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 09 2016 05:22 zulu_nation8 wrote: From WaPo, 2015:
[quote]
I imagine you're implying this is a small number.
But 4% is rather horrifying.
1/25 people killed by police fit an overly specific description. If that's just the "unarmed black men" subset, then how much higher is the total unjustifiable fatal police shootings?
It's very high. Many of the victims were, in reasonable opinion, unjustly killed. But the point of that post is that white killing unarmed black produces by far the most outrage, with the media fanning the flames for ratings.
So who are you arguing with again? What is your point? Most of the people in this thread agreed with that point hours ago and moved on. What are you looking for?
Can you comprehend that some people just want to present and discuss data they find interesting, and not to be pitted against a side and throw bullshit at each other?
What is your point in presenting the data? What are you trying to say?
lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
On July 09 2016 05:55 biology]major wrote: I've had multiple people on my social media praise the death of these cops via emojis and hashtags. BLM might have raised legitimate concern, but in my view the movement is NOT legitimate.There is no organization, just yelling and holding up signs to get attention from media is not enough. They need leaders that can enact reforms at a political level. They have 0 respected leaders. Obama should really have taken a more active role in this mess of a movement that is desperately in need of direction.
I can't imagine why black groups wouldn't want to make a clear leader, what in American history could possibly discourage them from wanting to lead a group of black people bent on reigning in white supremacy....
I agree Obama should have called for the overhauling of police departments years ago.
On July 09 2016 05:45 GreenHorizons wrote: Holy stupid. BLM has unquestionable changed the conversation in a positive way. Before that all the abuse and such was still imaginary, exaggerated, etc... Now that black people are abused at every level of the justice system is a given, some people just still want to pretend race has nothing to do with it.
BLM didn't cause this. As for the rhetoric, the rhetoric (used by very few) wouldn't even have any traction if police weren't violating black people's constitutional rights at epic levels. I tend not to blame anyone but the person responsible, but if we're trying to divert blame the police definitely come before some random assholes from BLM.
For example Dallas PD is STILL circulating an image of a black man they know had nothing to do with it and went out of his way to avoid suspicion as a SUSPECT.
He's told them he's getting death threats by the hundreds and him and his brother are fearing for their lives and the police wont even comment (don't believe me, call yourself).
Dallas police shooting: 'Black Power group' claims responsibility for police killings and warns of more assassinations to come
A Facebook page claiming to represent a black power group has posted messages claiming responsibility for the deaths of five police officers in Dallas.
The so-called Black Power Political Organization claimed on its Facebook account that it was behind the attack in which cops were picked out from an 'elevated position' - believed to be a multi-storey car park.
It came in the week of public outrage over the deaths of two unarmed black men shot by police.
There were initial reports there could have been up to three or four snipers involved in a co-ordinated attack during a peaceful Black Live Matter protest. [...]
300 likes on facebook!? Sounds legit.
Huh isn't this video enough proof that they bear some responsability?
This doesn't show a problem with BLM. This shows that there are legitimate hatreds felt towards cops from blacks, just as the same is true for cops to blacks. This shows the existence of an issue we know exists, but it doesn't show disproportionate blame.
On July 09 2016 05:32 WolfintheSheep wrote: [quote] I imagine you're implying this is a small number.
But 4% is rather horrifying.
1/25 people killed by police fit an overly specific description. If that's just the "unarmed black men" subset, then how much higher is the total unjustifiable fatal police shootings?
It's very high. Many of the victims were, in reasonable opinion, unjustly killed. But the point of that post is that white killing unarmed black produces by far the most outrage, with the media fanning the flames for ratings.
So who are you arguing with again? What is your point? Most of the people in this thread agreed with that point hours ago and moved on. What are you looking for?
Can you comprehend that some people just want to present and discuss data they find interesting, and not to be pitted against a side and throw bullshit at each other?
What is your point in presenting the data? What are you trying to say?
lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
It's very high. Many of the victims were, in reasonable opinion, unjustly killed. But the point of that post is that white killing unarmed black produces by far the most outrage, with the media fanning the flames for ratings.
So who are you arguing with again? What is your point? Most of the people in this thread agreed with that point hours ago and moved on. What are you looking for?
Can you comprehend that some people just want to present and discuss data they find interesting, and not to be pitted against a side and throw bullshit at each other?
What is your point in presenting the data? What are you trying to say?
lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
On July 09 2016 05:37 Plansix wrote: [quote] So who are you arguing with again? What is your point? Most of the people in this thread agreed with that point hours ago and moved on. What are you looking for?
Can you comprehend that some people just want to present and discuss data they find interesting, and not to be pitted against a side and throw bullshit at each other?
What is your point in presenting the data? What are you trying to say?
lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
On July 09 2016 05:45 GreenHorizons wrote: Holy stupid. BLM has unquestionable changed the conversation in a positive way. Before that all the abuse and such was still imaginary, exaggerated, etc... Now that black people are abused at every level of the justice system is a given, some people just still want to pretend race has nothing to do with it.
BLM didn't cause this. As for the rhetoric, the rhetoric (used by very few) wouldn't even have any traction if police weren't violating black people's constitutional rights at epic levels. I tend not to blame anyone but the person responsible, but if we're trying to divert blame the police definitely come before some random assholes from BLM.
For example Dallas PD is STILL circulating an image of a black man they know had nothing to do with it and went out of his way to avoid suspicion as a SUSPECT.
He's told them he's getting death threats by the hundreds and him and his brother are fearing for their lives and the police wont even comment (don't believe me, call yourself).
Dallas police shooting: 'Black Power group' claims responsibility for police killings and warns of more assassinations to come
A Facebook page claiming to represent a black power group has posted messages claiming responsibility for the deaths of five police officers in Dallas.
The so-called Black Power Political Organization claimed on its Facebook account that it was behind the attack in which cops were picked out from an 'elevated position' - believed to be a multi-storey car park.
It came in the week of public outrage over the deaths of two unarmed black men shot by police.
There were initial reports there could have been up to three or four snipers involved in a co-ordinated attack during a peaceful Black Live Matter protest. [...]
300 likes on facebook!? Sounds legit.
Huh isn't this video enough proof that they bear some responsability?
This doesn't show a problem with BLM. This shows that there are legitimate hatreds felt towards cops from blacks, just as the same is true for cops to blacks. This shows the existence of an issue we know exists, but it doesn't show disproportionate blame.
That without a doubt shows a problem with BLM. "legitimate hatred" should not translate to praising the death of other human beings.
Can you comprehend that some people just want to present and discuss data they find interesting, and not to be pitted against a side and throw bullshit at each other?
What is your point in presenting the data? What are you trying to say?
lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
So does that mean no one can ever be wrong if no one is held accountable for their opinions?
On July 09 2016 05:43 Plansix wrote: [quote] What is your point in presenting the data? What are you trying to say?
lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
So does that mean no one can ever be wrong if no one is held accountable for their opinions?
Is proving who is right and who is wrong the goal of the discussion?
On July 09 2016 05:45 zulu_nation8 wrote: [quote] lol
So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
So does that mean no one can ever be wrong if no one is held accountable for their opinions?
Is proving who is right and who is wrong the goal of the discussion?
No, but a meaningful discussion can't proceed when people can't agree on basic assertions.
I mean, by and large the solutions to police killing unarmed black people and the solutions to police killing unarmed non-black people are one and the same (cams, more transparency from police departments, de-escalation training, better training and mental health care for police and people in general) so it's not as though covering disproportionate shares of the killings actually makes things worse.
I can't think of any of the meaningful policy changes people propose in the wake of unarmed people killings that wouldn't make me as a white man also less likely to face severe disproportionate police retribution.
Edit: I mean, it's not like disproportionate media coverage of child abductions which can in fact drastically alter the probability a child is located.
On July 09 2016 05:47 Plansix wrote: [quote] So you have no perspective? No insight? You just pick data and then complain when people don’t talk about it in a fashion you find pleasing? What is your opinion?
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
So does that mean no one can ever be wrong if no one is held accountable for their opinions?
Is proving who is right and who is wrong the goal of the discussion?
No, but a meaningful discussion can't proceed when people can't agree on basic assertions.
What you are referring to in academic discussion is called consensus. People agree on terms and discussion points before hand. But it isn’t done in a contentious debate, but through simple agreement. If they can’t reach a consensus, then they have reached an impasse and further discussion is not longer fruitful.
aw man, over 20 pages since when I was on yesterday, I don't wanna read all that. Was there anything important/good in all the pages? Or just the usual drek and back and forth nonsense?
On July 09 2016 06:15 TheTenthDoc wrote: I mean, by and large the solutions to police killing unarmed black people and the solutions to police killing unarmed non-black people are one and the same (cams, more transparency from police departments, de-escalation training, better training and mental health care for police and people in general) so it's not as though covering disproportionate shares of the killings actually makes things worse.
I can't think of any of the meaningful policy changes people propose in the wake of unarmed people killings that wouldn't make me as a white man also less likely to face severe disproportionate police retribution.
Edit: I mean, it's not like disproportionate media coverage of child abductions which can in fact drastically alter the probability a child is located.
Here's the simple truth. If we fix police abuse of black people, it will solve the problem for white people. We can solve the problem for white people and it by no means ensures it trickles down to black people.
EDIT: Yeah not even touching how that's certainly impacted by race and the social situation. Also beauty standards.
On July 09 2016 05:45 GreenHorizons wrote: Holy stupid. BLM has unquestionable changed the conversation in a positive way. Before that all the abuse and such was still imaginary, exaggerated, etc... Now that black people are abused at every level of the justice system is a given, some people just still want to pretend race has nothing to do with it.
BLM didn't cause this. As for the rhetoric, the rhetoric (used by very few) wouldn't even have any traction if police weren't violating black people's constitutional rights at epic levels. I tend not to blame anyone but the person responsible, but if we're trying to divert blame the police definitely come before some random assholes from BLM.
For example Dallas PD is STILL circulating an image of a black man they know had nothing to do with it and went out of his way to avoid suspicion as a SUSPECT.
He's told them he's getting death threats by the hundreds and him and his brother are fearing for their lives and the police wont even comment (don't believe me, call yourself).
Dallas police shooting: 'Black Power group' claims responsibility for police killings and warns of more assassinations to come
A Facebook page claiming to represent a black power group has posted messages claiming responsibility for the deaths of five police officers in Dallas.
The so-called Black Power Political Organization claimed on its Facebook account that it was behind the attack in which cops were picked out from an 'elevated position' - believed to be a multi-storey car park.
It came in the week of public outrage over the deaths of two unarmed black men shot by police.
There were initial reports there could have been up to three or four snipers involved in a co-ordinated attack during a peaceful Black Live Matter protest. [...]
300 likes on facebook!? Sounds legit.
Huh isn't this video enough proof that they bear some responsability?
This doesn't show a problem with BLM. This shows that there are legitimate hatreds felt towards cops from blacks, just as the same is true for cops to blacks. This shows the existence of an issue we know exists, but it doesn't show disproportionate blame.
That without a doubt shows a problem with BLM. "legitimate hatred" should not translate to praising the death of other human beings.
"Should". The world "should" be many things, but as for facts, legitimate hatred translates into praising the death of other human beings. And that reality has nothing to do with a movement, but with human nature.
What the fuck kind of insight have you provided? I defend the data when you don't know how to read it and accuse others of being bad at math.
I've made a very clear point, that the media covers a disproportionate number of black shootings than of other races. And going by the individual cases linked in the WaPo data, quiet a lot of non-blacks are being murdered unjustifiably, more so than blacks. Mixing a systemic, bureaucratic issue with race is a great way to make sure it stays unaddressed.
And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
So does that mean no one can ever be wrong if no one is held accountable for their opinions?
Is proving who is right and who is wrong the goal of the discussion?
No, but a meaningful discussion can't proceed when people can't agree on basic assertions.
What you are referring to in academic discussion is called consensus. People agree on terms and discussion points before hand. But it isn’t done in a contentious debate, but through simple agreement. If they can’t reach a consensus, then they have reached an impasse and further discussion is not longer fruitful.
Your impasse appears because one side refuses to read or cite evidence because that's for debates and not discussions between bros.
On July 09 2016 06:17 zlefin wrote: aw man, over 20 pages since when I was on yesterday, I don't wanna read all that. Was there anything important/good in all the pages? Or just the usual drek and back and forth nonsense?
Mostly just a circlejerk discussing the Dallas shootings yesterday. Very skippable.
On July 09 2016 05:57 Plansix wrote: [quote] And I agreed that it is a problem for everyone. But the shooting of unarmed black men can be due to racism and the shooting of unarmed white men can be do to something else. So what do you propose we do about the shooting of unarmed white men?
I'm not agreeing/disagreeing but can I get supporting evidence on that?
I am having a discussion with you, not a debate where we provide detailed evidence of every single thing insight we propose. If you disagree with the assertion, that is fine. We have reached an impasse at that point if you do.
So if I provide evidence to the contrary, are you gonna ignore it and just say it's a difference of opinions? Instead of linking stuff that supports your opinion? Just trying to get a sense of how people discuss current events these days.
I'm asking cuz you just said you read a lot, so you must remember things.
In general, most discussions I have with people in life do not involve backing up each observation or theory with a link to some article. What you describe is a debate, which isn't want I am trying to have.
So does that mean no one can ever be wrong if no one is held accountable for their opinions?
Is proving who is right and who is wrong the goal of the discussion?
No, but a meaningful discussion can't proceed when people can't agree on basic assertions.
What you are referring to in academic discussion is called consensus. People agree on terms and discussion points before hand. But it isn’t done in a contentious debate, but through simple agreement. If they can’t reach a consensus, then they have reached an impasse and further discussion is not longer fruitful.
Your impasse appears because one side refuses to read or cite evidence because that's for debates and not discussions between bros.
Well its our impasse. And if you don't agree, that is fine. Good talk.
On July 09 2016 06:17 zlefin wrote: aw man, over 20 pages since when I was on yesterday, I don't wanna read all that. Was there anything important/good in all the pages? Or just the usual drek and back and forth nonsense?
It was good a while but now its back to a shouting match about insignificant stuff
EPT![[image loading]](http://2kpcwh2r7phz1nq4jj237m22.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/BPPO.jpg)
