Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood: have they had a more negative impact in the black community than in the white community?

Jim Crow laws: did they have more of a negative impact in the black community or the white community?

Gerrymandering: has it had more of a negative impact In the black community than in the white community.

Criminal Justice: has it had more of a negative impact in the black community than the white community?

And on and on and on.

None are so blind........

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

D. C. Bear said:

---

curtpenn said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Gold Tron said:

---

Why do we spend so much time talking about <13% of our population. Asians and Hispanics are equal or greater than that percentage and all we talk about with respect to either of those people groups is illegal immigrants which pertains to a small amount of either. It is exhausting. It really is the squeaky wheel getting the grease.

---

Because that 13 percent has the most complex/problematic history of any American population save maybe the natives. And because that history still impacts that group socially and economically today.

And let's follow your squeaky wheel theory to its logical end. If African Americans are America's squeaky wheel, that can only be for one of two reasons. 1) Black people are somehow inferior to the nation's other races (an inherently racist position), or 2) external forces have stacked the deck against that particular group of people. Given this country's history with slavery and discriminatory laws, I think it's pretty obvious which is the correct conclusion. And until we can acknowledge, as a country, the role history plays on the present, any discussion of potential solutions is futile.

---

" If African Americans are America's squeaky wheel, that can only be for one of two reasons." = fallacy

---

Yes, that is definitely a fallacy. It may be that 1) African Americans aren't "America's squeaky wheel" or 2) that there are additional reasons or combinations of reasons why they are.

What is your explanation?

---

For the record, the squeaky wheel theory is not mine, and I was not affirming it. I was merely suggesting that to hold that opinion, you have to believe one of two things: that the reasons for the statistical anomalies that exist in that population around crime and poverty are internal in nature or external. The former is an inherently racist position and the latter requires us to make certain acknowledgements that many here refuse to make.

To subscribe to that opinion requires one to either be racist or prepared to take a more earnest and introspective look at this topic than most here seem willing to.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood: have they had a more negative impact in the black community than in the white community?

Jim Crow laws: did they have more of a negative impact in the black community or the white community?

Gerrymandering: has it had more of a negative impact In the black community than in the white community.

Criminal Justice: has it had more of a negative impact in the black community than the white community?

And on and on and on.

None are so blind........

---

Exactly. This is what people are talking about when they refer to institutional racism. It's not that every individual is racist. That's clearly not the case. It's that our institutions have consistently tilted the playing field toward one group over another. We can't fix those problems without acknowledging they exist.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood: have they had a more negative impact in the black community than in the white community?

Jim Crow laws: did they have more of a negative impact in the black community or the white community?

Gerrymandering: has it had more of a negative impact In the black community than in the white community.

Criminal Justice: has it had more of a negative impact in the black community than the white community?

And on and on and on.

None are so blind........

---

There are a couple of posters doing their best to not see this post just like they've not seen so many other things

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

---

What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

---

What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

---

For example, it could be entirely internal, e.g. raised level of suspicion or raised level of anticipation of a violent encounter, or it could be an overt action, e.g. a traffic stop, aka "driving while black". However you want to define "profiling", it doesn't really matter. I'm not asking the question, I'm just saying that is the better question related to that data.

What would be one way one might know race was involved in Floyd's killing? Btw, the fact that you had to put "know" in quotation marks is already weakening your case.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

---

What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

---

For example, it could be entirely internal, e.g. raised level of suspicion or raised level of anticipation of a violent encounter, or it could be an overt action, e.g. a traffic stop, aka "driving while black". However you want to define "profiling", it doesn't really matter. I'm not asking the question, I'm just saying that is the better question related to that data.

What would be one way one might know race was involved in Floyd's killing? Btw, the fact that you had to put "know" in quotation marks is already weakening your case.

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

You talked about profiling as a good question for these data. Well, then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?

I would be glad to remove the quotation marks if you would feel better about knowing whether something was related to race. You could know that race was likely involved if you found, for example, a recording of those particular cops saying "Let's go rough up a black dude today!" on the day he was killed. You could also know that race was likely involved if you were able to count similar arrest situations and calculate which ones involved actions by the cops that were likely to lead to the person's death and found a significant disparity based on race. You could also know that race was likely to be involved if you found an ongoing pattern of police dehumanizing a particular ethnic group in their communication patterns or if you measured their attitudes in a variety of other ways, based on an anticipated connection between attitudes and behavior. So, knowing something can be based on a variety of evidence with varying degrees of confidence about a particular situation.

Now back to another question.
Do you think we have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

I would also note, as you have demonstrated, that it fairly easy to have a civil discussion about this topic.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

+ 18 more quotes (click to expand)

---

D. C. Bear said:


What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
For example, it could be entirely internal, e.g. raised level of suspicion or raised level of anticipation of a violent encounter, or it could be an overt action, e.g. a traffic stop, aka "driving while black". However you want to define "profiling", it doesn't really matter. I'm not asking the question, I'm just saying that is the better question related to that data.

What would be one way one might know race was involved in Floyd's killing? Btw, the fact that you had to put "know" in quotation marks is already weakening your case.

---

D. C. Bear said:

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

You talked about profiling as a good question for these data. Well, then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?

I would be glad to remove the quotation marks if you would feel better about knowing whether something was related to race. You could know that race was likely involved if you found, for example, a recording of those particular cops saying "Let's go rough up a black dude today!" on the day he was killed. You could also know that race was likely involved if you were able to count similar arrest situations and calculate which ones involved actions by the cops that were likely to lead to the person's death and found a significant disparity based on race. You could also know that race was likely to be involved if you found an ongoing pattern of police dehumanizing a particular ethnic group in their communication patterns or if you measured their attitudes in a variety of other ways, based on an anticipated connection between attitudes and behavior. So, knowing something can be based on a variety of evidence with varying degrees of confidence about a particular situation.

Now back to another question.
Do you think we have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

I would also note, as you have demonstrated, that it fairly easy to have a civil discussion about this topic.



Just getting caught up on some of the discussion.

1) Please expound more on BusyTarpDuster2017's "if so, how do you know?" since you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing.

I am asking for clarification on this case specifically.

2) Regarding your question "Well then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?

Could you clarify the meaning of "should"? In that are your referring to a societal right/wrong type question or are you asking if it would be prudent in reality for an individual to adjust expectations when dealing with other humans.

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

---

What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

---

For example, it could be entirely internal, e.g. raised level of suspicion or raised level of anticipation of a violent encounter, or it could be an overt action, e.g. a traffic stop, aka "driving while black". However you want to define "profiling", it doesn't really matter. I'm not asking the question, I'm just saying that is the better question related to that data.

What would be one way one might know race was involved in Floyd's killing? Btw, the fact that you had to put "know" in quotation marks is already weakening your case.

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

You talked about profiling as a good question for these data. Well, then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?

I would be glad to remove the quotation marks if you would feel better about knowing whether something was related to race. You could know that race was likely involved if you found, for example, a recording of those particular cops saying "Let's go rough up a black dude today!" on the day he was killed. You could also know that race was likely involved if you were able to count similar arrest situations and calculate which ones involved actions by the cops that were likely to lead to the person's death and found a significant disparity based on race. You could also know that race was likely to be involved if you found an ongoing pattern of police dehumanizing a particular ethnic group in their communication patterns or if you measured their attitudes in a variety of other ways, based on an anticipated connection between attitudes and behavior. So, knowing something can be based on a variety of evidence with varying degrees of confidence about a particular situation.

Now back to another question.
Do you think we have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

I would also note, as you have demonstrated, that it fairly easy to have a civil discussion about this topic.

---

Does the mere anticipation of a violent encounter make it more likely to happen? I have no evidence to back it up, but I think this is probably true. It's the result of human nature, and after all, police are only human.

Should a black man "expect" to be profiled? As I pointed out earlier with your other "expect" question, this is a bad question, and in my opinion, asked in bad faith. What black men should "expect" regarding profiling is going to depend on knowing the attitudes of every police officer in their area, or the ones they are most likely to come into contact with, in order to determine the overall likelihood of being profiled. It matters none what you and I think. It would be pure speculation, and so, rather pointless.

Regarding your answer to how one can "know" the killing of George Floyd involved race, I will note, as Bruce Leroy did also, that you only answered in the hypothetical sense. I was asking about George Floyd's case specifically. How do you know race was involved, in HIS case?

Do I believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race? Problem as it relates to race, in what way, specifically?

D. C. Bear said:

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

---

You must be the great philosopher Basho

Studies have statistically shown that the above hypothesis is directly correlated to the connection between anticipating winning the lottery and experiencing winning the lottery in anticipation of winning the lottery

ValhallaBear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

---

You must be the great philosopher Basho

Studies have statistically shown that the above hypothesis is directly correlated to the connection between anticipating winning the lottery and experiencing winning the lottery in anticipation of winning the lottery

---

Shark attacks are rare. One doesn't generally go to the beach anticipating a shark attack. However, when one is in areas known to be heavily shark infested waters, one becomes keenly aware of the danger and treats even a random striper grazing ones leg as though it's a shark, until proved otherwise.

This is human nature. The answer is to get rid of the sharks, which is tough to do when the clown fish are busy demanding justice for jaws.

ValhallaBear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

---

You must be the great philosopher Basho

Studies have statistically shown that the above hypothesis is directly correlated to the connection between anticipating winning the lottery and experiencing winning the lottery in anticipation of winning the lottery

---

A lottery is random.
Human interaction isn't.

D. C. Bear said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

---

You must be the great philosopher Basho

Studies have statistically shown that the above hypothesis is directly correlated to the connection between anticipating winning the lottery and experiencing winning the lottery in anticipation of winning the lottery

---

A lottery is random.
Human interaction isn't.

---

You're saying the police are telepaths?

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and stated 'when you go looking for trouble you're gonna find it'

sombear said:

---

And yes, I think the Minnesota PO murdered George Floyd, and race played a part. He should get the death penalty, and his 4 gutless colleagues should be arrested and do substantial time.

---

Why do you think race played a part? Based on what?
If the autopsy didn't show he was choked or strangled to death, and the knee to the neck was actually approved in the police manual, do you still think he should get the death penalty? If so, why?

ValhallaBear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ValhallaBear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

---

You must be the great philosopher Basho

Studies have statistically shown that the above hypothesis is directly correlated to the connection between anticipating winning the lottery and experiencing winning the lottery in anticipation of winning the lottery

---

A lottery is random.
Human interaction isn't.

---

You're saying the police are telepaths?

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and stated 'when you go looking for trouble you're gonna find it'

---

You don't have to be consciously "looking for trouble."

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

---

What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

---

For example, it could be entirely internal, e.g. raised level of suspicion or raised level of anticipation of a violent encounter, or it could be an overt action, e.g. a traffic stop, aka "driving while black". However you want to define "profiling", it doesn't really matter. I'm not asking the question, I'm just saying that is the better question related to that data.

What would be one way one might know race was involved in Floyd's killing? Btw, the fact that you had to put "know" in quotation marks is already weakening your case.

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

You talked about profiling as a good question for these data. Well, then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?

I would be glad to remove the quotation marks if you would feel better about knowing whether something was related to race. You could know that race was likely involved if you found, for example, a recording of those particular cops saying "Let's go rough up a black dude today!" on the day he was killed. You could also know that race was likely involved if you were able to count similar arrest situations and calculate which ones involved actions by the cops that were likely to lead to the person's death and found a significant disparity based on race. You could also know that race was likely to be involved if you found an ongoing pattern of police dehumanizing a particular ethnic group in their communication patterns or if you measured their attitudes in a variety of other ways, based on an anticipated connection between attitudes and behavior. So, knowing something can be based on a variety of evidence with varying degrees of confidence about a particular situation.

Now back to another question.
Do you think we have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

I would also note, as you have demonstrated, that it fairly easy to have a civil discussion about this topic.

---

Does the mere anticipation of a violent encounter make it more likely to happen? I have no evidence to back it up, but I think this is probably true. It's the result of human nature, and after all, police are only human.

Should a black man "expect" to be profiled? As I pointed out earlier with your other "expect" question, this is a bad question, and in my opinion, asked in bad faith. What black men should "expect" regarding profiling is going to depend on knowing the attitudes of every police officer in their area, or the ones they are most likely to come into contact with, in order to determine the overall likelihood of being profiled. It matters none what you and I think. It would be pure speculation, and so, rather pointless.

Regarding your answer to how one can "know" the killing of George Floyd involved race, I will note, as Bruce Leroy did also, that you only answered in the hypothetical sense. I was asking about George Floyd's case specifically. How do you know race was involved, in HIS case?

Do I believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race? Problem as it relates to race, in what way, specifically?

---

With the bolded quote above, it is a known fact that expectations can influence outcomes. Also, I am not talking only about the expectations of police.

I am not asking any questions in "bad faith."

I did not say I know race was involved, I said I believe race was involved. I believe race was involved based on deductive reasoning, not based on any specific attributes of this case. Minneapolis has a history.

Do you believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race in whatever way you want to specifically define or describe that problem?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

sombear said:

---

And yes, I think the Minnesota PO murdered George Floyd, and race played a part. He should get the death penalty, and his 4 gutless colleagues should be arrested and do substantial time.

---

Why do you think race played a part? Based on what?
If the autopsy didn't show he was choked or strangled to death, and the knee to the neck was actually approved in the police manual, do you still think he should get the death penalty? If so, why?

---

Fair points. Other posters had asked about opinions on this, and I gave mine. Just my opinion. I don't see why an experienced PO would have a knee on the neck of a restrained man for that long if there was not something else involved. Maybe the PO is just a bad person. Maybe he just lost it. Maybe he somehow thought he was doing the right thing. I just happen to believe that Floyd's race played a role. I support the men and women in blue, but this guy is one of the rare bad apples.

sombear said:

---

And yes, I think the Minnesota PO murdered George Floyd, and race played a part. He should get the death penalty, and his 4 gutless colleagues should be arrested and do substantial time.

---

Minnesota abolished the death penalty in 1911 when they tried to hang a murderer/buggerer and the rope was too long and he hit the floor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Williams_(murderer)

D.C Bear said

With the bolded quote above, it is a known fact that expectations can influence outcomes. Also, I am not talking only about the expectations of police.

I am not asking any questions in "bad faith."

I did not say I know race was involved, I said I believe race was involved. I believe race was involved based on deductive reasoning, not based on any specific attributes of this case. Minneapolis has a history.

Do you believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race in whatever way you want to specifically define or describe that problem?


Sorry, I may have missed your response but regarding your question "Well then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?"

Could you clarify the meaning of "should"? In that are your referring to a societal right/wrong type question or are you asking if it would be prudent in reality for an individual to adjust expectations when dealing with other humans.

Found image of DC at work.




(Edit: so this site is censoring images of Cathy Newman interviewing Jordan Peterson)

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bearitto said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

2019: people shot/killed by police
White - 370
Black- 235
Hispanic - 158
Other - 39
Unknown 202

---

So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed...

---

Well, they commit 4 times the murders and robberies and 2+ times the rapes, aggravated assaults, burglaries, car thefts, arson, and other assaults. You can't really expect to do so much of a thing, completely and absurdly out of proportion with your population, and not have equally absurdly out of proportion interactions with people whose job is to stop those things from happening.

It's all about as shocking as the prevalence of HIV in the promiscuous gay community.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-43

---

You talk about "your population" as though Blacks are somehow responsible for the actions of other Blacks. Why is that?

The idea that an individual African American should expect to be mistreated by the cops because some other African Americans committed any variety of crimes is interesting. Men commit a huge percentage of rapes. If a cop pulled out a gun and shot a man dead in the street, someone might make the absurd argument that he cannot really expect not to be shot dead in the street since such a high percentage of rapes are committed by men, even though he was just minding his own business.

---

The argument has been that the black population in America is singled out and " We're literally hunted EVERYDAY/EVERYTIME we step foot outside the comfort of our homes!" the us v them argument is not my creation. It's the creation of activists, celebrities, politicians, and now looters.

I see you'd like to try and ignore that to try and dismiss the statistics that explain why enforcement is more common among blacks, but that's intellectually dishonest at best.

Don't try and change arguments mid stream.

---

I'm not changing the arguments.

Why should an African American expect to be treated badly by cops because the actions of other African Americans? You post seems to imply you believe this is the case.

---

You are changing the argument. You know you are.

You say "blacks account for" as relates to enforcement outcomes and I fill in the details on what blacks account for as relates to what prompts law enforcement action. You don't like that your argument is made to look like the ignorant nonsense it is and you change arguments.

Go to bed or stop drinking. You are obviously not thinking clearly.

---

Read what I said: "So Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed..."

I am not arguing here that Blacks are shot by cops because they are black. I am saying that there is some relationship between being black and being shot by cops that isn't random.

You appear to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops because of the actions of some African Americans. Is that your contention?

---

"Shot and killed" follows "enforcement" which follows "crime committed".

"Shot and killed" by race follows "enforcement" by race which follows "crimes committed" by race...proportionally.

The argument you made and everyone else makes is an us v them argument using population proportion to claim racism. The argument carried through with statistics demonstrates that proportionality is statistically in line with crime rates.

Your claim that my post "appears to be making the argument that all African Americans should expect to be treated poorly by cops" is not just a mischaracterization. It's a lie.

I gave a very clear analogy to demonstrate my point...HIV in the gay community. Should every gay person expect to get HIV? No. Should every gay person expect that the incidence of HIV will be higher in their community where promiscuity is statistically higher than other communities? Yes. The statistics don't mean HIV targets gays. It means more gays engage in more activities that lead to HIV infections.

You intentionally mischaracterize and lie. Why is that?

---

I am not lying or mischaracterizing anything. You are reading things in my posts that aren't there. Jack Bauer's post notes that more whites than blacks are shot and killed by police. I note that, all other things being equal, blacks are being shot by police at twice the rate you would expect if shooting by police was randomly distributed. I did not offer a reason why this is so. You offered statistics, which I have not checked, saying that blacks commit a massively greater percentage of crimes to explain why they are shot by police at a massively higher rate.

Your HIV analogy is flawed in the following way. If someone is gay, but never has sex, they aren't going to contract HIV, and they will not develop AIDS. If someone is black, but doesn't commits crimes, he may still be mistreated by police and there are plenty of examples of African American citizens being mistreated by police even when they didn't do anything wrong. There are no examples of a gay person who didn't have sex contracting HIV simply because he was gay.

Now, my question is still there to be answered: should an individual African American man expect to be treated badly by police because of the actions of other African American men?

---

I don't think that's what was being said at all. I think he was merely saying that if a certain race is involved in more crimes proportionally, especially violent ones, then that race, statistically speaking, is more likely to be involved in violent interactions with police. I don't think that means that any black person, independent of their actions, should "expect" bad treatment from police, any more than it means that a white person should "expect" bad treatment from police in due proportion to the statistics involving whites.

---

The question is there without regard for "what is being said." It is a logical next question to ask.

---

Sorry, I don't see how that is a logical next question. An explanation for a statistic is not an implication that differential treatment is justified, or should be expected in the future. That question, rather, sounds more like an attempt to make something racist in order to incite. It sounds like the tactic that the leftist media constantly employs.

---

Why not? It's a useful question, it follows logically from that kind of data, and the answer to it has many implications.

---

No, it doesn't. It doesn't flow logically from the data any more than asking if white people should "expect" bad treatment from the police, given they are affected as well.

---

Ask it another way. Do those crime stats show that we don't actually have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

---

---

The answer would be no, it doesn't show that, and neither does it show that we do.

I think a better, more logical question to follow that data would be: "should this crime stat justify profiling by police based on someone's race?"

Just curious- do you believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing? If so, how do you know?

---

What does "profiling based on someone's race" look like?

I believe race was involved in George Floyd's killing. There are a variety of ways one might "know" if that was actually the case.

---

For example, it could be entirely internal, e.g. raised level of suspicion or raised level of anticipation of a violent encounter, or it could be an overt action, e.g. a traffic stop, aka "driving while black". However you want to define "profiling", it doesn't really matter. I'm not asking the question, I'm just saying that is the better question related to that data.

What would be one way one might know race was involved in Floyd's killing? Btw, the fact that you had to put "know" in quotation marks is already weakening your case.

---

Is there a connection between anticipating a violent encounter and experiencing a violent encounter in that anticipation of a violent encounter makes it more likely to happen?

You talked about profiling as a good question for these data. Well, then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?

I would be glad to remove the quotation marks if you would feel better about knowing whether something was related to race. You could know that race was likely involved if you found, for example, a recording of those particular cops saying "Let's go rough up a black dude today!" on the day he was killed. You could also know that race was likely involved if you were able to count similar arrest situations and calculate which ones involved actions by the cops that were likely to lead to the person's death and found a significant disparity based on race. You could also know that race was likely to be involved if you found an ongoing pattern of police dehumanizing a particular ethnic group in their communication patterns or if you measured their attitudes in a variety of other ways, based on an anticipated connection between attitudes and behavior. So, knowing something can be based on a variety of evidence with varying degrees of confidence about a particular situation.

Now back to another question.
Do you think we have a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race?

I would also note, as you have demonstrated, that it fairly easy to have a civil discussion about this topic.

---

Does the mere anticipation of a violent encounter make it more likely to happen? I have no evidence to back it up, but I think this is probably true. It's the result of human nature, and after all, police are only human.

Should a black man "expect" to be profiled? As I pointed out earlier with your other "expect" question, this is a bad question, and in my opinion, asked in bad faith. What black men should "expect" regarding profiling is going to depend on knowing the attitudes of every police officer in their area, or the ones they are most likely to come into contact with, in order to determine the overall likelihood of being profiled. It matters none what you and I think. It would be pure speculation, and so, rather pointless.

Regarding your answer to how one can "know" the killing of George Floyd involved race, I will note, as Bruce Leroy did also, that you only answered in the hypothetical sense. I was asking about George Floyd's case specifically. How do you know race was involved, in HIS case?

Do I believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race? Problem as it relates to race, in what way, specifically?

---

With the bolded quote above, it is a known fact that expectations can influence outcomes. Also, I am not talking only about the expectations of police.

I am not asking any questions in "bad faith."

I did not say I know race was involved, I said I believe race was involved. I believe race was involved based on deductive reasoning, not based on any specific attributes of this case. Minneapolis has a history.

Do you believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race in whatever way you want to specifically define or describe that problem?

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D.C Bear said

With the bolded quote above, it is a known fact that expectations can influence outcomes. Also, I am not talking only about the expectations of police.

I am not asking any questions in "bad faith."

I did not say I know race was involved, I said I believe race was involved. I believe race was involved based on deductive reasoning, not based on any specific attributes of this case. Minneapolis has a history.

Do you believe there is a problem with law enforcement as it relates to race in whatever way you want to specifically define or describe that problem?


Sorry, I may have missed your response but regarding your question "Well then, should an African American man expect to be profiled by law enforcement based on the actions of other African American men?"

Could you clarify the meaning of "should"? In that are your referring to a societal right/wrong type question or are you asking if it would be prudent in reality for an individual to adjust expectations when dealing with other humans.

---

How about both?

Why arent my replies going through?

Ok, DC Bear, here is my reply to your last post. For some reason, it won't let me post by replying.

It is a known fact that expectations can influence outcomes? That's not being very specific. Let's keep it relevant to our discussion- is it a known fact that police expectations influence outcomes, and if so, in what way? And if you have evidence, please share.

Yes, I know you said "believe". That's exactly my point- you don't really know whether or not race was involved. No one does for sure at this point. Yet it's a major part of the narrative and the impetus for all these protests, even the violent riots.

I would, however, like to hear your deductive reasoning behind your belief that race was involved.

Instead of asking a broad question like your last one, let's again concentrate on being specific. Why don't we do this- why don't you tell me what problem YOU think exists with law enforcement as it relates to race, and I'll tell you if I agree or not, and we'll go from there. Let's streamline this discussion a bit by zeroing in on what you obviously have in mind.

D.C. "Blacks likely account for something more than about twice what one would expect if race wasn't somehow statistically related to being shot or killed."

You presume Race is the salient factor. I suspect other factors, such as criminal history of the individuals involved, are more direct in causality.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Why arent my replies going through?

---

You offended the Server Cats who control all online input.

Or, it's a glitch.

How many unarmed black people were killed by police last year?