EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4213
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:41 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So the gunman was ex-military. Should be nice and disappointing to learn about his history of mental illness and how a functioning VA may have prevented this. | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:40 Mohdoo wrote: Consider the requirements of being a police officer. You can get some pretty low quality people as cops just because its a really easy job to get. We are giving these people a legal right to kill someone. That's a really, really, really big deal and should mean they are not only substantially more distinguished, but they should also be paid much more. It should be a very well paying, very exclusive job. I've always thought it should require a law degree and offer pay competitive for people with law degrees. this would be a good solution to the issue of oversaturation and unemployment of people with non T14 law degrees lol On July 09 2016 00:42 NukeD wrote: On another note I agree with a poster who said that this problem wouldn't exist to this extent if you issued a gun ban, because police are having to deal with people who are far more likelly to have a gun on them than in other countries so it inherently makes them more edgy. in america, this takes ending gun culture and the fetishization of the 2nd amendment, which by all indications, is never going to happen and is more unrealistic than my suggestions above and those of mohdoo above | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:38 farvacola wrote: Charging data is incredibly limited in usefulness because it fails to account for the differences in prosecutorial willingness to charge whites as opposed to blacks. Look up some information on Hillsdale and you'll see why that speech should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Ok, I'm curious where that line of logic leads to, as to what you believe the limited data fails to account for, and how it skew the numbers in a way that would support/disprove what I cited. And what about Hillsdale are you referring to? | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
https://news.wsu.edu/2014/09/02/deadly-force-lab-finds-racial-disparities-in-shootings/ Still based on very limited data but it's something: SPOKANE, Wash. – Participants in an innovative Washington State University study of deadly force were more likely to feel threatened in scenarios involving black people. But when it came time to shoot, participants were biased in favor of black suspects, taking longer to pull the trigger against them than against armed white or Hispanic suspects. The findings, published in the recent Journal of Experimental Criminology, grow out of dozens of simulations aimed at explaining the disproportionate number of ethnic and racial minorities shot by police. The studies use the most advanced technology available, as participants with laser-equipped guns react to potentially threatening scenarios displayed in full-size, high-definition video. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
| ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:47 farvacola wrote: The logic is really quite simple: we need to force police departments to release data and we need to prioritize national collection of said data. I never disagreed but how does that relate to the points I posted? It uses best available data. I thought you were arguing that the numbers would be a lot different if we had official data. I realize the condescending tone was off-putting. I don't usually post in this thread and became frustrated at trying to present some, what I thought, were interesting data that went against media narratives. But was repeatedly called ignorant. | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:47 farvacola wrote: The logic is really quite simple: we need to force police departments to release data and we need to prioritize national collection of said data. and/or create 3rd party organizations whose purpose is to scrutinize and evaluate controversial police actions and sanction them when then the police are UNJUSTIFIED MURDERERS | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:48 zulu_nation8 wrote: I never disagreed but how does that relate to the points I posted? It uses best available data. I thought you were arguing that the numbers would be a lot different if we had official data. You quoted data that was used in a speech that was given at one of the most conservative universities in the US. Do you think this affects its veracity and/or applicability? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
We just used a little Jihadi robot to take down a BLM extremist. This is the most politically relevant killing ever, lol. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:53 farvacola wrote: You quoted data that was used in a speech that was given at one of the most conservative universities in the US. Do you think this affects its veracity and/or applicability? Not really? Unless the crime rate of blacks are being significantly misreported? I don't get what partisanship has to do with this except for your bring it in. And you have to argue how real data would be different and skew the results. If you are unwilling to do that then I don't see much point in continuing this. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:48 kapibara-san wrote: and/or create 3rd party organizations whose purpose is to scrutinize and evaluate controversial police actions and sanction them when then the police are UNJUSTIFIED MURDERERS NPR reported that many police departments are already abandoning internal investigations and handing these cases over to the FBI or other agencies. It sounds like that is going to be the future. It just needs to be a system people have faith in. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:57 zulu_nation8 wrote: Not really? Unless the crime rate of blacks are being significantly misreported? I don't get what partisanship has to do with this except for your bring it in. It bring into question the accuracy of the data and if it is biased or manipulated. It is easy to manipulate data. There is nothing neutral or unbiased about the source. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:59 Plansix wrote: It bring into question the accuracy of the data and if it is biased or manipulated. It is easy to manipulate data. There is nothing neutral or unbiased about the source. How are they manipulated? In which direction? How would they skew the results? | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:40 kapibara-san wrote: it's just the training relevant reddit post i read yesterday on the topic: ![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/pUHFG/0048e60fd1.png) https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/4rgu6p/alton_sterling_shot_killed_by_louisiana_cops/d515mhc I definitely agree with this, Just from watching these videos I can see that these were just amateur level actions that weren't thought about logically but rather based on fear fed from a narrative of "us vs them". They have to learn how to de-escalate first and put their lives on the line doing so. The interesting thing is this will shift the balance of power to the side of the people, and will probably result in more cops being killed. as of right now it is incompetence with a lack of accountability, similar to another big headline recently | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On July 09 2016 00:57 zulu_nation8 wrote: Not really? Unless the crime rate of blacks are being significantly misreported? I don't get what partisanship has to do with this except for your bring it in. You've already admitted that the data itself is very incomplete. Additionally, I've also introduced the notion that charging and crime data more generally suffer from very dramatic distortions related to the discretionary mechanisms by which they manifest. Accordingly, when you have an obviously partisan performance of "connect the dots" using said incomplete data, it would be well-advised to discount that performance's conclusions. Furthermore, it ought to be troubling that the biggest opponents of widespread criminal/police data collection and sharing are precisely the same individuals mobilizing consequently handicapped criminal/police data in pursuit of establishing racially charged conclusions. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On July 09 2016 01:04 farvacola wrote: You've already admitted that the data itself is very incomplete. Additionally, I've also introduced the notion that charging and crime data more generally suffer from very dramatic distortions related to the discretionary mechanisms by which they manifest. Accordingly, when you have an obviously partisan performance of "connect the dots" using said incomplete data, it would be well-advised to discount that performance's conclusions. Furthermore, it ought to be troubling that the biggest opponents to widespread criminal/police data collection and sharing are precisely the same individuals mobilizing consequently handicapped criminal/police data in pursuit of establishing racially charged conclusions. Ok, what's the next step in that argument? Data is skewed, we should be cautious. In which direction are they skewed? How would it affect the analysis I linked? | ||
| ||
