An observation on Preacherman's post on gangbanger 'George'

[pwrtool45]

Maybe my CM has been talking too much. Let me try my CS and see if a more logical approach works.

//file this.cpp

#include <string>
#include "this.h"

using std namespace;

this::unfair(String z) {

String x = "based on clothes";
String y = "based on actions";


if (z == y) {

argument* = NULL;
return TRUE;

}

else if (z == x)

return FALSE;

else

return NULL;

} //end unfair()


*shrug*

If you want to base your character decisions on what someone's wearing instead of what someone's doing, be my guest. At the current time you are free to do so. If this is a key component in your decision to fire (i.e., this forms the basis for your perceived threat), then it may corrupt your decision. As a result, the subsequent court battle will be longer and more trying that necessary with the possible outcome that you may be spending the rest of your life with real gang-bangers (who consequently will not be wearing gangster clothes).

In the interim, however, I'll probably just bum a cigarette from one of the guys and go on about my business.


kodiak

If the youths in question are under 18, pay no attention. Underage kids can still shoot you, but they'd probably miss anyway. Shooting a real Lorcin causes them to flinch quite badly (as opposed to the plastic light guns attached to House of the Dead which they can shoot quite accurately). In case you weren't being sarcastic, my suggestion was to pay attention to nonverbals from the individuals in question (the "kids") instead of exercising your judgement based on a cursory examination (i.e., clothes).

 

[StuporDave]

Pay attention to youths in the mall

No, not the mall! I avoid the mall like the plague. It's like a personal hell to me. Like the supermarket on saturday.

If you want to base your character decisions......

That may be where we're losing each other. I'm not talking about making a character descision. I'm talking about quick first impressions. Deciding if this person in my immediate environment bears closer scrutiny.
If there are some kids in gang attire in my vicinity, they are immediately filed under "could be trouble" If I were to later overhear them talking about video games and complaining about math homework they would probably be removed from that file.

I'm not going to immediately draw a weapon on some kid walking behind me, but the way he's dressed would make me keep a close eye on him. I'd probably cross the street or step into a store and allow him to get ahead of me. His actions at that point would probably give my a good idea of his intentions, if any. If nothing else, he'd be in front of me, where I could see him and make the observant descision you're talking about.

I think we're arguing the same point from different ends.

Dave

 

[Diggler]

int i = 1;
while(i == 1)
{
     :banghead: 
}

 

[pwrtool45]

Stupor Dave,

I think we're pretty close to the same thing.


Diggler,

So, you *never* feel like hitting your head against a wall?

 

[Diggler]

Doh, you caught me... it's my day off, so I'm not supposed to code today.

Endless loop is more like it.

 

[Michigander]

It is true: EVERYONE profiles. Probably every day.

I say, keep it up, it may save your life some day.

As for LEO's and the like profiling, well, you can pass all the laws you want against it, but they are still going to do it. Can't help it. Their lives are on the line with every traffic stop. Profiling has probably saved more LEO's lives than firearms ever will.

And the LEO's will always "get away" with it too. Why? Because, usually the LEO's are absolutely CORRECT in their "first impression" profile. Then, when they use this "judgement" and treat the suspect accordingly, the suspect is usually "up to no good." So when the LEO takes care of business, who's going to complain? The BG?

Obviously, some people are going to "be profiled" incorrectly, but I'd bet the percentage is small compared to the ones who are profiled correctly.

Of course I have no statistics to bolster these claims, so it is merely my opinion. However, to me it seems like common sense.

 

[444]

" my suggestion was to pay attention to nonverbals from the individuals in question (the "kids") instead of exercising your judgement based on a cursory examination (i.e., clothes)."

I got a better idea, I will do both just like I always have.

"usually the LEO's are absolutely CORRECT in their "first impression" profile. "

I agree. I am not a LEO but have worked "the streets" for over 20 years. I deal with criminals, dopers, gang bangers, hookers, ............................ on a dialy basis. I have been in their houses, cars, rock houses, shooting gallarys, cardboard boxes, sewer pipes, prisons, jails; you name it. My first impressions are not always right, but they are right far more often than they are wrong.
I have spent a lot of time playing a game involving this with my partners. I often bet them on various points about a person or a call based purely on the little information we receive from dispatch. We would each play out the whole senario in our minds with as many details as possible. Then we bet on the points we disagree on. I am quite good at it. And this is without ever even seeing the person when we are doing this. This is based on maybe two sentences from dispatch and an address.