absurd, especially given what we know of the state's history and police behavior.

Holding public figures accountable for their statements and actions is a good thing, and it is the role of a robust press to ask tough questions. In attempting to discipline Rev. Darby and Dot Scott, you misfired terribly and in the process you took your place in a long and shameful line of Charleston journalists and civic leaders who have attempted to dictate to black people how they should feel and who they should follow. No, this is not the lynching of Denmark Vesey or even on a par with the firing of Septima Clark from her teaching position, but the dynamics and goals are the same.

report   
Posted by Mario Delgado on March 14, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Half of those who complained about police harassment had previous criminal records, including three with multiple arrests for drugs or violent crimes, state records show.

"All I said was 'Hi, excuse me officers, can you tell me what he's been arrested for?' " she said. "I wasn't even yelling."

Video shot from a police cruiser shows Euland screaming, cursing and yanking her arm away from officers while her fiance yells for her stop.

report   
Posted by word on March 14, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Call the chief of police and tell him to keep the cops out of the area. You don't need them. Inform the racist NCPD that the citizens in that area can handle the thugs themselves. I'm sure the outstanding members of that community would never call or ask for help from the racist police force. Sometimes there is a simple solution.

report   
Posted by Ken29404 on March 22, 2010 at 4:26 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-17 of 17

Add a comment

Classified Listings
Most Viewed

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2012, Charleston City Paper   RSS