Those Racist Dogs!

Now police dogs must watch the color of who they chew?

If modern race hustlers are to be believed, racism is an an inherent part of being white - and, indeed, racism is exclusive to that color.  If you're a minority, you can't be racist, even if you happen to be a majority as in California and most major cities.  The one lonely white person still around is always and forever the racist; as U.S. Rep. Gus Savage, (D, IL) memorably put it, "Racism is white.  There ain't no black racism."

Alas, the Honorable Savage was being speciesist - that is, needlessly restricting his concerns to human beings.  It turns out that dogs (color indeterminate) are also racist:

Racist and speciesist.

A new report on the Canine Special Detail of the LA Sheriff’s Department (LASD) shows that police dogs bite a disproportionately large number of minority suspects.

According to the Police Assessment Resource Centre (PARC) report, the number of Latino people bitten by LASD dogs went up 30 per cent between 2004 and 2012 and the number of African Americans bitten rose 33 per cent.

Most disturbingly, for the first half of 2013 100 per cent of individuals bitten by LASD dogs have been black or Latino.

Los Angeles became majority-minority some time ago, so it's no surprise to find fewer white criminals there: there are fewer whites, period.  But surely there are at least a handful of white criminals that a police dog might be inclined to take a nibble out of?

It can't be that black people are more tender and flavorful; after all, Science repeatedly assures us, "race is a social construct" devoid of any physical meaning.  The lopsided racial distributions we see virtually everywhere, from the NBA court to the criminal court, is merely the product of happenstance and culture.

Perhaps it's not racism, but classism?

Also noted by the report is the low or non-existent incidence of dog bites in affluent areas with smaller minority populations.

'Crime rates are lower in these areas, but the stark disparity leads us to wonder why canine deployments seem to occur disproportionately in less affluent areas with larger minority populations,' stated the report.

Now we're getting somewhere.  The dogs don't just roam the mean streets of the City of Angels, seeking whom they may devour; they are consciously let loose by human police officers at a time and location of their choosing.  So it could just be that the dogs' choice of tidbit is a result of the stereotypically racist cops.

That's somewhat improbable also: the police chief of Los Angeles is white just at the moment but there have been black police chiefs for years on end.   Like the city it serves, the LAPD is majority-minority and has been for many years.  As long ago as 2000, the federal Justice Department found a third of LAPD officers to be Hispanic, 14% black, and only 46% white.

So even if all 46% of the white LA cops were hard-core racists who set their dogs exclusively on black people, surely at least some of the black officers would have found a white criminal to chase down?

No, there is no possible explanation for this statistical anomaly; it must just be one of those random numbers that arrives without explanation and comes without cause.  At least, no explanation we're allowed to discuss in Barack Obama's America

The dogs themselves - well, they're not subject to the rules of political correctness.  They'll just continue right on biting whatever crooks they encounter without regard for their race, creed, color, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or sexual orientation.  If it so happens that they're all of particular races and not of others - well, who are we to judge?

Until Jesse Jackson pops up to demand that white criminals be found and fed to the dogs just to balance things out.

Read other articles by Hobbes or other articles on Law.
Reader Comments


October 24, 2013 1:14 PM
Add Your Comment...
4000 characters remaining
Loading question...