Politics

Black Motorist’s Fatal Shooting: Outcry Over Police Tactics

Published

11 years ago

April 10, 2015

In this April 4, 2015, frame from dashboard video provided by the North Charleston Police Department, Patrolman Michael Thomas Slager stands by Walter Lamer Scott’s car during a traffic stop in North Charleston, S.C. The video captures the moments leading up to a fatal shooting that has sparked outrage as the latest example of a white police officer killing an unarmed black man. Slager has been fired and charged with murder. (AP Photo/North Charleston Police Department)

JEFFREY COLLINS, Associated Press
MITCH WEISS, Associated Press

NORTH CHARLESTON, South Carolina (AP) — As its population surged in the last decade, South Carolina’s third-largest city fought rising crime through aggressive policing. But North Charleston’s police department lost the respect of many black residents in neighborhoods they blitzed, and now many are upset after the fatal shooting of an unarmed black motorist by a white officer.

Police in North Charleston used computers to track the neighborhoods where crime was on the rise, then sent waves of officers to patrol and conduct traffic stops, looking for offenders and letting drivers know they were cracking down. By the numbers, the tactics worked: every major category of crime, from murder to burglary to robbery to rape all fell significantly from 2007 to 2012, the last year for which statistics are available.

But anger is surfacing as civil rights leaders are demanding a full U.S. Justice Department investigation of the North Charleston force. The fatal shooting of Walter Scott as he fled after a traffic stop Saturday stirred outrage around the U.S., but people in North Charleston said they weren’t surprised.

“If the image of the city is more important than the lives of their citizens, there is going to be a problem,” said Dot Scott, president of the Charleston branch of the NAACP civil rights group. She’s unrelated to the slain motorist.

The U.S. Justice Department is conducting a parallel investigation with a local prosecutor into whether there were civil rights violations in the killing of Walter Scott. The NAACP would like that expanded to a full probe of whether racism and lack of respect for civil rights is pervasive through the entire department — similar to the federal agency’s probe after the fatal shooting of an 18-year-old unarmed black man by a white officer in Ferguson, Missouri.

With just over 100,000 people, North Charleston grew by nearly 16,500 people or about 20 percent from 2000 to 2010. More than half of its residents are minorities, mostly African-Americans. About 28 percent of its families make less than $25,000 a year.

For years, it battled an economic slump caused by the mid-1990s closing of the Charleston Naval Base on the city’s waterfront. For decades, city fortunes were tied to the base, where 38,000 people worked in the late 1980s.

But the city had plenty of land and proximity to next door Charleston, an affluent city popular with tourists. North Charleston has since bounced back, largely because of a huge investment by Boeing, which has a 787 aircraft manufacturing plant in the city.

Now North Charleston reaches from upscale subdivisions of $700,000 homes near the banks of the Ashley River to the older, impoverished black neighborhoods near the old naval base.

And those poor and black residents have learned to band together and be cautious around a police force that is nearly 80 percent white. Several residents around the city this week told the same story about what they do when an officer turns on the lights to pull them over. They said they immediately call a friend to see if they are nearby and can walk over to be a witness to a traffic stop. If no one is close, the phone is kept on so the person on the other end can listen, just in case.

Blacks were routinely putting their hands in the air when police confronted them for years before “Hands up, Don’t shoot” became a slogan in the wake of the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, said 25-year-old Robert Blanton.

He said he has been stopped plenty of times for simply walking around his neighborhood after dark.

“I wonder — do they do that to whites walking in their neighborhood?” Blanton said.

The police department has refused to talk about its crime-fighting strategies since Scott was killed and officer Michael Slager was charged with murder, saying they want to wait until after Scott’s funeral on Saturday out of respect for his family.

But in a 2012 article in The Post and Courier of Charleston, then-Police Chief Jon Zumalt justified his more aggressive approach by saying it ensured people were obeying the law. And even if traffic stops didn’t lead to arrests, it got the word out that North Charleston was serious about fighting crime, he told the newspaper, which reported traffic stops in the city increased by about 3,000 to nearly 64,000 in 2011.

Numbers gathered by the state back that up. North Charleston had 26 murders in 2007 and 13 murders in 2012. The number of robberies in that five-year span fell 66 percent, while the number of burglaries dropped 29 percent.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

OP-ED: Oakland Needs Office of Race and Equity

Don't Miss

Black Motorist’s Fatal Shooting: Outcry Over Police Tactics

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Business

Newsom Signs Addictive Social Media Law to Protect Kids

Newsom said California’s approach focuses on the features that can encourage excessive social media use rather than taking the broader step of banning teenagers from the platforms altogether. He contrasted the measure with restrictions adopted in Australia and Malaysia that prevent teenagers from accessing social media or creating accounts.

Published

21 hours ago

September 22, 2026

Post News Group

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Word Count: 391

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a new California law targeting addictive social media features that can keep children scrolling, giving the state new authority to restrict how platforms engage young users.

AB 1709, authored by Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) prohibits social media companies from giving children under 16 access to personalized feeds, including “For You” pages, as well as other features designed to maximize screen time, such as infinite scrolling and video autoplay.

The law does not prevent children under 16 from using social media. Instead, platforms must deactivate the covered features for those users.

“This is about actually addressing the problem, the scrolling, the algorithms,” Newsom said Sept. 10 during a bill-signing event in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The law comes amid growing concerns about the impact of social media on children’s mental health and well-being. California lawmakers have increasingly focused on the design and business practices of technology platforms as part of efforts to protect young users.

AB 1709 is one of 13 youth online safety and privacy laws Newsom signed Sept.10. The package also includes measures regulating AI chatbots, increasing potential penalties for technology companies and establishing additional protections for children using digital services.

Lowenthal said the new rules represent a shift toward greater accountability for technology companies.

“We want oversight. We want accountability. We’re done asking nicely, and we’re demanding that there is a duty of care across these platforms — a duty that puts the wellness of our children ahead of profits,” Lowenthal said.

The law builds on California’s broader effort to regulate children’s online experiences. A separate law, AB 1043, will require users to provide their birth dates when setting up new phones or laptops beginning in January, with device manufacturers required to share users’ ages with apps.

Some youth online safety advocates have supported AB 1709 as a more targeted alternative to outright social media bans. Others have warned that the restrictions could make it harder for some LGBTQ+ young people to find support online and questioned how effectively age requirements can be enforced.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Featured

On Your November Ballot: Prop 38 Would Allocate $8.4 Billion to Immunology and Immunotherapy Funding

“Yes on 38”, with the tagline “Californians for Life-Saving Immunology Research and Cures,” is leading the campaign for the support side of the proposition.

Published

23 hours ago

September 22, 2026

Post News Group

By Austin Gage, California Black Media

California voters will decide in November whether Proposition (Prop) 38 should authorize substantial state funding for immunology and immunotherapy research.

The initiative would fund immunology and immunotherapy research aimed at harnessing the body’s immune system to develop new treatments, medical procedures and potential cures for diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and heart disease.

More specifically, Prop 38, titled the Immunology and Immunotherapy Research Funding Initiative, is split into three main components that would go into effect if passed.

First, the initiative would authorize the state to issue $8.4 billion in general obligation bonds to support immunology and immunotherapy research. At least half of the bond proceeds, or $4.2 billion, would be dedicated exclusively to research.

Additionally, Prop 38 would make it mandatory for the state to enter into an agreement with a qualified nonprofit institute focused and dedicated to researching immunology and immunotherapy within 90 days of the initiative’s effective date. The research institute must be affiliated with the University of California.

The third component mandates that the remaining bond revenue must be directed to California-based public and nonprofit medical institutions through a peer-reviewed grant process.

“Yes on 38”, with the tagline “Californians for Life-Saving Immunology Research and Cures,” is leading the campaign for the support side of the proposition.

Along with the campaign, organizations that have publicly supported the ballot initiative include the California Democratic Party, The ALS Association, Alzheimer’s treatment and advocacy organizations, California Black Health Network, Parkinson Association of Northern California and Reform California among others.

“California has an opportunity to accelerate lifesaving medical breakthroughs. Immunotherapies work differently than traditional treatments. Instead of attacking cells directly, they empower the body’s own immune system to recognize and stop disease. Today, these therapies are already treating certain cancers and chronic conditions — and researchers continue to expand what’s possible. This initiative invests in proven science so cures can move from the lab to patients faster,” said the campaign.

No on Proposition 38 is leading the campaign against the measure, with support from the League of Women Voters of California. Opponents argue that California cannot afford to assume $8.4 billion in debt for medical research that may not produce definitive results. They also object to directing more than half of the bond proceeds — $4.2 billion — to a single qualifying nonprofit research institute, arguing that funding decisions of this magnitude should be made through the state’s regular budget process.

“Medical research can save lives, but Prop 38 is the wrong way to fund it. It would authorize $8.4 billion in borrowing for immunology and immunotherapy research and require the state to make $500 million to $600 million in annual debt payments for about 20 years. Those payments would come from the General Fund, which also pays for schools, health care, and other public services,” the League of Women Voters of California said.

A “yes” vote would authorize $8.4 billion in state bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy medical research.

A “no” vote would reject the proposed bond funding.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Community

Asm. Isaac Bryan’s Bill Banning California Police From ICE Side Jobs Reaches Newsom’s Desk

The legislation comes as ICE ramps up efforts to recruit law enforcement personnel under the Trump administration. Bryan said the federal agency is offering financial incentives to attract officers, raising concerns about the impact on local law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve.

Published

23 hours ago

September 22, 2026

Post News Group

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

A bill by California Assemblymember Isaac Bryan (D-Ladera Heights) that would prevent state and local police officers from taking second jobs with federal immigration enforcement agencies is headed to Gov. Gavin Newsom after clearing the Legislature.

AB 1537 would bar California peace officers from accepting secondary employment related to immigration enforcement, including work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The measure also would require officers to report offers for immigration enforcement-related outside employment to their employing agencies.

“They are trying to recruit our law enforcement personnel. They are offering these insane bonuses,” Bryan said.

Bryan said he is particularly concerned about efforts to recruit experienced law enforcement personnel while questions have been raised about ICE’s hiring standards.

“They want better skilled, better trained folks because their untrained and uneducated goons go through a very low threshold,” Bryan added.

The legislation would create consequences for California officers who violate its restrictions. Officers who fail to report offers of secondary employment related to immigration enforcement could face decertification as peace officers in California.

Bryan has framed the bill as a measure to establish boundaries between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement, particularly as immigration enforcement has become a major source of conflict between the Trump administration and California.

“This is a rogue agency that is harming the American people,” said Bryan. “It should be abolished, but in the meantime, we’ve got to do everything we can to put guardrails around our communities and protect our neighbors.”

AB 1537 previously received approval from the Assembly Public Safety Committee in March before advancing through the Legislature. The bill now awaits Newsom’s decision. The Governor can sign it into law, veto it or allow it to become law without his signature.