Booman has a well thought out and passionate response to a New York Times article on the plight of black men in modern day America.
Unfortunately for Booman, he’s also wrong in his conclusion:
Ending the Drug War is the single most productive thing we could do to help black men get a step up in American society.
The Drug War has swept up such a large population of black men that almost every urban black family knows an uncle, or a cousin, that has been impacted. Sometimes they are the victims of drug-related crime, other times their loved ones have wound up in prison. Doing time loses its sense of shame, and therefore the threat of doing time loses a lot of its deterrent effect. There is a certain snowball effect that has occurred. When the neighborhoods are filled with men that cannot find legitimate work because of their criminal record, a failure to look for legitimate work loses its sense of shame. And finding illegal sources of income, being the simpler path, also loses its sense of shame.
In short, the Drug War erodes the culture. It reinforces itself. It legitimizes and excuses crime.
Any comprehensive program that aims to tackle the problem of black male unemployment, must put an end to the Drug War front and center as the single most important piece.
Or, those black men could just stop selling and using drugs. You know, take some of the responsibility for their own moral failings, rather than perpetuating the “victim” excuse.
Believe it or not, every single person has the ability to make choices: the choice to stay in school or drop out; the choice to do drugs or not to do drugs; the chioce to sell drugs or not to sell drugs; and the choice to become a criminal or the chioce to remain a law abiding and productive member of society.
***
I agree with Booman that the data presented in the Times story is alarming, and its a problem that needs to be discussed and solutions found…but decriminalizing their criminal behavior is not the answer.
A good starting point would be for prominent black leaders to quit attacking blacks who are trying to break the cycle:
In fact it seems that anytime a black person dares to rise above “being blackâ€â€”getting an education, thinking for themselves, getting out of the ghetto, etc.—they are attacked by their own as being “not black enoughâ€, an oreo (black on the outside, white on the inside), or depicted as a Sambo.
***
MORE: Just to prove my point, Aubrey Kaplan at the L.A. Times writes this piece (which also appeared in my hometown paper, The Austin American-Statesman) that posits that part of the reason that White House adviser Claude Allen committed fraud was because he’s black.
Seriously.
Eugene Volokh wonders:
“I don’t support conservatism in its current iteration, and I support black conservatives even less.” [from the Times story] (I take this to mean “traitor to his race,” since otherwise it makes no sense: Why would holding any view be worse if you’re black, unless the theory is that somehow blacks ought not hold that view because it’s supposedly bad for blacks?) When whites are called traitors to their race for supporting policies that are supposedly bad for whites, that’s pretty roundly condemned as racism, and rightly so. Yet somehow condemning blacks as traitors to their race is seen by many as just fine.
And Paul Geary at The New Editor:
The Times won’t publish the Mohammed cartoons, but will publish an op-ed piece asserting that Claude Allen became a thief because of the natural psychological ramifications of being a black Republican. That’s breathtaking hypocrisy.
Yes, it is.
***
ADDED: From ReidBlog:
The imperative now is to find some solutions. One that I could think of off the bat, is a move to change the culture of “Black America.” If I see one more commercial for a gangsta movie or CD, I think I’ll puke. We’ve got to start modeling more productive ideas to our young men, rather than just materialism, mysogyny, sexual promiscuity (including bisexual promiscuity) and the relentless pursuit of a fictional, rented house, rented jewelry gangsta lifestyle. What are you saying about yourself and your community when you finally land a record deal, and choose to call your label Murder, Inc. or Death Row? And why are you surprised when the feds pay it extra attention? (Hollywood hasn’t exactly been helpful with its glorification of pimps and gangstas both in the greenlighting process, and during the recent Oscars…)
I think Reid makes a strong case.
read more | add new comment | source |full article | [IMG delicious] delicious | [IMG digg] digg | [IMG reddit] reddit | [IMG technorati] technorati
Of course selling and dealing drugs is a bad idea.
But does it change your opinion to know that whites use drugs at a rate greater than blacks? Evidently it is not drug use that has been criminalized but poverty.
Selective enforcement of the law violates the equal protection provision of the Constitution.
I don’t know that. Do you have a cite?
You know how you prevent being the target of “selective enforcement”? Don’t do or sell drugs. The choice is still ultimately in the hands of each person, regardless of skin color.
I’m not going to pontificate too much here because any intelligent person can see the answer. You have to get to the root of the problem which is the breakdown of the family and a permissive, immoral society. You can’t treat the result. You have to prevent the problem. Giving a person insulin for diabetes doesn’t change the fact he still has diabetes.
I hate to get all “facty” here, but it’s simply not true that the Kaplan article says Allen committed his crime because he’s black. That’s a lie. As for Voloky, he gets what he deserves here.
You’re only partly right, but mostly wrong Dan.
True, the Kaplan article doesn’t come right out and spell it out for you — the words “he did it ‘cuase he’s black” aren’t in the article.
But the entire articel alludes to the fact that he found him self in this prediciment precisely because he is Conservative and black.
But in case the reader’s reading comprehension skills are mired somewhere near that of a 7-year old, Kaplan tries to clear it up a little near the end when he writes:
For those whose reading comprehension skills or ability to put two-and-two together (and get four) are still not getting it, what Kaplan says and means in that one inoccus sentence is:
Being Conservative and black are two traits so diametrically oppossed to each other, that they’ll drive you crazy — and the existence of both of these traits in the same person, is likely the cause of Allen’s crime.
When a white conservative commits a crime, it’s simply part of our inherent “Culture of Corruption”. But when a black conservative commits a crime it’s because being black + conservative drove him crazy?
Now that’s crazy.
Blacks constitute 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of persons convicted, and 74 percent of people sent to prison.
http://www.drugpolicy.org/communities/race/criminaljust/
You can preach about morality to black people but clearly the problem lies elsewhere. We have a criminal justice system that sees a white drug user and says they’re really good kids who’ve just fallen in with a bad crowd. But when a African American is arrested for drug use they are seen as a threat to society. I’m not arguing here which is the correct view but the disparity is appalling.
5 years later the black kid is out of prison and the white kid is out of college. Yet somehow we are surprised by their differing circumstances of their economic and social conditions.
(to be clear: this link does show black drug use to be marginally higher than that of whites but other studies i’ve seen say the opposite. in any case, the small difference in drug use does not account for the huge differences in incarceration rates.)
Facts are stupid things, aren’t they Robbie?
Preston, I find your constant use of statistics comical. Black people have a choice just like anyone else. According to your statistics; 13% choose to use drugs, 35% choose to possess drugs. The problem lies no where “else” but with the choice they made.
Seems to me that your argument reinforces Robbies point “You know, take some of the responsibility for their own moral failings, rather than perpetuating the “victim” excuse.
Boy, you youngins’ don’t remember what it was like. In 1981 I was living in Berkeley, adjacent to Oakland. The feds had to come in and clean out the gangs in the East Bay. This predates crack. Once crack hit the streets, it was like the wild west all over. Plus, the hospitals were filling up with crack babies. These drug laws were enacted by the urging of the black community. It was the black community that was being devastated by drugs and gangs. It’s bad now but it was horrible back in 1980s.
I can only speak for the criminal justice system in California where I live. If there is a disparity it is due to different types of criminal behavior. If there were shoot outs in executive bathrooms with innocent people getting killed, believe me law enforcement would be targeting them. And for the record, in California people arrested for drugs are given numerous chances and treatement before they are given jail or prison time. If a first time offense of simple possession, they can avoid prosecution all together. And you wouldn’t know a fact if it smacked you in the face, Dan.
#2 – What would lead you to say that? I pointed out a fact, and Robbie was forced to ackowledge that I was correct. If there’s any face-smacking going around, I get to sit this round out.
Dan, we are so unimpressed with you.
That’s fine, #2. I’d rather be correct than impressively wrong.
Preston, I find your constant use of statistics comical.
Yes, I suppose it is easier to debate if you are not in a reality-based community but I’m not sure what’s comical about selective enforcement of the law: about the same numbers of black people use illegal drugs as white people yet over 70% of the people incarcerated for drug offenses are black.
I suppose you could look at those statistics and come to the conclusion that black people are stupid to use drugs when the system is rigged against them.
You also probably could have come to the conclusion in the Jim Crow South that a black man would be stupid to whistle at a white woman on the street or any number of actions that are permissible for whites when the penalty could be a beating or death. Yet somehow that’s not the conclusion I would draw…
Since I am not personally much able to effect whether black people do or do not use drugs or whistle at white women I would prefer that our criminal justice system treats those offenders in an equal manner independent of their race. Is that so comical?
And SIT… Did you just mistype or do you completely miss the point of the statistic I cited?
You said: According to your statistics; 13% choose to use drugs, 35% choose to possess drugs.
No.
(Obviously there are not 3 times as many black drug ‘possessors’ as black drug users…)
What the stats said:
13% of all people who use drugs are black.
35% of all people who are arrested for possession are black.
The obvious conclusion is that the race of the drug user has nearly tripled the chance of arrest. I would hope that would be troubling to to members of the political party that are so adamant about proving their commitment to racial equality.
Since I am not personally much able to effect whether black people do or do not use drugs or whistle at white women I would prefer that our criminal justice system treats those offenders in an equal manner independent of their race. Is that so comical?
It’s not comical, and I share your concern. I too would prefer that our CJ system treated all offenders equal regardless of race.
However, I think that 2 had a valid observation when he wrote:
There are undoubtably more black and hispanic gangs and gang member than there are white gangs. These gangs are all involved, not just in drug use, but drug trafficing — and more notably — violent gang-related drug and turf wars.
I’m curious how many young black men in prison for drug-related crimes are in prison only for possession? How many are in prison for drug-related crimes that go beyond simple possesion, and are coupled with additional crimes (such as robbery, murder, assault, etc.)? Same for white men in prison on drug related charges.
I don’t know the answer, but I’ll bet the answer is not as black and white as “same crime, differnet punishment”.
The obvious conclusion is that the race of the drug user has nearly tripled the chance of arrest.
No, the obvious conclusion is that the drug user is committing an act that gives LE reasonable suspicion to pat them down or probable cause to arrest and search incident to that arrest. If they find drugs, tough. If you do drugs behind closed doors, the police can’t see or break down your door. If you are seen sitting in a doorway, lighting a crack pipe, you get arrested. If you’re observed standing on a street corner, exchanging currency for off white objects which later test positive for cocaine base, you get arrested. If you enter a crackhouse to get high and it is raided by the cops, you get arrested. That one race does this more than other races is not an excuse. Good people do not want this shit in their neighborhoods. They want to walk down the street unmolested. They don’t want crack dealers trying to sell to their kids. They don’t want to be the victims of drivebys.
I’m curious how many young black men in prison for drug-related crimes are in prison only for possession? How many are in prison for drug-related crimes that go beyond simple possesion, and are coupled with additional crimes (such as robbery, murder, assault, etc.)?
Courts consider the fact that some crimes are based on drug addiction and where appropriate will order treatment in prison/jail or in lieu of prison/jail.
the obvious conclusion is that the drug user is committing an act that gives LE reasonable suspicion to pat them down
Such as ‘Driving While Black’?
Anyway. You attempt to address disparities between the races in the number of drug users v. the # of drug arrests. How about drug arrests v. drug convictions? Or drug convictions v. prison sentences.
At each step black people are treated more harshly by the criminal justice system. In part, the result of this is the devastating statistics presented in the NY Times piece where some 70% of young, black, male, high school dropouts are not employed.
This, of course, isn’t limited to criminal justice. The same disparity of treatment exists in housing, education, and employment. I don’t know the answer to those problems but I’m pretty sure it doesn’t include denying their existence.
Such as ‘Driving While Black’?
Wow. In Prestonia no black person is ever guilty and only detained and searched because he is black. lol!
Anyway. You attempt to address disparities between the races in the number of drug users v. the # of drug arrests. How about drug arrests v. drug convictions? Or drug convictions v. prison sentences.
In my experience, you have a better chance of going to trial and winning if you are black. And note: Most not guiltys are actually guilty of the crime. And people convicted of drug offenses are not sentenced to prison more often then white defendants. Who feeds you this crap?
At each step black people are treated more harshly by the criminal justice system.
No, they are not.
In part, the result of this is the devastating statistics presented in the NY Times piece where some 70% of young, black, male, high school dropouts are not employed.
Because they are drop outs and have no skills. Don’t do drugs. Take advantage of educational opportunities and you will find employment.
This, of course, isn’t limited to criminal justice. The same disparity of treatment exists in housing, education, and employment. I don’t know the answer to those problems but I’m pretty sure it doesn’t include denying their existence.
And I am absolutely sure it doesn’t include crying racism where none exists.
And people convicted of drug offenses are not sentenced to prison more often then white defendants. Who feeds you this crap?
…
No, they are not.
Well, obviously we’re going nowhere with this. But I’ll say your refutations would carry a bit more weight if they weren’t pull out of … thin air. Perhaps, a citation of facts rather than anecdotal evidence.
It took me all of 5 minutes to find statistics that undergird my argument. Maybe you don’t believe them but they put the burden upon you to provide counter-evidence.
Just sayin.
In any case, I was never making the point that people aren’t responsible for their own fates. I’m simply pointing out that if you are trying to explain why members a historically discriminated group are not succeeding it might be useful to look at discrimination as a contributing cause. It’s naive in the extreme to believe that the playing field became level in 1865 or 1964 or whenever.
Gotta weigh in here….
Have a brother, one of six, five girls one boy.
Alcoholic father. Growing up wasn’t easy..terrifying actually at times, but mom was rock solid. We forgave Dad over and over. Dirt poor. We hang together despite it all.
Brother has alcohol issues like dad, gets married and has three kids. Sisters get married and have 1-3 kids.
Brother can’t hold jobs due to alcoholism. Father coddles brother probably because he sees himself in only son and worries about everything..
Brother goes on welfare and then disability. Alcohol ruins health. Sisters live ordinary work-a-day lives. Sisters never coddled.
Father continues to coddle son..gives what little he has to help him. Sisters also help brother with money, clothes, etc. We love him. He is our brother. Brother continues to live on welfare..sells what we give him at garage sales…brother’s kids darling as little children, all fail to graduate high school, get in trouble with law.
Sisters give up on brother. Love him, but no longer support him. Why? Brother has become used to the system..knows how to game it…it’s how he lives. Have determined there is no changing him. All sisters worried about his kids, but can’t raise them. Brother’s wife totally worthless..never worked day in her life. Drunk…no teeth even. If ever employable, not after personal appearance gone to hell.
And so it goes….
We’re white Preston. It’s not race. It’s choice and lifestyle.
No, you don’t have the stats to back up your arguments. You are taking numbers that really have no application to what is being discussed. You are arguing that there is a disparity in sentencing when sentencing is based on laws and the individual facts of each case independent of race. And what you may right off as anecdotal, I call hands on experience. You don’t have a clue about what you are arguing, Preston. And I have neither the interest nor the time to dumb it down for you with only the mere possibility that you may understand. You won’t. You don’t want to understand how the criminal justice system works. You only want to misrepresent it in order to support your tired world view.
2,
Thanks for articulating better than I.
Those are my sentiments exactly.
Dianne, no one denies that individual choice is crucial in determining where that person ends up.
Yet if that’s all it takes do you suppose that the people of China owe their sudden prosperity a change in their morality and work ethic?
Of course not, the economic and social structures changed in China that now reward hard work with higher incomes.
It is naive to believe that removing just the most obvious legal barriers to economic acheivement will result in a level playing field while remaining oblivious to the more fundamental disparities.
2 -
You’re ad hominem attacks really elevate the discussion- thanks!
sentencing is based on laws and the individual facts of each case independent of race.
Well that’s sort of the issue at debate, isn’t it?
You might check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
You want an example of an ad hominem attack? Take a look at your false accusations of racism. You link to some liberal think tank that links to another liberal think tank that cites some generalized stats that are over 10 years old and that ignore the actual facts of the crimes that are the reasons for the so called disparity in sentencing. So, don’t whine because no one takes you seriously.
Preston….I encourage you to hop on over to LaShawn Barber’s Corner for enlightenment on the subject of race and the issues associated with it from the perspective of a respected Black woman who is working to improve the lives of Black people in this country. She takes the subject head on with no apologies for her beliefs. I think you will enjoy her blog.
Varied topics..good discussions. I have tremendous respect for her.
You want an example of an ad hominem attack? Take a look at your false accusations of racism.
Uh, are you serious? That is a brilliant strategy: discussing the possibility of racism in society is ‘personal attack’… It sort of shuts down debate, doesn’t it?
So, you’re point is that the statistics are too old? Or that they’re wrong? I thought you were arguing that they were irrelevant, that they had ‘application to what is being discussed’.
Whatever. If you want to have a little discussion about race I’m willing but this isn’t going anywhere.
Dianne-
I’ve seen her blog. I agree that issues like affirmative action are messy and complicated. I don’t think anyone expects one program to solve so many historical societal and econmic injustices.
I think it’s great to preach about individual responsibility but it seems a bit idealistic to think that cures societal problems. Once again- there were incredibly smart, moral, and industrious black people who died in poverty because they were not allowed in to good schools or good jobs or allowed to buy good property. While the legal barriers to success have been lowered it is crazy to think that a boy growing up in downtown Newark has an equal shot as one in suburban New Jersey, for example.
Yes I am serious. You don’t debate, Preston. You find some crap off the internet and link to it. You don’t read it. You don’t understand it. You don’t question it. As long as you think it supports your liberal kneejerk position, you believe it. And yes the statistics are irrelevant for the reasons I already stated twice and yes they are old, too. Sorry that is so difficult for you to understand.
I know I shouldn’t reply…
2-
I believe I’ve had productive debates with a number of conservatives on this and other sites. Can you say the same about liberals? If not, perhaps I’m not the problem.
As far as my use of statistics. Of course, statistics are famous for distorting reality. For instance, you presented a valid point that drug offenses may be an add-on offense after a perp has been apprehended. Yet without statistics we are left with he said/she said discussions that are certainly all heat and no light.
Regarding my abilities to read, understand, and link to supporting evidence- well, that’s just slander unless you are stating that the text of that link somehow does not corroborate the statistics I pulled from that site.
Anyway. Nice chatting with you- I’m off.
Disrespect solves nothing 2. However, Preston, you know the problem is not just limited to conservatives.
What we need are solutions, not accusations.
Unfortunately, this is the way a lot of discussions on race relations go. The result is what we have here…
Dianne – I’m happy to agree with you on this – the whole area is ripe for misunderstanding and accusations based on misunderstanding, and it happens to both sides. It takes discipline and humility on both sides to be able to have a meaningful dialogue. Unfortunately, on the internet it is too easy to throw a few accusations of stupidity or racism or what-have-you, and it tends to shut down the discussion, or turn it into a flamewar.
This is one of the only areas where I would consider censoring posts on my own site. I haven’t tried it yet,but it might be interesting to see how that would work – just delete anything that is an attack.
Oh can it, you two. He made a bogus argument about the criminal justice system and race of which he knows nothing about. You want to humor people who spew that type of crap, that’s your problem, not mine.
Solutions? For what? People are not given heavier sentences because they are black. Certain laws were not enacted as a result of racism but as a result of the black community asking both local and federal government to enact laws to specifically address the problems of drugs/crime/gangs in their community.
People are not given heavier sentences because they are black.
Wow, 2- it must be liberating to live in a world where society’s problems are all someone else’s business.
However, the US government itself might disagree about the impact of race and the criminal justice system: “In 82% of the studies [reviewed], race of the victim was found to influence the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty, i.e., those who murdered whites were found more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks.”
- United States General Accounting Office, Death Penalty Sentencing, February 1990
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=45&did=539#The%20Raw%20Data
I doubt that the black community asked for that.
If you are going to post a quote and follow it with a link that theoretically the quote is from, the link should lead to that quote. Yours doesn’t. Care to try again? And the DPIC is even worse than the other two lefty website you relied on earlier. They are dishonest. And once again, whether a death sentence is handed down depends on specific and unique factors that neither you or the other antideath penalty whackos ever mention.
The U.S. General Accounting Office Report “DEATH PENALTY SENTENCING: Research Indicates Pattern of Racial Disparities” (GAO/GGD-90-57, 2/90) is cited by opponents as proof that the “race of the victim” effect has been proven. Not quite. First, some of the studies which the GAO included in their analysis included non-capital murders. This certainly impairs the integrity of the results because only capital murders should have been included. Secondly, Drs. Stephen Klein and John Rolph, “Relationship of Offender and Victim Race to Death Penalty Sentences in California”(Jurimetrics Journal, 32, Fall 1991), found that, “After accounting for some of the many factors that may influence penalty decisions, neither race of the defendant nor race of the victim appreciably improved prediction of who was sentenced to death . . . “. Thirdly, Smith College Professors Stanley Rothman and Stephen Powers (“Execution by Quota?”, The Public Interest, Summer 1994), found that legal variables, such as prior criminal history and the aggravated nature of the murder, are the proven basis for imposition of the death penalty. The black/white variation in sentencing has generally been reduced to zero when such legal variables are introduced as controls. Fourth, crime statistics show a 4:1 to a 7:1 ratio of white to black victims in circumstances relevant to death penalty cases.. Such ratios are consistent with the 6:1 ratio of white to black victims in death row cases (C.1,2,4,5). Fifth, any affirmative conclusions regarding the GAO study disregards the findings in McCleskey, that an empirical/statistical study cannot separate the causal effect of legitimate factors influencing jury decisions from the effects of possible racial biases, whereby The Court found “Where the discretion that is fundamental to our criminal justice process is involved, we decline to assume that what is unexplained [by measured factors] is invidious.”(481 US at 313). See Dr. Joseph Katz’ enforcement of the McCleskey majority: “Statement to the Senate Subcommittee on the Judiciary Concerning the Relationship Between Race and the Death Penalty” 10/2/89.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
Hey, Dianne – not only have we finally agreed on something, we’ve both earned the scorn of #2. I think I owe you a beer or something.
Hee Hee…didn’t realize we were both from Kansas City area, Dan. I always feel like I’m in Texas when I visit this blog. I like Boulevard Wheat…lol..
There ya go, 2: Point, Counterpoint- it’s almost like a real debate here…
In any case I had the amusing experience while watching a documentary on Venezuela yesterday of listening to interviews of the upper and middle class- who make up less than 20% of the society claiming that the problem with the poor was that they didn’t work hard enough. Just like my friend 2 would say!!! This in a country that is something like the 4th largest exporter of oil to the US.
It’s the same argument that was made by the English about the Irish: they were too lazy to not be poor. Yet somehow when the Irish got to a different social and economic environment in the US they prospered.
Once again, I’ll say the ideology of hard work is what each individual needs to have to succeed. The government however has to enact policies that understand that societal and economic forces have conspired to work against many in our society.
Preston,
Entitlement programs comprise 2/3 of federal spending.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/Issues2004/budget-spending.cfm
What shall we do? Force those who are already working their asses off to get another job and work harder to pay for those who won’t?
Or who shall we “take from” to “give to” ?
I’m sorry, this country is full of a lot of people who were disadvantaged for some reason, but I’ll be damned if I’ll agree to pay for someone to sit on their ass just because they are a different color than me. Those days are long gone.
Of course the option is to give up capitalism for socialism. Sorry, if I supported that option, I’d live in France. Come to think of it, I’d rather work.
As my friend Preston would say, the hell with the law abiding citizens of the black community!!! It will never be a real debate with you, Preston, because you know nothing of the subject and only brought it up because you erroneously thought it would support your looser political agenda.
I’ll agree to pay for someone to sit on their ass just because they are a different color than me.
This certainly has no relation to anything I’ve advocated.
Dianne- of course, your numbers relate largely to programs for the elderly- not anything that is going to situation of young, black men.
http://encarta.msn.com/media_461566684/U_S_Government_Spending.html
“Once again, I’ll say the ideology of hard work is what each individual needs to have to succeed. The government however has to enact policies that understand that societal and economic forces have conspired to work against many in our society.”
Preston, in reference to the above, my point was if the government is already spending 2/3 on entitlements, where is the money going to come from to aid the situation of young black men? Or are you talking about something that doesn’t involve money? You were talking about societal and economic forces right?
I can think of one thing that would equalize everything for everybody, but of course it involves money and that is a voucher system for education in PUBLIC as well as private schools. However, I think that any additional money that would cost would be well spent. I spoke about this on another post yesterday. Way back when my husband went to an Engineering High School in Baltimore. It was a public school, devoted to the pursuit of a career in the construction field. There were other public high schools that specialized in studies related to other types of careers, more like junior colleges of today. He received a wonderful education, but had to get on a city bus and travel a long ways every day to and from school. Also, uniforms (shirt and tie) were required. These schools were very successful and disciplined, and were career oriented. Years later I worked with a guy who graduated from City College (another Baltimore public high school) who became a veterinarian. It worked then; I don’t know why it wouldn’t work now.
What, specifically, are you calling for?
Lets just keep locking the negros up.