No announcement yet.

affirmative action


300x250 Mobile

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • affirmative action

    Its simple, yes or no? Just wondering general opinions.



  • #2
    It appears as though you've recieved "votes" but not opinions. This can be a "hot" topic.

    Personally Affirmative Action has outlived it's usefullness. At one point in time in was necessary to enact such a law to avail fair and equitable employment and housing to everyone not just a certain segment of the population. This was especially true in the 60's to late 70's. This was an era in which racial minorities and women were often discriminated against when seeking employment and housing.

    This law made it's impact and accomplished it's goals. It has also been fortified by E.E.O. Civil Rights was in it's "infancy" at the time of it's inception. In my opinion it achieved the purpose. The job sector should now focus on who is the best candidate for the position based on experience, education and skill level. Basing positons and promotion to "balance" a depatment, Agency, etc., really loses out these days by advancing someone in keeping with this concept. Many highly qualified candidates/applicants have been "overlooked" or put on the "back burner" because the Departments/Agencies are basing these advancements on ratios rather than the experience, education and skill levels. This is where it has often been said that the overall job requirements/standards have been lowered to afford accessibility to all.


    • #3
      You're asking on a forum full of mostly white males...What do you think they're going to say??


      • #4
        IMHO, A/A is a big crock of $hit, which allows underqualified individuals into LE, and keeps those who would have better potential out. My city's PD has several classic examples of that.

        But this city, many times the victim of a lawsuit based on race/gender/WTF, always gives in to A/A, and would hire Lizzie Borden to meet the quota!

        Don't get me wrong- we have some really fine female/minority/both officers on the department here, as well as the good and bad WM's.

        I just feel anymore A/A is a main tool used in double standards in hiring, in an obsolete piece of crap, and it needs to go. Judge candidates on their own merits, not their race and/or gender.
        Never make a drummer mad- we beat things for a living!


        • #5
          Invisiblecop, that was very well said. Frank Booth, I can't help but like you....that was right on the money. Having a very good knowledge of the history of race relations in this country, I feel that Affirmative Action had it's place, and that it has (for the most part) served it's purpose. However, circumstances have changed, and it is time for us to change with them, and that means that perhaps it's time for Affirmative Action to go by the wayside.

          What needs to be addressed now are current attitudes towards women and minorities in Law Enforcement, and what needs to be done to improve the situation. When discussing female and/or minority officers on this forum, the words female/minority are almost always prefaced by the word 'unqualified'. One answer to the problem is simple: Simply hire the most qualified candidate, without regard to gender or race. Standards should not be altered or lowered to allow a candidate in who would otherwise not be able to do so on their own abilities and merit.

          At the same time, there is something that minority and female candidates can do THEMSELVES to help alleviate the situation, and that is to be able to perform and pass academic, physical, and firearms qualifications at 100% across the board, as well as having a squeaky clean background. When women and minority candidates for Law Enforcement can do what is necessary to CONSISTENTLY perform at such levels, then perhaps we can begin to change current attitudes.
          'If the grass is greener on the other side, water your OWN lawn.'


          • #6
            The main reason that Affirmative Action is Alive and Well is because of Government Funding. Most Departments/agencies look forward to the additional monies allocated to them yearly to keep this archiac Law alive. Another gross misappropriation of our hard earned tax dollars!


            • #7
              I have always wondered...

              Isn't the idea of equality that everyone is treated the same and held to one standard regardless of race/gender etc...? If so, it would seem that affirmative action is counter productive to equality since it affords a lower standard and special treatment over the majority based solely on race/gender etc...

              Yes, I am a white male. That's not my fault. I didn't have any choice in what gender or color I was born. Where I did have a choice was keeping my nose clean and staying out of trouble growing up. I went to a public school in the city with many minorities and females. The curriculum wasn't great, but I didn't have any choice in where I went to school either. I didn't have money for college. Not my choice, but hey, we have to play the hand we're dealt. My choice...I joined the Army. I earned myself a college degree, which I might add, was not earned between frat parties. It came from hard work in between field exercises, overseas tours and 12-hour law enforcement shifts. I don't regret those decisions.

              My point is that I have not had anything handed to me. I have made sacrifices and worked my [email protected]@ off to get where I am today. Why? In order to make myself a marketable commodity to employers. I have earned my education and experience and the thought that I may be passed over for a job or promotion which I am qualified for in order to hire or promote a less qualified minority makes my blood boil. If I am denied a position for which I am the most qualified candidate based solely on my gender or race, how can anyone call that anything other than discrimination?

              C. Davis

              "Let us not forget those who gave their tomorrows for our todays"


              • #8
                The concept that this Forum basically comprised of white male members may be true to a degree. I am a female who has experienced first hand the implementation of Civil Rights, Affirmative Action and E.E.O. It was a totally different atmosphere than todays' hiring and housing practices.

                At one time it was necessary. Today Civil Rights and E.E.O. now sees that these groups are "protected" under law and afforded fair and equitable employment, promotions and housing. There are thousands of hungary attorneys eager to take on suits that smack of violations in these areas. Cases are heard daily in every state concerning these violations and monies rightfully paid to those discriminated against. No employer in their right mind would venture to blantantly and purposely refuse employment to anyone in these protected classes. Financial and Civil Penalities are quite hefty to those who are foolish enough to violate the Civil Rights Act and E.E.O. Guidelines.

                In many cases today Affirmative Action has spawned a unique counter effect : reverse discrimination. This has become a political hot potato that many have challenged but have yet to win because of of this archaic Law. It's left the job sector in a sad state of affairs. Each years "standards" are lowered to attract those who would otherwise not pass entry exams. The "Battle Cry" of those who have failed is : "The test was biased! It was purposely "worded" to omit certain groups!" So say those who've failed. This is pure nonsense! This is all because of a Law that has long outlived its' usefulness. It affects all of us not just some of us.
                Last edited by Invisiblecop; 01-05-2004, 10:03 AM.


                • #9
                  In Canada we call it employment equity instead of Affirmative Action. Once again A/A is wrong, how does it help law enforcement agencies catch criminals, what difference will it make if a guy is black or white. I think that the politicians who dont have any clue about police work are shoving affirmative action down departments throats.


                  • #10

                    "You're asking on a forum full of mostly white males...What do you think they're going to say??"

                    Exactly, exactly, exactly. As a black guy, it's always fun to watch whites yell and whine about how they are getting treated so unfair and how they are being discriminated against, considering American history, all I can do is laugh and think of the irony. Anyway, alot of people don't realize that many of these applicants aren't underqualified or not as well prepared for the job, they just get it because they are a minority. If two people are tied for a job, the minority will get it or if the minority is slightly below, then the minority will still get it. I firmly believe that these results would be the same even without Affirmative Action. See, business and companies all love to be able to say how diverse they are and how they treat people fair and how they love their minorities just to gain or save face. Diversity in my opinion has become nothing more than a marketing tool in this society for companies to get whatever goal they percieve they need and even without A/A it would still occur. Don't get mad at the "underqualified" minorities, get mad at our employers who are simply passing up more talent to save or gain face or to be able to plaster there minority on their advertisments to look good. Be mad at the people who are simply using the minorities for their own benifit, those are the people to get mad at. In reality, there still are places of high minority make up where the kids honestly don't have as much a chance as their suburban counterparts and other such cases where having A/A is a benifit to give minorities the boost that they need to achieve that they would not get elsewhere. I'm not saying it would be wise to hire the minority who worked at McDonalds sweeping floors as opposed to the White Ex-CEO but in circumstances where two applicants are close to each other, I say o ahead and let the minority get the job, don't like that? Think of it as a reperation and hey, if the minority fails or dosen't do as well as a white counterpart at leats you can guarantee the world will hear about it and focus on it as the media loves to do ala SAT scores, which is another matter. Basically, when it's all said and done, there still are cases where minorities actually need A/A, and then there are cases when employers simply use A/A for their own goals, which you all always seem to notice more often and thats not the fault of anyone except the employer...


                    • #11

                      "The concept that this Forum basically comprised of white male members may be true to a degree."

                      Really, I would say that in today's world women are no longer as impacted as much by the new form of concealed discrimination as muh as minorities are so...


                      "Each years "standards" are lowered to attract those who would otherwise not pass entry exams"

                      Biased testing? Similar to the biased testing that nearly every student takes, that being the SAT which has always been considered culturally biased to favor whites? You must have noticed, the results are divided up by ethnicity and then plastered in every newspaper as soon as they get out. This is another case, college using A/A to look away from the minorities mediocre SAT scored and still take him over the higher scoring white males who have ALWAYS done better on this SAT test which dosen't prove much anyway, you can't wrap up 4 years of High School and ignore GPA's and instead focus on a 4 or so hour test...


                      • #12

                        "Isn't the idea of equality that everyone is treated the same and held to one standard regardless of race/gender etc...? "

                        "Equality" really has nothing to do with it. No one in America is ever guaranteed "equality." If they were, we would all be as rich as Bill Gates. What is guaranteed (in most circumstances) is "equal opportunity." There's a huge difference there. No one is saying you can have this job if you want because it's an issue of equality, they're saying that you can apply and have an equal shot at trying to get the job. This is really where A/A is a crock of BS, it tries to turn "equal opportunity" into "equality." There are already plenty of countries with "equality" written right into their political agendas; They're called communist countries.
                        Sometimes I look at a person, and I just think, 'That person, right there, is the lowest common denominator.'


                        • #13
                          "In reality, there still are places of high minority make up where the kids honestly don't have as much a chance as their suburban counterparts"

                          So what? You want me to shed tear? Wah, the suburban kids have more opportunity, boo hoo. They had more opportunity than me too what's your point? It's funny that you choose to word your argument in the whining of of white males then "whine" about inner city kids being disadvantaged. What about inner city white kids? Are they disadvantaged? What about poor country kids? Surely they're disadvantaged aren't they? Oh wait, they're white, nevermind that they're dirt poor.

                          Are you saying that Michael Jordan's kids need AA? Are you saying that Bill Cosby's kids need AA? Are you saying that Robert Johnson's kids need AA? Are you saying that Colin Powell's kids need AA? Do you think that they have less opportunity than some white suburban kid? According to AA legislation they do. How ridiculous is that? A billionaire's kid qualifies for preferential treatment. IF you are going to base some kind of preferential treatment legislation on anything, why not economic status? That seems like it would produce a much more positive effect. Actually bennefiting someone who needs it instead of a black lawyers kid who gets preferential treatment to get into Harvard. The black lawyers kid went to good schools, had computers, lived in a safe neighborhood. What disadvantage did she have? None, but she'll get in over a poor black kid from the inner city because her parents can pay the tuition. If the people you want to help are the poor disadvantaged inner city kids, wouldn't it make more sense to base a preference system on what makes them disadvantaged? Or doesn't that matter? Are all black people the same that it doesn't matter where they come from, or what their story is, only that they're black. Because that's certainly what it sounds like when I hear people like you talk about the need for race based affirmitave action.

                          The point people seem to miss when discussing equality, is the one that Maliz made. Nobody has a right to a job, only the right to the opportunity to a job, or to attend college, or anything else. As long as you are not barred from competing for a job there is no issue with equality. Liberals have been arguing, quite successfuly, that equality of outcomes is what's important. That equality of bank accounts is as important as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They're idiots. I didn't have the advantages that Robert Johnson's kids have but so what? Does that mean that I should begrudge them what they have? No, of course not. They got theirs now I want to go get mine. (I'll never have that kind of money but that's by choice) The point is that I have the opportunity to rise above my humble beginings and so does everyone else with or without help from the government.

                          BTW, some of the biggest opponents of AA are black. It's not simply white males whining about discrimination. Although, if discrimination in favor of whites is wrong, wouldn't discrimination in favor of blacks be wrong? Guess not. Who knew? Two wrongs do make a right.
                          On the wings of a dove
                          Let's roll for justice
                          Let's roll for truth
                          Let's not let our children grow up
                          Fearful in their youth -- Neil Young


                          • #14
                            "Equality" really has nothing to do with it. No one in America is ever guaranteed "equality." If they were, we would all be as rich as Bill Gates.
                            I mispoke. I apologize. What I meant was that if the idea is that we are all supposed to have the same "opportunity", then one group should not be given an inherent advantage simply because of their race or gender.

                            Very well said jarhead6073.
                            C. Davis

                            "Let us not forget those who gave their tomorrows for our todays"


                            • #15
                              "Affirmative Action" -- where a black kid who is dumber than a box of rocks but sure can dribble a basketball gets a 4 year scott free scholarship while a white female with a 3.8 GPA can't get into the college of her choice to study medicine and do something to help society.

                              yeah...i'm all for AA.
                              I'll post, You argue.


                              MR300x250 Tablet


                              What's Going On


                              There are currently 5068 users online. 386 members and 4682 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad