Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Standing during the Pledge or National Anthem

Burgold

By Burgold
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Dont Taze Me Bro

Dont Taze Me Bro

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, tshile said:

That doesn't mean anything thought.

It's a statistic with no context what so ever. You're using it to say that the color of skin is the factor, but that's not what the statistic says.

There's correlation and there's causation. When I ask what it means, and you reply with "Exactly what it states", I can't help but wonder if you understand that or not. Because that's not the answer.

I know what the statistic says.  It was based off the percentage of blacks killed by LEOs and their percent of the total U.S. population versus the same for whites.  And the deaths will range from justified use of deadly force, unjustified, discrimination/racially motivated, etc.  I understand that.

Edit:  The point I am trying to get across is that we have had numerous (too many) deaths occur involving black people at the hands of law enforcement where other options (other than death) were available, where there wasn't any apparent threat but they were killed any way.  I know the same happens to people of all races (including white), but not nearly as much as it is happening to black people and other minorities.  And I'm not saying that every death is a result of racism, because it isn't.  But again, I'll point to @youngchew 's video he posted, the entire way black people are approached is worlds away from the way white people are approached.  It doesn't represent "every" situation, but it proves a problem that still exists as far as racial profiling is concerned.  

Edited by Dont Taze Me Bro
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Evil Genius

The Evil Genius

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Does that 2.5 times stat exist because blacks commit more crimes?

 

I would think that would be hard to ever accurately capture. There are plenty of "crimes" that people of all races get away with. How do you capture those "crimes" accurately and more importantly, how do you think that would skew the data? Are whites/non-whites being pulled over and/or ivestigated and/or detained at the same frequency?  

From what I've read...no. I'd think institutional bias absolutely plays a factor in the 2.5x stat. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGreatBuzz

TheGreatBuzz

Posted
Posted

Ray Ban, I am definetly one of the more Property Police people here and you completely lost me.  

By your thinking, you wouldn't have gotten hit by that drunk driver if you hadn't left your house so it's not the drivers fault.  Let's ignore the fact that you were in the right to leave your house.

Just like I think certain posters here are so far to one side that they actually make their side like worse, you are doing that for the pro police side.  Please just stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Does that 2.5 times stat exist because blacks commit more crimes?

 

By the way, I think if you dive down into it, you're going to find...

Crime goes up as an area's residents 'wealth' goes down. The closer to (or further past) the poverty line you go, the more crime you have.

Crime goes up as an area's density goes up.

And when you put them together what you wind up seeing is that crime correlates very strongly with poverty and especially strongly with high densities of poverty.

(I'm talking about the kind of crime that receives increased police presence as a response, and over time can be understood to even cause police to be more aggressive in their tactics. violent crime; rape, murder, assault, robbery, etc. i'm not talking about check kiting and duis)

I really hate that the conversation is always about black/white/others because when you look at the stats it strongly correlates with poverty (and economic opportunity.) We can fix one (or make it better), we can't the other.  Yet we constantly focus on the one we can't fix, then wonder why nothing ever changes.

The community outreach stuff is nice and all but i'm wiling to bet, pending a revelation in how we discuss/approach the issue, the statistics will look the same 10 years from now (adjusted and compared to the national average for crime/incarceration/shootings, i'm sure it'll go up/down but once you normalize it all i bet it's the same)

 

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo the kKklown

Bozo the kKklown

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Kilmer17 said:

Does that 2.5 times stat exist because blacks commit more crimes?

 

is that true, or do you mean Black people are caught committing more crimes?

 

And if we narrow that, is police as concentrated in non-black areas the same way they are in black areas.

Edited by BenningRoadSkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dont Taze Me Bro

Dont Taze Me Bro

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, steve09ru said:

Anyone know the total number of interactions with police for black vs. white so far in 2016?  I see the 2.5x stat but haven't found where that is computed.

If I'm not mistaken it was data taken from 2015 (concerning the 2.5x stat).  I read it in an article a while back, not sure how 2016 is trending either.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gamebreaker

Gamebreaker

Posted
Posted

Correct me if I'm wrong, but all national data involving crime, demographics and such comes from the FBI. And very recently, I think as recent as 2015, someone with the FBI said the data was very incomplete because only 3% of the precincts in the nation were reporting data to them. 

So regardless of what we know, not even a tenth of our law enforcement is being forth coming with the data necessary to make the kinds of determinations we're looking for. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Springfield

Springfield

Posted
Posted

As far as the data, I think it's difficult to be accurate with it.  I also think that it's easy to manipulate that data to prove either points.  Also, it's difficult to prove any sort of causation with the data.

 

Are black people more likely to commit a crime?  Are police more focused on black people per capita?  Are white people equally likely to disobey an officer's orders?  Do white people disobeying officer's orders get killed at the same rate as black people?  These are all questions that are pertinent to the conversation that I don't believe that any of those statistics have answered.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Springfield said:

As far as the data, I think it's difficult to be accurate with it.  I also think that it's easy to manipulate that data to prove either points.  Also, it's difficult to prove any sort of causation with the data.

 

Are black people more likely to commit a crime?  Are police more focused on black people per capita?  Are white people equally likely to disobey an officer's orders?  Do white people disobeying officer's orders get killed at the same rate as black people?  These are all questions that are pertinent to the conversation that I don't believe that any of those statistics have answered.

There's plenty of stats to combine together to look at this and start coming up with possible answers. The real problem is we don't have the same environments - the densities of poor white and poor minority areas are different. So some of those can never be answered indisputably.

One issue, as others have pointed out, is the lack of uniniform data across the nation. Which should definitely be factored into drawing conclusions. So you can only work with what we have, not make stuff up.

Look up stats for crime, education and poverty and put it alongside race and criminal justice stats (not just police shootings, the problem is bigger than that; poor people get the short end of the stick throughout the system.) Then look at victimization statistics.

The narrative is the black people are being targeted. This implies the crimes aren't happening, or they are happening elsewhere and the police only focus on black people. Sounds good looking at the stats, until you bring in victimization information and realize there is an actual disproportionate amount of victims in these areas. 

Skin color has nothing to do with it. If you flip the histories around it would be white people with the higher crime, higher victimization, higher poverty, and lower education. Decades of racism and slavery will do that to anyone.

I have no doubt if I grew up in some of these places with family structure issues to boot I'd have the same experiences. You don't have to change my skin color.

Ever met a white person who did grow up in those situations? They're not exactly fond of the police either...

Whats aggregating is the constant reference to black people as if they're predisposed to being criminals.

Our presidential candidates are spending time taking side of black people or police, I haven't heard either of them give a meaningful speech on poverty and education, and why it's important for *everyone* that we work to fix it.

I don't know how you fix the aggressiveness of police without addressing the crime problem. They deal with the worst our society has to offer, and they have their safety as the number one priority. It'd be nice to have them looked at as 'protect *and* serve' but I'm honestly not sure they were ever like that in these communities. They just got away with it more.

A good step would be holding each other accountable. As much as I and others spend time declaring some (most?) of these cases justifiable, there are absolutely ones that aren't and no one is held responsible. The police need to understand that's not helping them at all...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ray-Ban Dan

Ray-Ban Dan

Posted
Posted

I'll just leave this here...

 

The Misplaced Rage in Charlotte

 

Violence and looting have erupted on the streets of Charlotte, N.C. Those involved have tried to justify this behavior by claiming it’s a natural response to white racism endemic to the city’s law enforcement and justice system.

But that claim ignores highly salient facts concerning the incident that set off this latest wave of unrest. For starters, the police maintain that the dead manwas armed. While angry protestors may choose not to believe that, there is no doubt that the police officer who shot Keith Lamont Scott is, himself, a black man. Moreover, the city’s police department is headed by a black police chief. How curious, then, that we see a man identified as Mr. Scott’s brother caught on video saying that “all white people are f****** devils; all white cops are f****** devils.”

And then there’s the sight of protesters chanting "Hands up, don’t shoot”—an obvious reference to the shooting death of Michael Brown two years ago in Ferguson, Mo. That’s curious too. We’ve learned quite a bit about that incident since the riots there. Most importantly, we now know—thanks to both a state grand jury investigation and a separate federal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department—that “Hands up, don’t shoot” never happened. It was a false claim made up by witnesses who wished to cover up the fact that Michael Brown had attacked Officer Darren Wilson after robbing a convenience store.

Unfortunately, perpetuating the fabricated myth spread by the Black Lives Matter movement and their willing (or unquestioning) accomplices in the media seems to be far more important to many activists than accepting the truth of what actually happened in Ferguson.

We don’t yet know what really happened in Charlotte. The investigation of that tragic incident has not been completed. But recent cases like the one in Ferguson and the Freddie Gray case in Baltimore, in which all of the police officers charged with intentional wrongdoing were eventually cleared, demonstrate initial reports on these types of violent confrontations are often inaccurate.    

We also should know that claims of systematic racism by law enforcement officers and chants such as “Why do you keep killing us?” are part of a false narrative: one that insists that law enforcement officers, specifically white officers, unfairly target and kill black Americans. These incendiary claims appear to be supported by many within the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department which must take some share of the responsibility for spurring this fabricated storyline and the results it engenders.<rest at link>

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ray-Ban Dan

Ray-Ban Dan

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Major Harris said:

Not seeing a link

I'm not sure what happened. That story was originally posted by btfoom on September 25th in the Tulsa shooting thread. He provided the link in the story, but for some reason it didn't show up when I posted it in this thread. My apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
grego

grego

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

Funny how he calls what CK is doing dumb, yet he keeps speaking as if the option to arrest him is possible, as if he legally could. :ols:

Talk about stupid. 

you mean Ruth Bader Ginsberg?

I got the opposite impression- that people can choose to sit for the national anthem or burn a flag and that it shouldn't be illegal.

 

"I think it's really dumb of them," Ginsburg said. "Would I arrest them for doing it? No. I think it's dumb and disrespectful. I would have the same answer if you asked me about flag burning. I think it's a terrible thing to do, but I wouldn't lock a person up for doing it.

"I would point out how ridiculous it seems to me to do such an act. But it's dangerous to arrest people for conduct that doesn't jeopardize the health or well-being of other people. It's a symbol they're engaged in."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
grego

grego

Posted
Posted

 

probably not the exact, right forum, but, heres a line from an article about Floyd Mayweather-

"And with the growing number of black people dying at the hands of police,"

my question is, is this an accurate statement? is the number of black people shot by police actually growing (assuming were not talking about the 'since the beginning of time, then yes' context)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...