Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #481375
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim |
| Date | 2018-12-14 13:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g7ii2qFjtelU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (9 earlier) <a2d6da4c-bf2a-4fc3-9d95-4508a56f48bc@googlegroups.com> <d990083d-61ff-47cd-872b-9f4afdffa730@googlegroups.com> <4f189b40-def4-44cd-993a-54096676d3ac@googlegroups.com> <5c215a7e-a0cd-427c-902f-2462c25060da@googlegroups.com> <e6f10b30-cc10-431d-981f-fc9e9a21427b@googlegroups.com> |
On 12/14/18 10:38 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 9:23:50 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 10:40:00 AM UTC-5, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:56:35 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:03:46 PM UTC-5, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 1:04:24 PM UTC-7, chrisv wrote:
>>>>>> SilverSlimer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The moment anyone is actually willing to read chrisv's political opinion
>>>>>>> is the moment Western Civilization officially dies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's really funny, coming from you, Slimer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tell us, again, how the criminal justice system in the US has a racial
>>>>>> bias, and that it favors blacks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll see your 'bogus bias' claim and raise you one glaring reality...
>>>>>
>>>>> "According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans
>>>>> accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008"
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait, that can't be right! Or can it? After all, blacks are only about 13.5%
>>>>> of the total population. Ah, I almost forgot...
>>>>
>>>> Forgot to read this section of the same reference....right?
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Explanations_for_racial_discrepancies>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Plus there's also this section which mentions economics a lot:
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Modern_theories_of_causation>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (Hint: statistical distributions of wealth-poverty vs race).
>>>>
>>>> And this is referenced too:
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system#Causes_of_racial_disproportionality>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So no, it isn't as cut and dry a skin color issue as you're trying to make it.
>>>
>>> You seem to believe you're making a counter argument that excuses,
>>> justifies or somehow rationalizes the bizarrely gigantic disparity but
>>> I'm not seeing an actual argument from you.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>>
>> Your claim is effectively that crime only correlates to race.
>
> LOL! "claim"? Where?
Your repeated focus on skin color / race and discounting of other
factors, of course.
Your direct claim, fully unsupported, that liberals ignore the issues
around this (which are largely economic disparity and racial injustice
in this country) when the facts are conservatives are the ones who are
so afraid to face the issues they cry and play victim when people
peacefully and respectfully kneel to bring attention to these injustices.
>> What I've listed shows that many other factors have been identified.
>
> So use them in an actual argument if you have one.
>
>>> My take is... you could ... trying to explain it away with what
>>> it appears you're trying to use to do that.
>>
>> I *could* ... but it is your claim
>
> Anyone can clearly see that I didn't make a "claim", I showed a stat,
> one I labeled as a "glaring reality" (and that part is called 'opinion').
You focused on the color of skin and discounted other stats tied to it.
You absolutely are pushing a bias -- one based on race. You can try to
pretend you are not, but that is just nonsense.
> If you want to argue why the stat is wrong, fine, but don't lie
> that I've done more than post it.
You are lying when you claim you have not. And you even claimed -hh was
posting a "counter argument", which suggests you know you ARE pushing an
"argument" -- but now when your racist crap is being pointed out you are
trying to say you did not claim anything.
> If there's any kind of a "claim"
> here it's inherent in the reality of the numbers, a claim no one
> needs to actually make because it's *that* glaring*.
Ah, numbers. Research. Let's look at the related research... which you
WILL run from because it does not back your bigoted worldview.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00230.x/full
——
The meta-analysis shows with strong consistency that minority suspects
are more likely to be arrested than White suspects.
——
https://sites.hks.harvard.edu/criminaljustice-backup/publications/Police-on-Police_Shootings.pdf
——
Specifically, we are persuaded by evidence that both police officers and
members of the general public display unconscious biases that lead them
to be quicker to “shoot” images of armed black people than of armed
white people in computer‐based simulations testing shoot/don’t‐shoot
decision‐making.
——
http://www.rshroff.com/uploads/6/2/3/5/62359383/frisky.pdf
——
We further find that blacks and Hispanics were disproportionately
stopped in these low hit rate contexts, a phenomenon that we trace to
two factors: (1) lower thresholds for stopping individuals—regardless of
race—in high-crime, predominately minority areas, particularly public
housing; and (2) lower thresholds for stopping minorities relative to
similarly situated whites.
——
https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/janfeb-2014/driving-while-black
——
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows
how police target African Americans on highways across America.
——
http://sfblueribbonpanel.com/sites/default/files/BRP_Exec_Summ.pdf
——
While the SFPD’s policies prohibiting biased policing are in line with
best practices, available statistics indicate racial disparities in its
stops, searches, and arrests. Black and Hispanic people are more likely
to be searched without consent than any other group, and of those
searched, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest “hit rates” (i.e.,
the rate at which searches found contraband).
——
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/frisk9.pdf
——
In the period for which we had data, the NYPD’s records indicate that
they were stopping blacks and Hispanics more often than whites, in
comparison to both the populations of these groups and the best
estimates of the rate of crimes committed by each group. After
controlling for precincts, this pattern still holds. More specifically,
for violent crimes and weapons offenses, blacks and Hispanics are
stopped about twice as often as whites.
——
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2012.01272.x/abstract
——
The pattern of racially selective enforcement suggests the potential for
systemic violations of the Fourteenth Amendment's prohibition on racial
discrimination.
——
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2010.01190.x/abstract
——
The racial skew, questionable constitutionality, and limited efficiency
of marijuana enforcement in detecting serious crimes suggest that
nonwhite New Yorkers bear a racial tax from contemporary policing
strategy, a social cost not offset by any substantial observed benefits
to public safety.
——
https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/assets/files/Expert_Report_JeffreyFagan.pdf
——
Specifically, I provide evidence that the NYPD has engaged in patterns
of unconstitutional stops of City residents that are more likely to
affect Black and Latino citizens.
——
http://policingequity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/CPE_SoJ_Race-Arrests-UoF_2016-07-08-1130.pdf
——
That racially disparate crime rate is an insufficient explanation of
racially disparate use of force rates for this sample of police
departments. Given that these departments range widely in size and
represent urban cities, suburban counties, and transportation police in
geographically diverse jurisdictions, the results are suggestive that
these findings may generalize beyond the sample.
——
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
——
The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of
unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the
probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49
times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on
average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that
there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of
racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative
risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting
data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias
in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in
larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable
portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial
inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level
racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific
crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings
in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime
rates.
——
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no
——
“The only thing that was significant in predicting whether someone shot
and killed by police was unarmed was whether or not they were black. ...
Crime variables did not matter in terms of predicting whether the person
killed was unarmed.”
——
https://chicagopatf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/PATF_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_4_13_16-1.pdf
——
Moreover, black and Hispanic drivers were searched approximately four
times as often as white drivers, yet CPD’s own data show that contraband
was found on white drivers twice as often as black and Hispanic drivers.
——
https://www.aclu-il.org/en/press-releases/traffic-stop-data-shows-persistent-patterns-racial-bias-according-new-report
——
The data reveals, as an example, that statewide across Illinois, African
American and Latino drivers are nearly twice as likely as white drivers
to be asked during a routine traffic stop for "consent" to have their
car searched. Yet white motorists are 49% more likely than African
American motorists to have contraband discovered during a consent search
by law enforcement, and 56% more likely when compared to Latinos.
——
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/us/racial-disparity-traffic-stops-driving-black.html
——
Officers were more likely to stop black drivers for no discernible
reason. And they were more likely to use force if the driver was black,
even when they did not encounter physical resistance.
——
http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf
——
On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty
percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions
with police. Adding controls that account for important context and
civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities.
——
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/08/us/study-supports-suspicion-that-police-use-of-force-is-more-likely-for-blacks.html
——
African-Americans are far more likely than whites and other groups to be
the victims of use of force by the police, even when racial disparities
in crime are taken into account.
——
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550616633505
——
Regression analyses confirmed that police used less force with highly
stereotypical Whites, and this protective effect was stronger than the
effect for non-Whites. Results suggest that intragroup bias is a
protective factor for Whites, but not for non-Whites, providing an
additional route through which racial disparities in policing operate.
——
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/12/16/spd_findletter_12-16-11.pdf
——
Analysis of limited data suggests that, in certain precincts, S.P.D.
officers may stop a disproportionate number of people of color where no
offense or other police incident occurred.
——
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/15/oakland-police-stopping-and-handcuffing-disproportionate-numbers-of-blacks-work-to-restore-trust
——
And in Oakland, Calif., a new study found that if you are African
American and encounter a police officer, there is a 25 percent chance
you will be handcuffed, often in front of family or friends, even though
you are not being arrested.
——
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo
——
The resumes with white-sounding names spurred 50 percent more callbacks
than the ones with black-sounding names.
——
http://www.pnas.org/content/114/41/10870.full
——
We find no change in the levels of discrimination against African
Americans since 1989, although we do find some indication of declining
discrimination against Latinos. The results document a striking
persistence of racial discrimination in US labor markets.
——
http://fortune.com/2016/07/19/mortgage-lending-racial-disparities
——
Blacks Are Still Significantly Less Likely to Get Approved for a
Mortgage than Whites
——
https://phys.org/news/2015-08-african-americans-discriminated-access-local.html
——
Study shows African Americans discriminated against in access to US
local public services
——
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
——
Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living
in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in
adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a
sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children.
White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys
raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay
wealthy in their own adult households.
…
The research makes clear that there is something unique about the
obstacles black males face. The gap between Hispanics and whites is
narrower, and their incomes will converge within a couple of generations
if mobility stays the same. Asian-Americans earn more than whites raised
at the same income level, or about the same when first-generation
immigrants are excluded. Only Native Americans have an income gap
comparable to African-Americans. But the disparities are widest for
black boys.
—
> You're
> all righteously perched to scream "racism" but what you
> won't do is address how the poverty you're trying to use, to
> justify murder to this insane extent, is something the Dem
> party had anything to do with.
You CLAIM he is is seeking to "justify murder". Do you have ANY backing
for that. What is being noted is causes for it... things which tie into
it which you want to run from so you can push your racist worldview.
> Now *that* is a "claim"... one
> I'm extremely confident in making in regards to how I *know*
> you will argue because you have a history of excusing Dems.
You made a claim you will NEVER back: the idea he (or others) are trying
to "justify murder". It is a lie on your part. Nobody is JUSTIFYING it,
they are EXPLAINING the factors which evidence suggest is tied to it.
>>> <shrug>... no matter how you slice it, you're gonna need more than
>>> mere 'theories' to convince people why this isn't an alarming issue
>>> (one that is, somehow, rarely spoken about).
>>
>> Not theories, but just the same data
>
> This is the part where you use that "data" in an argument that seeks
> to 'explain away' the insanely huge disparity shown by the stat.
I post a lot of related research, above. But you WILL run from it. Does
not fit your victim-mentality racist worldview. You want to be the
victim, or at least be seen as one.
>> "Income inequality alone explained 74% of the variance in murder
>> rates
>
> Personally, I don't buy the "Income inequality" argument for
> murder because there are other groups who are poor that aren't
> murdering at the same rate. You're free to selectively buy it but
> I can see why you'd feel the need to (as I address below) but good
> luck convincing others.
Ah, so the evidence here is to be ignored... but you want your evidence
to be accepted... but you also want your claim to not be seen as a claim
so you can distance yourself from it.... you are just in your normal
game mode.
>> and half of the aggravated assaults. However, social capital
>> had an even stronger association and, by itself, accounted for 82%
>> of homicides and 61% of assaults."
>>
>> <https://www.zippia.com/advice/crime-income-inequality/>
>
> Yeah... about that...
>
> Back in the 60's almost half of black families were in or were
> approaching what was then our 'middle class'. Have you ever
> heard of the Moynihan report, the one that Johnson based a
> famous speech on to deaf ears, that rightfully (it was one thing
> he totally got right) traced a lot of black problems back to Jim
> Crow era laws and beyond (as you are alluding to here)? Are
> you aware that Dems controlled the House and the Senate
> (sometimes in a supermajority) from 1955 (just as civil rights
> were starting to get 'interesting') until 1981?
>
> So... we have issues that are rightfully traced back decades
> earlier and a political party that somehow managed to fritter
> away the dream of 'middle class' for the black family just as
> they began to recover from issues traced to 'the bad old Dem'
> era. Dems were in majority for decades, why could they only
> make things worse for black communities? Hello? This is the
> group you *claimed* you were championing, WTF happened?!
>
> Now conditions are even worse, Dems not only want to pretend
> the history we all know happened never happened... but they also
> want to pretend that their subsequent social policies, which they
> claimed would "help" the black community's family structure,
> didn't destroy a notable rise in that community just as it was
> starting to show very positive results.
Lots of claims there made by you. Now show some support.
And off you run again... as you do below:
> (snip stuff that has nothing to do with Dem creation/interference
> and the U.S.)
Yup... you just run. And that was when -hh used YOUR source to show your
CLAIM was not as simply as you present it... not JUST about race.
Then you cry when it is noted you push racist crap.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Another shooting in France, another Muslim SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-12-11 20:55 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-11 19:45 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-12 07:08 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-12 13:48 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-12-13 03:16 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-12 19:36 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-12 20:59 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 07:12 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-13 05:41 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 15:52 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 11:17 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 17:36 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-12-13 12:53 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim % <%> - 2018-12-13 11:02 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 14:04 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 20:13 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-14 07:12 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-14 13:08 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-14 18:37 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-14 14:04 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-14 19:17 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-14 13:47 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-14 15:41 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-17 15:06 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another MUSLIM SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-12-17 10:55 -0500
Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-17 10:00 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-17 11:28 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-18 03:58 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-17 21:02 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-17 11:07 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-17 18:11 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-13 15:03 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-13 18:16 -0500
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-13 17:56 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-14 07:39 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-14 08:23 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-14 09:38 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-14 10:02 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-14 14:31 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 16:07 -0700
Marxism is a sadistic cult. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-12-17 18:36 -0800
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 13:28 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 13:17 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 16:10 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-14 07:09 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 16:12 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 13:16 -0700
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 12:07 -0600
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 19:41 +0000
Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 14:01 -0600
csiph-web