Federal Judge Who Outlawed Racial Profiling is Victim of Black Mob Violence

How does it feel to be a renowned expert on racial profiling and be in uniquely opposite positions?

Well just ask Susan Dlott, the Federal judge who (supposedly) "wrote the book" on racial profiling.

Apparently she got the lessons from the opposite side the other day when her home was invaded by criminals.

And to make things even more ironic, she evidently referred to the robbers as "Black and had guns" when she called the police.

The never ending saga of irony never sleeps.


Ironic Enforcement

Federal Judge Susan Dlott wrote the book on racial profiling in 2002.

Last week, she ripped it into one million tiny pieces when three black people broke into her $8 million Cincinnati home and started beating her and her 79-year old husband.

“There’s three black men with guns at our house,” Dlott told a 911 operator after she escaped the home invasion and ran to her neighbor’s house one mile away.

And just in case the operator did not hear her the first time, Dlott said it again: “My husband and the dogs are still there. There are three black men with guns and masks at the house.”

Sociology is Ironic

Irony? Hypocrisy?
It's a weird story, X.
I guess many progressive liberals prefer to just make rules other people need to follow. They're exempt...because they're so compassionate, I suppose.

It reminds me of an atheist that rages against a belief in God, but in a shtf scenario, what's the first thing many of them do? Pray.

This woman rails against everybody else identifying black criminals as black, but what is the first thing she does when faced with a criminal break in? She identifies them as blacks.

a reply to: xuenchen

I am thankful she was able to escape..I wonder what happened to her husband..

So we are laughing at elderly people being beat and robbed and calling her out for claiming that there were black men in her house beating and robbing them when in fact there were 3 black men committing the said crime ... Not sure what your angle on this is ?

How does this have anything to do with racial profiling?

If she could describe the most prominent features of the alleged assailants, then she would be well suited to relay that to the police.

Racial profiling is targeting a specific demographic based on race, or geography.

So again this doesn't look like it has anything to do with racial profiling . . . .

-FBB

a reply to: xuenchen

How is it ironic?

a reply to: freedomSlave

No, it is the fact that she said you should never refer to race, that they are not 3 black men or 3 white men, and should only be identified as 3 men, and then the very first time she has a real life situation, she of course says 3 black men.

It's an example of PC gone wild, and even the people who enforce it know it's stupid.

Assuming the facts of the story are true.

originally posted by: freedomSlave
So we are laughing at elderly people being beat and robbed and calling her out for claiming that there were black men in her house beating and robbing them when in fact there were 3 black men committing the said crime ... Not sure what your angle on this is ?

No one laughed at elderly people being beaten and robbed. Sheesh!

This woman has been advocating for years against identifying criminals by race. In simple words, "don't identify the criminal as black as it has nothing to do with the crime being perpetrated."

What is the first thing she does when it happens to her? She identifies the criminals by their race....black.

No angle. Just showing how stupid being ridiculously out-of-control pc is and those that do so may one day find themselves facing the very thing they rail against. When they do, they throw their pc'ness right out the door.

University of Minnesota to Stop Using Race in Crime Alert Suspect Descriptions

editions.lib.umn.edu...

Racial profiling does not refer to the act of a law enforcement agent pursuing a suspect in which the specific description of the suspect includes race or ethnicity in combination with other identifying factors.

www.aclu.org...
Here we have no other identifying factors.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: freedomSlave

No, it is the fact that she said you should never refer to race, that they are not 3 black men or 3 white men, and should only be identified as 3 men, and then the very first time she has a real life situation, she of course says 3 black men.

It's an example of PC gone wild, and even the people who enforce it know it's stupid.

Assuming the facts of the story are true.

When has she said you should never refer to race?

Wait... is this what conservatives think "racial profiling" by police means?!

a reply to: queenofswords

It reminds me of an atheist that rages against a belief in God, but in a shtf scenario, what's the first thing many of them do? Pray.

Have you ever seen this happen?

Or are you simply saying so because you know that it is what you, put in that position, would do yourself?

This is a racist thread, and for all that I uphold the rights of the OP to post it, it is disgusting and contemptible. It is also exactly what we have come to expect from the thread starter.

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: freedomSlave

No, it is the fact that she said you should never refer to race, that they are not 3 black men or 3 white men, and should only be identified as 3 men, and then the very first time she has a real life situation, she of course says 3 black men.

It's an example of PC gone wild, and even the people who enforce it know it's stupid.

Assuming the facts of the story are true.

When has she said you should never refer to race?

Wait... is this what conservatives think "racial profiling" by police means?!

It's what the ACLU thinks it means. I just quoted their definition. It can NEVER be Gender/Race without other identifying factors. Why do you bring up conservatives when we are discussing what liberals are saying?

Saying a "black man" is racial profiling. Saying a "black man" with a spider tattoo on his left hand is fine. That's direct from the liberals, I quoted and sourced it.

Racial profiling: Harassing/detaining people at random because they're black/hispanic/purple martian, and therefore are all criminals and must be up to no good. Example: being pulled over in a nice car for driving while black (line of thought being they must have stolen that car)

Not racial profiling: Describing your attackers.

originally posted by: Nyiah
Racial profiling: Harassing/detaining people at random because they're black/hispanic/purple martian, and therefore are all criminals and must be up to no good. Example: being pulled over in a nice car for driving while black (line of thought being they must have stolen that car)

Not racial profiling: Describing your attackers.

You're right. Except your normal definition is NOT what this Judge thinks, and is NOT what the ACLU and other liberals think.

I quoted and sourced it. You can NOT use race in a description without other identifying features, or it's racist. Saying it was 3 black men is racist according to the ACLU, and the article says this Judge was instrumental in forcing this view.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

University of Minnesota to Stop Using Race in Crime Alert Suspect Descriptions

editions.lib.umn.edu...

Racial profiling does not refer to the act of a law enforcement agent pursuing a suspect in which the specific description of the suspect includes race or ethnicity in combination with other identifying factors.

www.aclu.org...
Here we have no other identifying factors.

ok fair enough I didn't realize her stance on it the issue .. Can't help to shake my head as to why she ever thought that providing the description of race was irrelevant. Thanks for providing a little more story than the op. ETA Not really sure how this is considered racial profiling .

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: freedomSlave

No, it is the fact that she said you should never refer to race, that they are not 3 black men or 3 white men, and should only be identified as 3 men, and then the very first time she has a real life situation, she of course says 3 black men.

It's an example of PC gone wild, and even the people who enforce it know it's stupid.

Assuming the facts of the story are true.

When has she said you should never refer to race?

Wait... is this what conservatives think "racial profiling" by police means?!

It's what the ACLU thinks it means. I just quoted their definition. It can NEVER be Gender/Race without other identifying factors. Why do you bring up conservatives when we are discussing what liberals are saying?

Saying a "black man" is racial profiling. Saying a "black man" with a spider tattoo on his left hand is fine. That's direct from the liberals, I quoted and sourced it.

Yeah totally! Except that's not what the ACLU said at all. Did you even read your link?

Read that whole description. Nowhere does it say you cannot use ethnicity to describe a suspect.

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: freedomSlave

No, it is the fact that she said you should never refer to race, that they are not 3 black men or 3 white men, and should only be identified as 3 men, and then the very first time she has a real life situation, she of course says 3 black men.

It's an example of PC gone wild, and even the people who enforce it know it's stupid.

Assuming the facts of the story are true.

When has she said you should never refer to race?

Wait... is this what conservatives think "racial profiling" by police means?!

It's what the ACLU thinks it means. I just quoted their definition. It can NEVER be Gender/Race without other identifying factors. Why do you bring up conservatives when we are discussing what liberals are saying?

Saying a "black man" is racial profiling. Saying a "black man" with a spider tattoo on his left hand is fine. That's direct from the liberals, I quoted and sourced it.

Yeah totally! Except that's not what the ACLU said at all. Did you even read your link?

Read that whole description. Nowhere does it say you cannot use ethnicity to describe a suspect.

Are you serious? Did you even read it? I quoted it. How much clearer can it get?

From the ACLU.

You MUST use other identifying features OTHER THAN race and gender or it's racial profiling.

Racial profiling does not refer to the act of a law enforcement agent pursuing a suspect in which the specific description of the suspect includes race or ethnicity in combination with other identifying factors.

Your version which relies SOLELY on race without other features is UNACCEPTABLE.

Defining racial profiling as relying “solely” on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin or religion can be problematic. This definition found in some state racial profiling laws is unacceptable

What part of unacceptable is hard for you to understand? It flat out says you can not use race without other identifying features multiple times. What this Judge did is wrong according to Liberals and the ACLU. Did you not read where college campuses are prohibiting this already? So on those college campuses they would not have even have been able to say black men, only men.

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: xuenchen

How is it ironic?

It should be obvious all blacks should be looked at as criminals. Just like all people from the ME should be considered Muslim and are terrorist. This is the kind of crap that FOX and other neoconservative groups try to get people to believe.

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: freedomSlave

No, it is the fact that she said you should never refer to race, that they are not 3 black men or 3 white men, and should only be identified as 3 men, and then the very first time she has a real life situation, she of course says 3 black men.

It's an example of PC gone wild, and even the people who enforce it know it's stupid.

Assuming the facts of the story are true.

When has she said you should never refer to race?

Wait... is this what conservatives think "racial profiling" by police means?!

It's what the ACLU thinks it means. I just quoted their definition. It can NEVER be Gender/Race without other identifying factors. Why do you bring up conservatives when we are discussing what liberals are saying?

Saying a "black man" is racial profiling. Saying a "black man" with a spider tattoo on his left hand is fine. That's direct from the liberals, I quoted and sourced it.

Yeah totally! Except that's not what the ACLU said at all. Did you even read your link?

Read that whole description. Nowhere does it say you cannot use ethnicity to describe a suspect.

First link few paragraphs in

"
The new policy, however, will no longer include racial descriptions in most circumstances.


“Vice President Wheelock is announcing a change that will reduce the use of suspect descriptions in Crime Alerts when there is insufficient detail to reasonably aid in individual identification.”

To be clear: Where there is sufficient information to aid our community in identifying a suspect who presents risk, we will continue to include that information. Where the information is too general to advance that goal, we will note that only a limited description of the suspect(s) is available.”

This new policy was evident from a University of Minnesota Crime Alert issued this Monday in which a student was a victim of a criminal sexual assault over the weekend:


“The victim describes the suspect as a male, approximately five feet eight inches to five feet eleven inches tall with a medium build. The suspect is between the ages of 25 and 28 years old and spoke with an accent.”

The race or a similar physical description of the suspect is not mentioned.