|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 08 2016 00:14 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The problem isn't that cops are racists. The problem is that cops are assholes. If you do anything to resist a cop or piss him off, you run the risk of getting your ass beaten/killed. It doesn't matter what race you are.
And they are way more likely to get away with it if the victim is some poor black person.
|
On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example.
I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests. I would even guess that they are less likely to be killed given how often they interact with the police.
On July 08 2016 00:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:20 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Cops are still probably racist. But turning police killings into a race issue distorts the problem and makes it more unlikely to be dealt with. No it doesn't, people claiming race isn't a factor intentionally pettifog the issue and it disgusts me.
Which part are you disagreeing with, that it distorts the problem or that it's more unlikely to be dealt with?
The stat doesn't show the % of arrestees by race who were beaten, the % of those who were arrested or questioned with justified cause, etc. I would imagine there's a greater disparity there than compared to the killings data. But since the media is only concerned with those killed, it's good to point out that the killings, going by the data, are not racially motivated.
|
On July 08 2016 00:23 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example. I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests.
You cited their more frequent criminal involvement as hedging that proportion, but you're ignoring that one reason that's happening is because they are being disproportionately engaged with in the first place, and it's unquestionably based on their race.
So just because they are unjustly being disproportionately harassed, doesn't change the disproportionate nature of the ones that end in death.
|
On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed)
To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of.
Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?)
|
On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?)
They suck at subconscious profiling. as was mentioned it got them a ~90% rate of completely innocent people being harassed by police. It's race.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oXP2bOz.jpg)
|
On July 08 2016 00:23 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example. I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests. I would even guess that they are less likely to be killed given how often they interact with the police.
How can you believe police do all the things you listed above and then say that it wouldn’t contribute to the shootings and deaths we are talking about now? Do you think they stop with the racial profiling the instant the gun is drawn?
And I would also point out that the data base I provided under reports deaths by police shooting. There is no official database of the use of deadly force. Some states allow the police 30 days before they even need to make it public. Florida doesn’t even collect the information at all.
|
On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?)
Ok we got the easy solution then, black people should simply always wear their best suit because it decreases the chance of being shot to death by white police men. I think that is fair enough.
edit: I agree that cops seem to be badly trained though. Which absolutely questions the gun laws as a whole as well, if not even cops are reasonable with it, how can you trust the public to be?
|
On July 08 2016 00:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:23 zulu_nation8 wrote:On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example. I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests. You cited their more frequent criminal involvement as hedging that proportion, but you're ignoring that one reason that's happening is because they are being disproportionately engaged with in the first place, and it's unquestionably based on their race. So just because they are unjustly being disproportionately harassed, doesn't change the disproportionate nature of the ones that end in death.
How am I ignoring that reason? Did I say police arrests aren't racially motivated instead of police killings?
The arrests that end in death are not disproportionate to the total number of arrests, that's the entire point.
|
On July 08 2016 00:32 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:23 zulu_nation8 wrote:On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example. I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests. You cited their more frequent criminal involvement as hedging that proportion, but you're ignoring that one reason that's happening is because they are being disproportionately engaged with in the first place, and it's unquestionably based on their race. So just because they are unjustly being disproportionately harassed, doesn't change the disproportionate nature of the ones that end in death. How am I ignoring that reason? Did I say police arrests aren't racially motivated instead of police killings? The arrests that end in death are not disproportionate, that's the entire point.
That's an impressively dense response. So since black people are harassed disproportionately, the amount of them that end up dead is in proportion with which they are unjustly harassed, so it's race influenced up until they pull the trigger. That's so asinine I can't believe someone actually clicked post with that.
|
On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?)
Fully agree with the second paragraph. If we can get that stuff done, things'll be a lot better.
|
On July 08 2016 00:38 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?) Fully agree with the second paragraph. If we can get that stuff done, things'll be a lot better.
Will they? Alton's killers had body cams, it's going to be investigated by the DoJ (because of protest not law), and they have what's basically a statistically impossible rate of not being convicted.
It's going to take a hell of a lot more than that to make any significant progress.
|
On July 08 2016 00:31 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?) Ok we got the easy solution then, black people should simply always wear their best suit because it decreases the chance of being shot to death by white police men. I think that is fair enough.
I saw a quote a black college professor in an article about the shootings:
“Get good grades. Work hard. Go to college. Dress nice at all times. Cut your hair. Be deeply respectful. Do all of this and maybe we won’t kill you.”
The very pinnacle of blaming everyone else but the person who fired the gun. Personally responsibility, unless you wear a police uniform.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Of all the partisan loaded questioning in this committee I'd have to say this Dem guy talking about "political theater" is probably the worst. The others are at least asking questions about the investigation.
Edit: the follow-up guy from Texas is actually pretty bad too.
|
On July 08 2016 00:45 LegalLord wrote:
Of all the partisan loaded questioning in this committee I'd have to say this Dem guy talking about "political theater" is probably the worst. The others are at least asking questions about the investigation.
Edit: the follow-up guy from Texas is actually pretty bad too.
I think he did a decent job of clearing up that if someone in the FBI did what Hillary did they would be punished.
|
On July 08 2016 00:41 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:38 zlefin wrote:On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?) Fully agree with the second paragraph. If we can get that stuff done, things'll be a lot better. Will they? Alton's killers had body cams, it's going to be investigated by the DoJ (because of protest not law), and they have what's basically a statistically impossible rate of not being convicted. It's going to take a hell of a lot more than that to make any significant progress.
they won't be perfect; but they'll be better.
It's also something that we can get widespread political agreement on, so there's more chance of actually getting such things done.
|
I guess the only qualification you need to be employed as a cop in America is to be a murderous psychopath. So sad to hear all these people getting killed every week by cops.
User was warned for this post
|
On July 08 2016 00:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:32 zulu_nation8 wrote:On July 08 2016 00:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:23 zulu_nation8 wrote:On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example. I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests. You cited their more frequent criminal involvement as hedging that proportion, but you're ignoring that one reason that's happening is because they are being disproportionately engaged with in the first place, and it's unquestionably based on their race. So just because they are unjustly being disproportionately harassed, doesn't change the disproportionate nature of the ones that end in death. How am I ignoring that reason? Did I say police arrests aren't racially motivated instead of police killings? The arrests that end in death are not disproportionate, that's the entire point. That's an impressively dense response. So since black people are harassed disproportionately, the amount of them that end up dead is in proportion with which they are unjustly harassed, so it's race influenced up until they pull the trigger. That's so asinine I can't believe someone actually clicked post with that.
It's also impressive that you equate harassment to killing, and are unable to comprehend grade school stats, like others in this conversation, and are so subjected to the line of thought that the data disproves that you've resorted to insults.
I googled this just now:
When it comes to racially lopsided arrests, the most remarkable thing about Ferguson, Mo., might be just how ordinary it is.
Police in Ferguson — which erupted into days of racially charged unrest after a white officer killed an unarmed black teen — arrest black people at a rate nearly three times higher than people of other races.
At least 1,581 other police departments across the USA arrest black people at rates even more skewed than in Ferguson, a USA TODAY analysis of arrest records shows. That includes departments in cities as large and diverse as Chicago and San Francisco and in the suburbs that encircle St. Louis, New York and Detroit.
Let's be safe and say blacks are arrested at 2x the rate of other races, blacks make up 12% of the population, and 25% of police killings. Common sense would say that police are disproportionately killing blacks less compared to other races, which is interesting. I thought others would find this interesting as well regardless of political lines but lol.
Go on about but.. but.. cops are racist and you don't understand!
|
On July 08 2016 00:50 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:45 LegalLord wrote:
Of all the partisan loaded questioning in this committee I'd have to say this Dem guy talking about "political theater" is probably the worst. The others are at least asking questions about the investigation.
Edit: the follow-up guy from Texas is actually pretty bad too. I think he did a decent job of clearing up that if someone in the FBI did what Hillary did they would be punished.
They would be punished if they held the job when the investigation took place. And it would be done internally, not through the court system. They would have been written up, maybe fined. I’m sure they could find a way to fine Clinton if they really wanted.
|
On July 08 2016 00:52 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:38 zlefin wrote:On July 08 2016 00:26 biology]major wrote:On July 08 2016 00:15 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 08 2016 00:08 biology]major wrote:On July 07 2016 23:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Umm....no. That's just....not how proportions and math works. You need to rethink your math here. I think the proportion of african americans in the US is around 12 or 13 percent. If a quarter of police shootings are black folks, then they are far, far over-represented in police deaths than they should be (for technical statistical details they are actually shot at much greater than twice the rate because when you analyze differences in proportions you convert to odds ratios, but this is a bit above most stats level education), if shootings were "randomly distributed" among the population. This is not a x > y, this is a case of "the proportion of y is much higher than it should be if we were to just randomly sample the population". As op mentioned black people commit crimes at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you have to factor that into it as well. There are a lot of crimes which wouldn't need to result in police shooting people to death. All these oh so smart naïve fallacys here are (almost) useless to begin with. Would the "Falcon Heights Shooting" already be defined as a "crime" here? Would a white have been shot in the same circumstance? That's the question you have to ask, not if we can somehow interprete data the way we want (that there is no problem indeed) To answer the question if white would have been shot in this circumstance, It all comes down to subconscious profiling. If the white guy was tattooed up and looked like a criminal then yeah the cop coulda felt he was in danger when he reached into his pocket, or it coulda been a black man in a suit and maybe the same situation wouldn't have happened. We subconsciously profile for good reason, it helps keep us alive and is efficient. I think these last two killings have been a combination of assholery and incompetence/poor training, but racism is still something I am not convinced of. Cops need body cams, and need to be trained better. The FBI should also investigate all of these cases and come to their own conclusions and honestly these cops should be tried in court for murder/incompetence (would any reasonable police officer have fired or handled that situation in a similar way?) Fully agree with the second paragraph. If we can get that stuff done, things'll be a lot better. Will they? Alton's killers had body cams, it's going to be investigated by the DoJ (because of protest not law), and they have what's basically a statistically impossible rate of not being convicted. It's going to take a hell of a lot more than that to make any significant progress. they won't be perfect; but they'll be better. It's also something that we can get widespread political agreement on, so there's more chance of actually getting such things done.
Marginally better maybe, widespread political agreement doesn't go as far as we'd like, universal background checks being an example.
It's a much deeper social issue and the remedies you mention are a bandaid on a bullet wound. The question I would have is what would be traded to the Police Unions to get them on board. I mean they already get 24-72 hours after a killing to come up with a story before they have to be interviewed (even though Philando Castile's girlfriend had to be handcuffed and interrogated with her boyfriends blood still on her), can't be drug tested after killing someone (even though the victim is always tested), and enjoy unwarranted credibility whenever they do actually end up in court.
I can't imagine what they would expect in return to protect the criminals among them in exchange for the remedies you mention.
On July 08 2016 00:53 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2016 00:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:32 zulu_nation8 wrote:On July 08 2016 00:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:23 zulu_nation8 wrote:On July 08 2016 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 08 2016 00:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:"randomly sample the population" -- don't know which population to sample, it's okay, neither does The Guardian.
Going back to the original point, if blacks are more likely to be suspected or arrested, assuming 2x, probably more, than the % of blacks in the US, and they are 2x more likely to be killed by the police, it would seem that police killings are not disproportionately black, and that it's not as much of an race issue as people believe. The point you're missing is that black people interact with police more frequently regardless of whether they are committing crimes. As an example. I'm not talking about arrests or harassment, I'm talking about police killings. No one's disagreeing that blacks are far more likely to be stopped, arrested, harassed, whatever, but they're not being killed by the police disproportionately, at least that's what the data suggests. You cited their more frequent criminal involvement as hedging that proportion, but you're ignoring that one reason that's happening is because they are being disproportionately engaged with in the first place, and it's unquestionably based on their race. So just because they are unjustly being disproportionately harassed, doesn't change the disproportionate nature of the ones that end in death. How am I ignoring that reason? Did I say police arrests aren't racially motivated instead of police killings? The arrests that end in death are not disproportionate, that's the entire point. That's an impressively dense response. So since black people are harassed disproportionately, the amount of them that end up dead is in proportion with which they are unjustly harassed, so it's race influenced up until they pull the trigger. That's so asinine I can't believe someone actually clicked post with that. It's also impressive that you equate harassment to killing, and are unable to comprehend grade school stats, like others in this conversation, and are so subjected to the line of thought that the data disproves that you've resorted to insults. I googled this just now: When it comes to racially lopsided arrests, the most remarkable thing about Ferguson, Mo., might be just how ordinary it is.
Police in Ferguson — which erupted into days of racially charged unrest after a white officer killed an unarmed black teen — arrest black people at a rate nearly three times higher than people of other races.
At least 1,581 other police departments across the USA arrest black people at rates even more skewed than in Ferguson, a USA TODAY analysis of arrest records shows. That includes departments in cities as large and diverse as Chicago and San Francisco and in the suburbs that encircle St. Louis, New York and Detroit. Let's be safe and say blacks are arrested at 2x the rate of other races, blacks make up 12% of the population, and 25% of police killings. Common sense would say that police are disproportionately killing blacks less compared to other races, which is interesting. I thought others would find this interesting as well regardless of political lines but lol. Go on about but.. but.. cops are racist and you don't understand!
Just wow. They harass an insane amount of innocent black people, of course more would not end up dead. If they harassed less innocent black people, the proportion would not be better. So by harassing more innocent black people and not resorting to murdering them you are asserting that balances the ratio.
That's just gross.
|
Some states are already passing laws saying that the body cam recordings can’t be released to the public until “after investigations complete”. I am sure there are other creative Police Unions creating rules to make sure they control those recordings, rather than the public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
