Discuss.

Obviously this isn't an indictment of all police, but seems like yeah, here we are again.

Our country is in deep trouble. How could the cops shoot and kill this guy after all the incidents we've had lately? Are they f***ing dumb as dirt or just plain evil? Folks, we won't last another 100 years. This world is coming to an end.

 

So in brief, we are destroying the environment http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/12/world/russia...eria/index.html

We have poor starving people in the USA and all over the world we do not care about.

We have cops totally out of control.

We have government officials who do not represent the people anymore, just their parties, doing their best to only stifle the other party, proven again in North Carolina where the government does not care about all the $$$ it just cost its citizens with the controversial law. And in Kansas a government leader refusing to accept FREE money for its people. My gawd.

We have a horrific health care system.

We treat the old horribly (health care and old folks home abuses).

We hate each other. We only love our own families.

And again, we don't care. Instead of wanting our leader to help solve problems we want to make life miserable on our leader if he/she is not in our party.

 

More ... we have one Presidential candidate wanting to send all undocumented immigrants home, ones who came here because uh, we have the best place to live in the world allegedly. Sending them home means sending their kids (US citizens who speak ENGLISH) home with them.

The other presidential candidate is an elitist fake who has convinced the poor she will help them when she is just another 1 percenter who only loves the one percent.

Heaven help us.

Edited September 13, 20169 yr by greg775

Our country is in deep trouble. How could the cops shoot and kill this guy after all the incidents we've had lately? Are they f***ing dumb as dirt or just plain evil?

 

If only somebody would do something to get people talking about this problem and maybe work towards finding a solution.

 

Oh, here's one.

If only somebody would do something to get people talking about this problem and maybe work towards finding a solution.

 

Oh, here's one.

 

Except no one is talking about WHY he's doing it, they're only talking about what he's doing.

Except no one is talking about WHY he's doing it, they're only talking about what he's doing.

 

There's a good chunk of people talking about why he's doing it. It's not exactly a secret.

If only somebody would do something to get people talking about this problem and maybe work towards finding a solution.

 

Oh, here's one.

He's doing it the wrong way, offending the military.

The National Anthem isn't a military hymnal or something. There are actual military anthems and songs.

He's doing it the wrong way, offending the military.

The military fights to protect his right to protest and lots of military personnel have said they supported Kaepernick. To try and assign offense to the military as a civilian is the most offensive part of your post.

The military fights to protect his right to protest and lots of military personnel have said they supported Kaepernick. To try and assign offense to the military as a civilian is the most offensive part of your post.

I said I heard some military on the radio pissed off.

Stop listening to talk radio

I said I heard some military on the radio pissed off.

 

No, you just keep saying "the military". Not "some military".

I wonder how many people have greg blocked now

I wonder how many people have greg blocked now

Did you see Charles Barkley's comments? I can link if you don't wanna google it.

Did you see Charles Barkley's comments? I can link if you don't wanna google it.

 

This was a Quintana-level curveball.

I said I heard some military on the radio pissed off.

 

These people don't sound pissed off to me.

 

https://twitter.com/ShimmiHendrix/status/77...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

https://twitter.com/KristenMeghan/status/77...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

https://twitter.com/Baltic_Avenue/status/77...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

 

https://twitter.com/colemanachase/status/77...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

https://twitter.com/SunnyAnderson/status/77...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/7708273...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

https://twitter.com/DEdwardBeck/status/7708...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

This probably isn't the right thread but I didn't want to open a Black Lives Matter thread. I had a question. I was watching the video today of the Yale students ganging up on some professor who was upset that the administration sent out a memo warning students to not dress up inappropriately for Halloween. Like have a costume that might offend.

They ganged up on him and were screaming at him. One woman was crying and said she expected a "safe space" at Yale where she could be protected from offensive people/language.

 

Is that the purpose of Yale?? To be a safe space?

"In fact, as of July 9, whites were 54 percent of the 440 police shooting victims this year whose race was known, blacks were 28 percent and Hispanics were 18 percent, according to The Washington Post’s ongoing database of fatal police shootings. Those ratios are similar to last year’s tally, in which whites made up 50 percent of the 987 fatal police shootings, and blacks, 26 percent. (The vast majority of those police homicide victims were armed or otherwise threatening the officer.)"

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-...m=.356c7bff492a

 

 

I hope you are not using this to show that somehow there is not a disproportionate amount of minorities who are the victims of police shootings.

 

According to the 2010 US survey the percentage of the US population was as follows:

 

72.4% white

12.6% black/african american

 

So black people make up 12.6% of the population but account for 28% of the shootings. Ill let you figure out what the problem is (hint its that the ratio is completely out of whack.)

 

And honestly, what is the point of just posting a quote and not actually giving your opinion on it. It leaves the reader trying to assume what you are trying to prove. My guess is that you were trying to show that there actually isnt a problem because more white people get shot. But thats like saying if there are 10million white people and 100 black people, that there is no problem when 150 white people get shot as compared to 99 black people. I mean 150 > 99 right?

 

Old cliche, statistics never lie, but liars use statistics.

Edited September 15, 20169 yr by Soxbadger

I hope you are not using this to show that somehow there is not a disproportionate amount of minorities who are the victims of police shootings.

 

According to the 2010 US survey the percentage of the US population was as follows:

 

72.4% white

12.6% black/african american

 

So black people make up 12.6% of the population but account for 28% of the shootings. Ill let you figure out what the problem is (hint its that the ratio is completely out of whack.)

 

And honestly, what is the point of just posting a quote and not actually giving your opinion on it. It leaves the reader trying to assume what you are trying to prove. My guess is that you were trying to show that there actually isnt a problem because more white people get shot. But thats like saying if there are 10million white people and 100 black people, that there is no problem when 150 white people get shot as compared to 99 black people. I mean 150 > 99 right?

 

Old cliche, statistics never lie, but liars use statistics.

 

To be fair, other studies have proven what he's trying to say is true:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/s...tings.html?_r=0

 

Copes use excessive force more against minorities, but when it comes to shootings, there isn't a bias.

 

edit: i should have said "use of force" not just "excessive" force.

Edited September 15, 20169 yr by JenksIsMyHero

To be fair, other studies have proven what he's trying to say is true:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/s...tings.html?_r=0

 

Copes use excessive force more against minorities, but when it comes to shootings, there isn't a bias.

 

edit: i should have said "use of force" not just "excessive" force.

 

To be fair that study only was in 10 major police departments in 3 states. That being said, all I was responding to was the statistics that he presented. Those statics clearly showed that based on the numbers blacks were being shot at a disproportionate rate.

 

Now there may be other numbers that show they are not. But I can only work with the numbers that are presented.

 

I tried to read the paper, but honestly its 63 pages and it seems that its not raw data. I think the most important thing though is:

 

This work focused only on what happens once the police have stopped civilians, not on the risk of being stopped at all. Other research has shown that blacks are more likely to be stopped by the police.

 

The cities Mr. Fryer used to examine officer-involved shootings make up only about 4 percent of the nation’s population, and serve more black citizens than average.

 

I personally do not really know what is the truth. But anecdotally I would think that minorities are more likely to be shot, but again, that is in total, which includes the theory that minorities are investigated/arrested at a disproportionate rate in the first place.

 

Ultimately it's not something that can be conclusively proven because there is no way to find out the statistic "White people who werent arrested that should have been, "black people who were investigated that never committed a crime", etc.

So why were you so sure I was arguing the contrary in my post with no argument?

 

Because that is the logical conclusion. If someone posts something and another person responds, it would seem like that post is a counter-argument.

 

That is just the intuitive reading of the thread. If it was mistaken, that is my bad. But again, you just posted random statistics so you left it to the reader to try and discern what the point of the post was.

I hope you are not using this to show that somehow there is not a disproportionate amount of minorities who are the victims of police shootings.

 

According to the 2010 US survey the percentage of the US population was as follows:

 

72.4% white

12.6% black/african american

 

So black people make up 12.6% of the population but account for 28% of the shootings. Ill let you figure out what the problem is (hint its that the ratio is completely out of whack.)

 

And honestly, what is the point of just posting a quote and not actually giving your opinion on it. It leaves the reader trying to assume what you are trying to prove. My guess is that you were trying to show that there actually isnt a problem because more white people get shot. But thats like saying if there are 10million white people and 100 black people, that there is no problem when 150 white people get shot as compared to 99 black people. I mean 150 > 99 right?

 

Old cliche, statistics never lie, but liars use statistics.

Wouldn't the more relevant statistic in determining if there's a racial bias in police shootings be the percentage of victims that were shot where lethal force was not justified (the percentage of times where lethal force was justified but not taken could be enlightening too)? If the percentage of unjustified shootings is the same between white and black victims then it shouldn't matter that the numbers don't match the demographics of the general population. The fact that minorities tend to end up in such situations more often is definitely a problem, but that's really a separate issue than what we're talking about here.

Edited September 15, 20169 yr by OmarComing25

Wouldn't the more relevant statistic in determining if there's a racial bias in police shootings be the percentage of victims that were shot where lethal force was not justified (the percentage of times where lethal force was justified but not taken could be enlightening too)? If the percentage of unjustified shootings is the same between white and black victims then it shouldn't matter that the numbers don't match the demographics of the general population. The fact that minorities tend to end up in such situations more often is definitely a problem, but that's really a separate issue than what we're talking about here.

Great post. Was hoping someone would post this.

This probably isn't the right thread but I didn't want to open a Black Lives Matter thread. I had a question. I was watching the video today of the Yale students ganging up on some professor who was upset that the administration sent out a memo warning students to not dress up inappropriately for Halloween. Like have a costume that might offend.

They ganged up on him and were screaming at him. One woman was crying and said she expected a "safe space" at Yale where she could be protected from offensive people/language.

 

Is that the purpose of Yale?? To be a safe space?

 

This should probably be a separate thread because this entire topic is several layers deep. I had to click 4 different links to really understand the whole story.

 

What it seems to boil down to is that college students are completely shocked that some people have a different viewpoint about some things.

 

Watching the videos it seems that the only thing they want is an apology rather than listen to the explanation of why the person feels the way they do. What's odd is that the professor they are confronting isn't even the one that wrote the email that they are upset about.

Wouldn't the more relevant statistic in determining if there's a racial bias in police shootings be the percentage of victims that were shot where lethal force was not justified (the percentage of times where lethal force was justified but not taken could be enlightening too)? If the percentage of unjustified shootings is the same between white and black victims then it shouldn't matter that the numbers don't match the demographics of the general population. The fact that minorities tend to end up in such situations more often is definitely a problem, but that's really a separate issue than what we're talking about here.

 

 

Well the problem is that some people are arguing that police claim it as justified disproportionately when it comes to minorities. In the olden days it was called "a case of mistaken identity" where the police killed someone cause they mistakenly believed it was someone they were looking for. Its impossible to objectively know whether there is bias or not because no will ever know what the police officer really thought.

 

It was just a post with raw data and I just interpreted the data given. Nothing more or nothing less.

Edited September 16, 20169 yr by Soxbadger