Black people three times more likely to be searched
BLACK people in Gloucestershire are three times more likely to be stopped and searched than other races, a report claims.
The figures revealed yesterday by the Equality and Human Rights Commission show for every white person, 3.3 black people were stopped by the police in the county during 2007/08.
-

Police
Asian people were stopped less than white people, with a ratio of 0.9 to 1.
Alexandra Macrae, chief executive officer of the Race Equality Council for Gloucestershire (Glosrec), has already lobbied local police to change their methods.
She said it was a "highly sensitive" issue, particularly among the African-Caribbean community.
"Considering most stop and searches are drug-related, you have to bear in mind the proportion of white users is high, if not higher, than black or African Caribbean people," she said. "To pick on the black population because of a perception that they are either using or dealing drugs is to racially stereotype them.
"Are the police saying black people are three times more likely to be involved in crime than white people?
"The fact is if you are black and drive an expensive car at two o'clock in the morning you are likely to be stopped by the police."
Several police forces across the country have been highlighted by the commission as using the stop and search system in a discriminatory way.
In some areas, black people are stopped and searched at least six times the rate of white people. Asian people are about twice as likely to be stopped and searched as white people.
If black people were stopped and searched at the same rate as white people in 2007/8, there would have to be around 25,000 stops and searches of black people. Instead, there were more than 170,000.
The commission will write to police forces with the most concerning statistics.
It has not ruled out taking legal action against some forces under the Race Relations Act.
Mrs Macrae said the figures gave a damning impression, given the black and ethnic population in the county was just 2.8 per cent according to the 2001 census.
And she criticised Gloucestershire Police for no longer funding a seat for Glosrec on the Police Authority.
"It is always good for the police to have somebody who stands apart from them to provide an independent view, it is a pity unlike other police forces across the country, Gloucestershire police will not fund us," she said.
Of the 38 forces surveyed, Gloucestershire had the 20th highest proportion of black to white searches.
A police spokesman said: "Stop and search powers are an effective tool in preventing, reducing and detecting crime and in ensuring the safety of the entire community. We aim to ensure that stop and search activity is intelligence led, used fairly across all ethnic groups and in a way that enhances community confidence."







34 Comments
View all
by Hard Nose, RFoD
Wednesday, March 17 2010, 12:01AM
“Is this a white thing?”
by Joe K, Barton & Tredworth
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 4:20PM
“Did this stunt backfire so badly, TiG, that you had to push it down to 'page 3' and keep it off 'Most commented', rather than do what I predicted you would..?”
by Joe K, Barton & Tredworth
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 2:53PM
“I guess you would, Bob, as you took great care not to call Anon a racist.
Sadly, the real answer to your question is 'Almost everybody, nowadays'.”
by Bob, Cheltenham
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 2:22PM
“Anon, FoD - you say you're upset that your comment was deleted and add:
"I took great care in not using racial or inflammatory language..."
The question I'd like to ask is what sort of a person has to "take great care" to ensure their words are not racist?
Think I might know the answer.”
by Reg, Linden
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 1:14PM
“Indeed Joe K. May I vote your earlier post hilarious.:-)”
by Joe K, Barton & Tredworth
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 1:07PM
“See, there's just no logic to what Tig leaves, and what it removes...”
by Let's be clear on this, please
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 12:09PM
“Could we please stop the assertion that Police Officers are able to randomly select individuals to stop (and possibly search as well, although not always the case).
Police Officers have to have 'reasonable grounds' and are therefore unable to target groups without justification.
If more people from a certain ethnic group have been stopped and/or searched, it's because there were reasonable grounds.
Simple.”
by Malcolm X, Safely away from Barton & Tredworth
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 12:05PM
“Philip, my statistics come from the following sources:
HM Govt Crime Census 2009
Police Camera Action
Street Crime Uk
Boyz 'n' the Hood
And from living in London for most of my life.”
by captain catt, seamen's mission
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 11:40AM
“If I was walking late at night or in the early hours, especially in a high crime area, then being stopped and searched by the police is not something I'd object to - rather I'd consider it rather reassuring. But then I have nothing to hide.”
by Philip, Hucclecote
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 11:23AM
“Fred
No, I'm not suggesting that for one second.
All I'm saying is that if you stop black people to white people at a rato of 3.3-1, when the actual population ratio in Gloucestershire is 1-50, then the fact that you 'prove' black people commit more crime is completely nonsense. Of course you'll prove more black people commit crime, as an 'average', if you stop more of them than the 'average'!
Whether you deliberately skew the statistics or do so in error is irrelevant to the argument.
I actually have no views on this matter at all beyond the numeric, and I have no proof that black people do commit more crime, per head of population, than white people. But I DO know that if you set out to stop far, far more black people than their percentage makeup of the population as compared to white, you damn well WILL seem to prove that they commit more crime - because you'll have set out to do exactly that!”