Pubdate: Tue, 26 Feb 2002
Source: St. Petersburg Times (FL)
Copyright: 2002 St. Petersburg Times
Contact:  http://www.sptimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/419
Author: Elijah Gosier

IF ONLY NUMBERS HAD HUMAN FACES TOO

After several days of studying a page full of numbers called the "City of 
St. Petersburg Uniform Crime Report -- Drug Arrests 1998-2001 by District 
and Midtown Area," after performing all sorts of arithmetic, turning the 
paper in every direction to see if the numbers changed like speed limit 
signs at night, and ultimately folding it into an airplane, I reached a 
couple of insightful, radical conclusions.

One, St. Petersburg has a drug problem; two, police arrest a lot of people.

I don't know how much one affects the other, but beyond those two, few 
conclusions could be reached that withstood the test of consistency. For 
example, if I tried to say drug arrests have been declining, I wouldn't 
have much of a trend on which to base that thesis. True, the total number 
of arrests in 2000 was lower than the total in 1999, and the total for 2001 
was lower than in 2000. But the totals for 2000 and 1998 were identical, 
sandwiching 1999, which had the highest total of all.

I couldn't say the problem was confined to one part of the city, because 
the arrests came from each of the three policing districts, and the numbers 
were surprisingly close.

A somewhat overused excuse says that numbers can be made to say anything. 
Usually that assertion comes from the losing side in a debate. But the 
strongest statement these numbers seem to make is that maybe too many 
statements are already being made. The four years' worth of month-by-month 
tabulations of drug arrests just don't support some of the popularly held 
myths that propel this city's war on drugs and its war against itself.

Stationing an officer on every corner in District 3, the southern district, 
would not cure the drug problem, as some are convinced it would. That -- 
and this should probably come with the warning label: May cause severe 
cognitive dissonance -- would reduce the overall problem by a little more 
than one-third. The western district also accounts for just more than a 
third; the northern district, about one-fourth.

So why does all the hoopla about enforcement center on District 3?

Why does the call for more aggressive policing hold the red flag over the 
southern district?

Why is it always the southern district that screams police brutality loudest?

The answer to each question, in St. Petersburg and every other largely 
segregated city (which still describes most), is because it's black. That 
fact shapes perception, history and current events. Race skews 
proportionality. Just as a table of loud diners seems louder if they look 
or talk different, an area can appear more prone to crime than another for 
the same reasons, even when the facts do not support such a conclusion.

We tend to view criminals who look like us -- especially if they're young 
- -- the way drug criminals who get arrested generally are: as aberrations, 
misguided. We analyze ad nauseum to find and, if possible, fix the thing 
that went wrong.

Outside that group, they're simply regarded as criminals, for which law 
enforcement is the solution. That's where former police Chief Goliath Davis 
clashed with politicians and other law enforcement officials over the 
federally funded Weed and Seed program when he advocated drug treatment as 
more effective than law enforcement in solving District 3's drug problem. 
He grew up there and saw the aberrant, troubled individuals, not the herd 
of criminals others saw.

That's an important distinction. Police officers are vulnerable to the same 
perceptions of communities and individuals, which makes the report on drug 
arrests even less clear in its implications. Drug arrests overwhelmingly 
are the result of stings or other targeted police operations. They usually 
occur after police become suspicious of an area or individuals. So it is 
unclear whether the report reflects the level of crime in the three 
districts or the level of attention focused on it.

Undeniably, the activity is more visible in District 3, the fast-food, 
drive-through, takeout franchise of the drug trade. District 2 is more of a 
dine-in establishment, and District 1 is a combination of the two.

The visibility in District 3 leads to foot chases and public apprehensions, 
where every move is critiqued and every use of force is evaluated on the 
spot by people who do not trust the police. Many with good reason. There is 
a history, dating back beyond the time when Klansmen wore law enforcement 
uniforms to work, of police abuse of black people and others who through 
poverty or ethnicity are powerless. That history has become a part of 
scandalous current events in police departments from Los Angeles to Miami, 
providing undeniable evidence that there are enough corrupt cops to tarnish 
the heroic work of the others.

Already tense relations between police and depressed communities are 
further strained when good cops observe their antiquated code and defend 
the ones who violate them and their communities. Those communities strain 
the relationship when they observe their own code and refuse to help police 
weed out the criminals among them.

No matter how long I study the crime report, the numbers produce more 
questions than answers.

But this we know without question: The city has a drug problem and police 
arrest a lot of people.

It has been that way for years.

My guess is that it will continue to be that way until we figure out that 
only police can purge their ranks and only communities can purge theirs.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth