“Minorities pulled over at high rate” is the headline of an article in the Peoria Journal Star published on July 4, 2006, page B1.  The article states that “An analysis by the Department of Transportation found that minorities made up 28.5 percent of the driving population but accounted for 31.8 percent of traffic stops in 2005.


After being stopped, 68.7 percent of minority drivers got tickets.  Only 59.5 percent of white drivers who were pulled over ended up getting tickets.”


From these statistics can a conclusion be drawn that police are profiling to stop minority drivers and that police are discriminating against minorities?  The answer is no!  The only thing for certain is that from these statistics about 3% more minority stops are outside the realm of statistical probability.  The only thing for certain is that from these statistics about 9% more minority stops leading to tickets are outside the realm of statistical probability when compared to white drivers.  


It is ridiculous to argue that because minorities are 28.5% of the driving public they should only be pulled over 28.5% of the time.  It is ridiculous to argue that because 59.5% of white drivers being pulled over receive tickets then the exact same percent of minority drivers should receive tickets.


Could other factors outside of race be involved?  The answer is of course it is possible that other factors outside of race are involved.  It might even be as obvious as more minorities are committing offenses that would lead to them being pulled over.  It might be as obvious as more minorities are committing offenses to justify giving tickets to minorities.  It is ridiculous to argue that because 28.5% of the driving public consists of minorities, they commit 28.5% of all driving offenses.  The real world does not follow pure statistical patterns—the real world is made up of people not abstractions.


Consider just one other possible variable—gender.  Have you ever been a passenger in a car when a female driver was stopped by a police officer?  I have.  She was speeding.  She was pulled over for speeding.  The police officer walked away without giving her a ticket.  Did that occur because of her race, because of her gender, or for another unrecognized variable?  Statistics can’t answer the question of why!!!


Consider this.  On Monday, July 3, 2006, page B2 the Peoria Journal Star published the dispositions of “Driving Under the Influence” cases that were handled in the court room of Judge Albert Purham Jr.  Thirteen cases were handled by the judge.  In one case the defendant was found not guilty, in one case the charge was amended/reduced, and in the other 11 cases the defendants were found guilty and received some type of punishment.  


First, the punishments were not the same for all 11 found guilty.  Second, is a conviction rate of 12 out of 13 cases too high, too low, or exactly what would be statistically expected based upon previous cases?  Finally, although the race and gender of the accused is not given, the probable gender of the defendant can be assessed based upon the first name of the defendant.  


The first names of the defendants listed were Stanley, Rocky, Sean, Scott, Janet, Robert, Martin, Chet, Zachary, Terrence, Jarod, Michael, and Andrew.  Of those 13 names, only one—Janet—has a high probability of being female.  The other 12 names and defendants are probably male.  Is the court discriminating against males because less than half of the population is male and yet 12 of the 13 defendants were probably male?  I don’t know.  But, statistically one might be able to argue that males were disproportionately arrested and convicted for DUI offenses.          

Then again, maybe not.  Statistics alone do not explain why!!!