Racial Bias in U.S. Traffic Policing

U.S. police issue traffic fines to racial or ethnic minority drivers more often than to white drivers. However, this does not necessarily mean that police officers are racist, as the disparity could also result from actual differences in driving speeds between demographic groups.

To investigate this issue, Pradhi Aggarwal and his colleagues objectively analyzed drivers' locations, speeds, and speed limits but found no significant differences in speeding behavior or traffic violations. Moreover, they discovered that when both white and minority drivers drove at identical speeds, police were still 33% more likely to issue speeding citations to minority drivers and imposed fines that were 34% higher.

In other words, U.S. police are not neutral regarding the country’s racial and ethnic groups but treat minorities more harshly than white drivers. Naturally, this is an issue that American law enforcement should address as soon as possible.

However, the researchers also noted that their study participants were not a random sample of the entire population but rather better-trained drivers working for a specific rideshare service. Thus, the possibility remains that minority drivers might, on average, follow traffic laws less strictly than white drivers, which could lead police to have a more negative attitude toward them.

This, in turn, might explain why minorities are more easily stopped and fined more harshly. However, this explanation remains—at least for now—pure speculation. Therefore, at this stage, scientific evidence supports the conclusion that traffic law enforcement exhibits racial bias. And this conclusion will not change unless further research specifically addresses the question.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Attitudes towards immigrants are not becoming more positive in Western countries
Racism or self-preservation instinct?
People with Middle Eastern and North African inheritance identify themselves as non-Whites

Facts, US Supreme Court and the case of Roe v. Wade

US Supreme Court has prepared overturning Roe v. Wade to give up federally accepted right for an abortion. This was commented by professor Diana Greene Foster in Science magazine. She pointed out - based on her own research - that the aim of the Supreme Court is against scientific evidence. 

Her results have shown that patients who received an abortion were more than six times more likely to report aspirational 1-year plans than those who were denied one. They were also more likely to have a wanted child later and could better take care of the children they already had. 

It is also worth noting that most of abortion patients are already parents. Therefore she considers it clear that a legal abortion has powerful and positive multigenerational impacts. 

She also pointed out that if people are forced to carry a pregnancy to term, they have a higher risk to experience lasting financial hardships, and women from whom abortion has been denied had three times greater odds of being unemployed than those who obtained abortions. They also were four times more likely of being below the federal poverty level.

I am writing from Finland, and this issue does not directly concern me. However, I want to point out that here a new abortion law came into force in 1970. It allowed abortion on social grounds to women under 17 or over 40 years of age, or when a mother had already given birth to four children. And according to instructions from the Medical Board, abortion has been freely available to unmarried, widowed and divorced people. 

Year 1973 was the peak year for legal abortions in Finland, with more than 23 000 abortions recorded. That was equal to the number of illegal abortions before the law change - but removed serious health problems associated with operations performed by quacks. Thereafter the number of abortions has steadily declined and during the recent years the number of abortions per year has been about 10 000. Thus, the liberal attitude towards abortions in our country has in fact reduced the number of abortions. 

Taken together, I hope these facts affect decision makers in all states of the USA if the federal law will be turned down by the Supreme Court. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sexual harassment and bullying in working life
Obligatory military service gains support