And doctors have a history of ignoring bad doctors. And that's why there are a lot of them.
Printable View
And doctors have a history of ignoring bad doctors. And that's why there are a lot of them.
So called plain numerical fact are in fact disputed for a lot of reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
For example, the data indicates blacks are arrested at higher rates, in drug cases three to four times higher than whites, even though "the prevalence of drug use is only slightly higher among blacks than whites for some illicit drugs and slightly lower for others; there is little evidence, when all drug types are considered, that blacks sell drugs more often than whites.
In other words, looking at the data, crime rates are to some extent driven by racial and ethnic disparities in policing. While you may well rationalize that such disparities are justified, the heart of the matter is whether the justice system targets minorities disproportionately.
Source
You have a potential point, which is why murder rates are so convenient. Dead bodies not due to accident, suicide or disease are less a matter of opinion and discretion than whether fisticuffs were a) men being men, or b) aggravated assault. And everything from homicide to school suspensions stack up more or less in line in terms of incidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
Pick your crime of choice. Because police are likely to interact with, well, criminals. More crime in a given group, and yeah you will have more police use of force. Doesn't do away with the terrible history of either the American south, where some police forces were themselves basically terrorist organisations, nor of the terrible history of the very liberal American northern cities where police and fire have also both been racist.
But, taking the last 30 years or so of history, you look at murder rates and, adjusted for that, whites get shot somewhat more often by police than African Americans. Doesn't mean that police are biased against whites, either. Of course, there's no virtue signalling involved in that last sentence, so I don't know why I bothered writing it except out of a desire to be fair. Could well be that relative to incidence, more people in that group acted so that police shot them.
gud wun dood part teuxQuote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
Because police are likely to interact with (who they decide are) criminals.
And again, homicide is very useful in this regard. Not really a matter of opinion, and while false convictions are very disturbing and awful, no one credible argues that a big percentage of offenders are falsely convicted.Quote:
Originally Posted by powdrhound
Do bad stuff, and you are likely to interact with police, plain and simple.
FWIW, when looking at unarmed victims empirical data suggests racism is linked to higher rates of police violence.
Source:
Based on the relationship between state-level structural racism and Black-White disparities in police shootings, structural racism is an important predictor of the Black-White disparity in rates of police shootings of unarmed victims across states.
For every 10-point increase in the state racism index, the Black-White disparity ratio of police shooting rates of people not known to be armed increased by 24%.
No. Read what you linked. They are defining racism as a structural concept. They aren't saying police are shooting more black people because police are racist.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
So, please stop trying to distort what they wrote. That ain't a police issue. Are police supposed to turn a blind eye to, well, murder, armed robbery, and such because, historical injustice?
Remember, the majority of the victims of those criminals are going to be within their same socioeconomic groups. Those victims need to be served by police, today.
For instance, the big uptick in murder rates post-Ferguson, caused in large part by BLM activism and related riots. Well, guess who the murder victims were? People in those same communities, for the most part. So, should police turn a blind eye, to be politically correct, or should they arrest murderers?
At no point have I claimed police are racist. Instead, evidence was provided suggesting the justice system targets minorities disproportionately which goes hand-in-hand with racism as a structural concept, i.e., the word "racism" was used as a synonym for racial disparities. So, please stop trying to distort what I wrote.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
As far as police being able to use deadly force to stop an imminent threat--that's not what SCOTUS said. They have to have a fear of an imminent threat, which means in practice--as shown by the lack of indictments and convictions for egregious killings--that anything a policeman thinks might possibly be a threat, even if he doesn't see a deadly weapon in the hands of the victim, is considered a threat.
As far as my own profession--I reviewed cases for the medical board of physicians suspected of malpractice and was the head of Quality Assurance for my department. I was involved in disciplining a number of physicians.
One thing I observed a lot in my practice was agitated, uncooperative patients in the ER--an officer who happened to be there would come over unbidden and confront them and escalate the situation. Then a nurse would come in and calm things down. Too many officers are more interested in asserting their power and authority than in actually handling the situation in the most effective way.
You have no argument against me so you resort to ad hominem attacks. You sound desperate. Sad.
I hate to interrupt your circle jerk, but cops today are way different than 20years ago.
Read this and report back.
Oh, it’s wapo news, so it won’t melt your fragile snowflake mind
Top police trainer: "The sex you have after killing someone is the best sex there is"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-dave-grossman
If wapo is too much, try mother jones
https://www.motherjones.com/politics...ilitarization/
No, neither did you provide evidence that the justice system is targeting minorities.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
You linked to a study saying that disparities in socioeconomic outcomes linked to race (and to obvious historical racial injustice) leads to differences in getting shot by police. Very different from being targeted. The Euros are bending over backwards to ignore crime by a huge population of newly arrived mainly young men, some of whom did see some bad stuff when they were young. Despite the Euros bending over backwards to try to ensure equal outcomes, they won't get them. There doesn't have to be targeting.
To provide evidence that the justice system is targeting minorities, you have to, well, provide evidence of targeting on a systemic basis.
And the "justice system" isn't police. Let's go back to murder rates. I actually don't doubt that some of the murderers the police have to arrest had limited options in life. That doesn't meant that POLICE are targeting them in any way shape or form. Police did support making weed illegal and support increased penalties for crack, etc. at the policy level, but that isn't what people are talking about in terms of police bias.
Again, the plain cold math is, adjusted for incidence, using homicide which is not much of a judgment call, the police aren't "targeting" minority groups.
Police tactics and killings are correlated with higher rates of gun ownership. Police have a legitimate fear of getting shot themselves due to high rates of gun ownership in America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Core Shot
To recap, your claim is that disparities in the use of lethal force by police is due to the higher number of interactions police have with black individuals due to higher rates of crime in the black community.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
What the empirical evidence shows, however, even when controlling for black arrest rates, is the ratio of Black-to-White fatal police shooting rate is Blacks are shot by police at a rate 3.1 times higher than Whites, and unarmed Blacks are shot at a rate 4.5 times higher.
Source
No, again you're not reading and you're not doing the math. I am deleting a longer answer, because basically, yes there are obvious historical injustices. But, the numbers now don't reflect a police issue when you adjust for incidence of the types of crime least subject to opinion. If you disagree on the math, or don't understand that structural racism doesn't even mean implicit current bias, then there's no way to communicate.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
I am literally summarizing the results of the research.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
You might have a point, in an alternate universe sort of way, if you were discussing the study's materials and methods or its design. Things like using Poisson regression to evaluate the Black-White disparity in police shootings while also controlling for a wide range of state-level variables known to be associated with homicide rates etc., but in no way shape or form are you doing anything like that.
No, you're not. In some politically correct universe that assumes targeting as the only possible explanation for disparities, you might kinda be summarizing it. But, what that research says is, basically, if you look at areas with socioeconomic disparities, and define those as structural racism, then the people in areas on the low end of socioeconomic disparities are more likely to get shot by cops. And, no shit. It would be surprising if it were different. Doesn't mean that the police, now, are racist, nor that the justice system is targeting minorities.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
And, doesn't address things like homicide rates, that are higher than the relative disparities in police shootings.
And, further, doesn't give any focus to the victims of the increased homicide rates post-Ferguson. I.e. it is fun to falsely criticize police, but less fun to be in neighborhoods where liberals got the police to pull back.
Consider a hypothetical ER doctor. I bet that you are going to see racial disparities in patient outcomes for his patients. Does it mean he's targeting minorities? No, normally it does not, barring something further.
ghast is willfully blind as a fucking bat, which would be interpreted by radical leftist abortion swimming pools as racist as fuck.
When I write that I am literally summarizing the results of the research, I mean I am literally summarizing the results of the research.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostofSeasonsPast
But since you are so unwilling to update your prior beliefs, for anyone else the results are interesting throughout. For example, even though on average Blacks are shot by police at a rate 3.1 times higher than Whites, and unarmed Blacks are shot at a rate 4.5 times higher, there is tremendous variability across the states in the ratio of Black to White police shooting rates:
Attachment 233200
Dude, murder rates: .01 % versus .0014%.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
Yes, literally you have to go right a column. And yes the disparity is much more than even 4.5 times.
That is the math.
Man, this GhostofSeasonsPast cat is sometimes articulate but when forced to go off script the wheels really fall off.
Good chance it actually has a script.
Duh.
https://www.theroot.com/black-woman-...ers-1825464717
Add asking about whether it’s protocol to pay for plastic utensils to the list of things you apparently can’t do while black without someone calling the police on you.
Video showing the brutal takedown of a black Mobile, Ala. woman at a local Waffle House has sparked fury both online and in the local community, prompting protests and sit-ins, AL.com reports.
The incident happened early Sunday when 25-year-old Chikesia Clemons, and her friend Canita Adams went to Waffle House. While placing an order Clemons asked for plastic utensils, at which point an employee told her that would be an additional charge of 50 cents.
When Clemons and Adams told the employee that they had not been charged for utensils when they purchased food from that same Waffle House just the night before, the employee suddenly canceled their order. Clemons then asked for the contact information for the Waffle House district manager.
“They didn’t even ask her to leave, she was waiting for them to give her the district manager’s card so she could file a complaint on one of the waitresses,” Clemons’ mother, Chiquitta Clemons-Howard told the news site. “When they went to go get the card, that’s when the police showed up. The officer should’ve come in and said we need you to leave.”
The video shows that after briefly speaking to Clemons, a white Saraland Police officer dragged the young woman by her arm from where she was sitting and on to the floor of the Waffle House. Three officers stand over the young woman and pull at her limbs as they attempt to cuff her. Their actions pulled down Clemons’ top, exposing her breasts.
Throughout the entire altercation, Clemons and Adams attempt to get answers out of the officers as to why Clemons is being apprehended.
“What are you doing,” Clemons asks.
“I’ll break your arm, that’s what I’m about to do,” an officer could be heard responding.
Even as the two women voice their distress, customers could be seen eating in the background.Clemons was ultimately charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, Clemons-Howard told the news site. The mother paid Clemons’ $1,000 bond on Sunday morning.“The footage shows the story completely,” the upset mother said. “My nerves are very, very bad right now.”
Mobile NAACP President David Smith released a statement on Sunday, noting that the organization would be gathering facts on the incident, especially in light of the recent, inexplicable arrest of two black men in a Philadelphia Starbucks.
“In light of the current situation in our country — such as the arrest of two young black men at a Philadelphia Starbucks coffee shop — we felt it was important for our members to get a first-hand account of the incident, which has now gone viral on social media locally and across the country,” Smith noted.
As for the officers, a spokesperson for the Saraland Police Department, Det. Collette Little said that the department would be investigating.
“The Saraland Police Department is aware of the arrest at Waffle House and the accompanying video on social media,” the statement read. “The situation is being thoroughly reviewed and is under active investigation right now. Our department strives for transparency and we encourage our community to be aware of current events.”
In the meantime, Waffle House appears to be siding with the police actions.
A Waffle Houose spokesperson told AL.com that although it is “still obtaining and reviewing information,” it believes that there is reason to question Clemons’ version of what happened.
“[I]t’s fair to say that the information we have received at this point differs significantly from what has reportedly been attributed to Ms. Clemons and strongly supports the actions taken by the Saraland Police Department,” spokesperson Pat Warner told the news site via email.
And this is how Cops are supposed to act:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA-YD6sTcP4
Toronto cop = badass... kept his cool and didn't fall for it