From the Yonge Street Riot to the Carding Controversy: Policing and Surveilling the Black Community in Toronto, Canada, 1992-2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the last decade, the conversation surrounding racial profiling and carding in the city of Toronto garnered much public and scholarly attention. Many journalists, academics and activists have examined the Community Contacts Policy, also known as carding, as well as mass incarceration and the police shootings and killings of unarmed, young Black men. The Yonge Street Uprising and the carding controversy in Toronto serve as two case studies to explore the ways that Black men have been disproportionately profiled, policed and surveilled in this country, particularly in the province of Ontario. Despite the fact that the Yonge Street Uprising and the carding controversy occurred decades apart, a common thread throughout both cases was the narrative of Black male criminality. In addition, it became apparent that many of the practices employed in contemporary society, such as racial profiling, carding and mass incarceration were derived from slavery, with the goal of limiting the freedom and mobility of Black people. Therefore, an examination of Canada’s historical treatment of Black people is necessary in order to demonstrate how practices rooted in slavery, such as, fugitive slave advertisements and historical representations of Black criminality helped inform current police practices. Through an analysis of historical, legal, criminological, and critical race scholarship, this work seeks to examine how and why Black people, specifically Black men, were and continue to be disproportionately more likely to be policed, surveilled and incarcerated. In addition, neighborhood contexts were examined to determine whether there was a relationship between police stop and search practices among different neighborhoods. An analysis of quantitative and qualitative data gathered from various bodies of criminological and legal research, and reports commissioned by the Ontario government, provide support for the theory that the Canadian state criminalize and incarcerates certain populations it deems undesirable. Additionally, a consistent theme throughout this analysis was a heightened sense of anxiety and threat that whites have historically exemplified in relation to Black immigration, mobilization and resistance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".