George Floyd dies after police knelt on his neck (MOD NOTE IN POST #1)

mouldybiscuits

joe40 wrote: »

I don't think you can divorce the societal and poverty issues from systemic racism in the US. It doesn't have to be overt racism even sub conscious bias can be very damaging

I don't think anger at this level would exist in the black community without reason. And I also do not think mainstream media around the world are that easily manipulated. There are race issues in the US and there are police brutality issues in the US. For me that is definitely true.

These protests do not exclusively involve black people. People from all backgrounds are protesting.

Maybe it would be an idea to encompass all police brutality, but these particular protests are specific to one area at the minute.

What I worry is that now any time there is a police brutality incident against a person who is black does that automatically make it a racist attack? Police brutality is awful and there should be severe punishments for any police proven of wrongdoing but should incidents be addressed differently when the victim is black? Because it looks like that's the direction we're headed in. I feel like people saying black lives matter and not being allowed to say all lives matter is only going to cause more segregation between white and black people. Just because someone is white doesn't mean they treat black people differently but this seems to be the message being spread i.e CNN anchor saying all white people have a virus in their brain. I just feel like this isn't the route civil rights leaders of the past would have taken. We shouldn't judge anyone based on the pigment of their skin. We need unity as humans and this movement seems to be aimed at having black people and white people treated differently to one another. It's a real shame how society has gone if this is the status quo.

joe40

mouldybiscuits wrote: »

What I worry is that now any time there is a police brutality incident against a person who is black does that automatically make it a racist attack? Police brutality is awful and there should be severe punishments for any police proven of wrongdoing but should punishments be more severe when the victim is black? Because it looks like that's the direction we're headed in. I feel like people saying black lives matter and not we are all equal is only going to cause more segregation between white and black people. Just because someone is white doesn't mean they treat black people differently but this seems to be the message being spread i.e CNN anchor saying all white people have a virus in their brain. I just feel like this isn't the route civil rights leaders of the past would have taken. We shouldn't judge anyone based on the pigment of their skin. We need unity as humans and this movement seems to be aimed at having black people and white people treated differently to one another. It's a real shame how society has gone if this is the status quo.

All incidents of police brutality should be treated/punished equally.
To be honest I haven't heard anyone saying otherwise.

cdeb

joe40 wrote: »

I don't think anger at this level would exist in the black community without reason. And I also do not think mainstream media around the world are that easily manipulated. There are race issues in the US and there are police brutality issues in the US. For me that is definitely true.

Well this gets into fairly nuanced areas which I think are way outside the scope of random punters on the internet. You could be right on the anger levels and you could be wrong; I'm not going to pretend to know for sure there.

I do think self-entitlement in general has proliferated in recent years. This idea that I'm right, and anything bad that happens to me must be someone else's fault. You'll see it in legal claims (hello Maria Bailey!), though deep down they don't really believe there's anything wrong. You'll see it on social media a lot of course. The media far too often run with it because it's good clickbait; there's plenty of threads on here I'm sure where posters have picked large holes in such stories (Margaret Cash being a good example actually) So I can quite easily see large groups of people trying to blame someone else for their situation.

There is a studied phenomenon called the illusory truth effect. To quote from wiki -

The illusory truth effect (also known as the illusion of truth effect, validity effect, truth effect, or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe false information to be correct after repeated exposure. In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.

So in effect, the more the media report on systemic racism, the more people believe it exists, and then you have confirmation bias when you're stopped by the police - it was racism in action! Even if it wasn't. For example - I was stopped by the guards while driving a few months ago; they drove up behind me, flashed the lights and flagged me down. They asked for my licence, said I was driving a bit erratically and breathalysed me. I passed, and they said thanks and I was on my way. (This is a long way away from kneeling on someone's neck of course - I don't want to conflate those two! But police interactions don't start with them kneeling on your neck of course)

They probably pulled me over because they saw me leave a pub at 11:30. But say I was in America and there was a well-reported history of Irish people being pulled over by the police at random, with some maybe being pulled out of their cars and so on, I could start to think that this was another example of racist oppression. Even though it wasn't. Times that by a lot, and the effect could grow.

Again, I won't even pretend to be an expert on it (I found it when googling for the word which I thought was "truism" but wasn't). This is all a multi-layered issue.

Racism exists of course. And black people can be racist too of course. I've seen both in action, and they're as bad as each other.

But the bottom line here is I think there's far more to be gained by looking at the core issues and not trying to divide everything along racial lines, which just causes more tensions.

A lot of that is just my view and I'm not going to be able to rigorously back it up. But it stands to logical reason from where I'm looking, and a lot of the arguments on the other side seem to be just repeating facts as if true.

cdeb

Overheal wrote: »

It gave lots of context. A huge write up by the Washington post. Another by FiveThirtyEight. “Whataboutism?” You’re barking mad

So you can tell me the percentage of other races who were stopped and released without charge so I can compare it to the percentage you quoted for black people then to see if there is evidence of racial bias?

(Search function not working; I can't find your OP)

ELM327

Carfacemandog wrote: »

These are the 'dirty scumbags' you would have had 'shot on sight' with no questions asked. Questions like, "did you have permission to enter the house?"

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-52896871/george-floyd-death-the-man-who-sheltered-80-us-protesters

My post that you quoted was not linked to the link you provided.
Nice try though,


My post was about scumbag looters. A man rescuing peaceful protesters is not the same as a bunch of violent looters breaking and entering, now is it.

Overheal

74% of Americans believe George Floyd’s death is an underlying racial injustice problem:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/74-americans-view-george-floyds-death-underlying-racial/story?id=71074422

cdeb wrote: »

So you can tell me the percentage of other races who were stopped and released without charge so I can compare it to the percentage you quoted for black people then to see if there is evidence of racial bias?

(Search function not working; I can't find your OP)

You can check the links I provided already.

Tasfasdf

Overheal wrote: »

74% of Americans believe George Floyd’s death is an underlying racial injustice problem:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/74-americans-view-george-floyds-death-underlying-racial/story?id=71074422



You can check the links I provided already.

Did they survey the whole country or just a few Americans.

cdeb

Overheal wrote: »

74% of Americans believe George Floyd’s death is an underlying racial injustice problem:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/74-americans-view-george-floyds-death-underlying-racial/story?id=71074422

Another unhelpful stat. What people believe and what reality is are often two different things. See the illusory truth effect I posted. (Reminds me too of the "Yes Minister" sketch about opinion pollsters phrasing the question correctly)

So it might well be correct, but it certainly doesn't prove it.

Overheal wrote: »

You can check the links I provided already.

I can't because the search function isn't working.

walshb

Tasfasdf wrote: »

Did they survey the whole country or just a few Americans.

And how many felt they “needed” to be seen to answer a certain way..

Look at all the utter crap on Instagram..

World is full of contrived insincere bull****

ELM327

Tasfasdf wrote: »

Did they survey the whole country or just a few Americans.

Probably asked the looters

Snickers Man

Feck's sake lads, when are you going to sort out this 503 problem?

Off topic, maybe but I'm looking for specific posts in this thread and not having a working search engine is a nightmare.

Techs on lockdown?
Not paying your bills?

Odhinn

Snickers Man wrote: »

Feck's sake lads, when are you going to sort out this 503 problem?

Off topic, maybe but I'm looking for specific posts in this thread and not having a working search engine is a nightmare.

Techs on lockdown?
Not paying your bills?

Been gassed by the man.

coolbeans

RIGOLO wrote: »

not really , thats just a cooloquialism we all use

but then again , the social justice warriors also moonlight as the grammar and punctuation police, lets add phraseology to the list of things they claim ownership of who,where,what,when and how a thing may be discussed. Its not called totalitairism for nothing.

You're some hypocrite. Yesterday you were picking holes in at least one poster's use of English until it was pointed out that your command of the written language is less than stellar. Then you went quiet, mercifully.

ohnonotgmail

cowards and thugs

https://twitter.com/JeffShafer/status/1268684973604814857

Chris_Heilong

Tadeo Fit Calf wrote: »

I can't see him feeling safe to do that to a white person.

I dont know about that, Statistically the police in America kill more white people than Black.

Overheal

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I dont know about that, Statistically the police in America kill more white people than Black.

Rate or total?

Statista reports just this week blacks are 2.5x more likely to be killed by police...

https://www.statista.com/chart/21872/map-of-police-violence-against-black-americans/

Tell me how

cdeb wrote: »

Well this gets into fairly nuanced areas which I think are way outside the scope of random punters on the internet. You could be right on the anger levels and you could be wrong; I'm not going to pretend to know for sure there.

I do think self-entitlement in general has proliferated in recent years. This idea that I'm right, and anything bad that happens to me must be someone else's fault. You'll see it in legal claims (hello Maria Bailey!), though deep down they don't really believe there's anything wrong. You'll see it on social media a lot of course. The media far too often run with it because it's good clickbait; there's plenty of threads on here I'm sure where posters have picked large holes in such stories (Margaret Cash being a good example actually) So I can quite easily see large groups of people trying to blame someone else for their situation.

There is a studied phenomenon called the illusory truth effect. To quote from wiki -



So in effect, the more the media report on systemic racism, the more people believe it exists, and then you have confirmation bias when you're stopped by the police - it was racism in action! Even if it wasn't. For example - I was stopped by the guards while driving a few months ago; they drove up behind me, flashed the lights and flagged me down. They asked for my licence, said I was driving a bit erratically and breathalysed me. I passed, and they said thanks and I was on my way. (This is a long way away from kneeling on someone's neck of course - I don't want to conflate those two! But police interactions don't start with them kneeling on your neck of course)

They probably pulled me over because they saw me leave a pub at 11:30. But say I was in America and there was a well-reported history of Irish people being pulled over by the police at random, with some maybe being pulled out of their cars and so on, I could start to think that this was another example of racist oppression. Even though it wasn't. Times that by a lot, and the effect could grow.

Again, I won't even pretend to be an expert on it (I found it when googling for the word which I thought was "truism" but wasn't). This is all a multi-layered issue.

Racism exists of course. And black people can be racist too of course. I've seen both in action, and they're as bad as each other.

But the bottom line here is I think there's far more to be gained by looking at the core issues and not trying to divide everything along racial lines, which just causes more tensions.

A lot of that is just my view and I'm not going to be able to rigorously back it up. But it stands to logical reason from where I'm looking, and a lot of the arguments on the other side seem to be just repeating facts as if true.

Racism is a curious word because by it's definition, the sense that someone is of a particular character or will behave in a certain way is only racism if you apply it to all people of that race. Ergo, British or American people and businesses which put up signs saying 'No Irish' weren't racist. But they were prejudiced and is it any less wrong, harmful or hurtful to make assumptions on peoples behavior because of their nationality than it is because of their skin colour?

In your example above, the behaviour of the cops in targeting Irish people would have been prejudiced in no less a way than when they do it to black people but is it the fault of the oppressed that there isn't a more widely used and recognized term to explain that situation than racism?

In my view, the meaning of racism is now more accurate to say that it encompasses all behaviour where an individual, or group is prejudged or acted upon in a negative manner because of a collected identity which the person committing the act presumes they have.

We see this in Ireland where members of the travelling community claim that they are experiencing racist attitudes towards them but some say that because the people prejudicing them are of the same race, it's not racism, but does that excuse the behaviour or lessen the impact which the person at the end of it suffers?


On your topic of self-entitlement, I think there is some element of that, and I think that that is rooted in an inherent human psyche/behaviour which does not necessarily exist in people only identifiable by a different race or nationality etc. That fact is being used by some to undermine the collective experience that black communities have experienced through the systemic racism which has and still does exist.
But, I also think of Will Smiths comments, 'Racism hasn't gotten worse, it's getting filmed'.

Odhinn

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I dont know about that, Statistically the police in America kill more white people than Black.

But in terms of population percentage, blacks are far more likely to be shot dead by police than white folk.

Odhinn

Tell me how wrote: »

.................
But, I also think of Will Smiths comments, 'Racism hasn't gotten worse, it's getting filmed'.

True words.

Podge_irl

cdeb wrote: »

My statistics showed a correlation between black/latino police encounters and their crime rates. That means something (i.e. it supports the argument that those communities aren't being targetted in any unusual manner)

That there is a correlation between police encounters and recorded crime rates shouldn't be all the surprising surely? It absolutely doesn't disprove the concept that they are being targeted.

cdeb

Podge_irl wrote: »

That there is a correlation between police encounters and recorded crime rates shouldn't be all the surprising surely? It absolutely doesn't disprove the concept that they are being targeted.

Yes, though again, I put the question earlier in the thread to try quantify how much this effect would be skewing the stats - it may have an effect, but is it material? - and no answer.

I'm trying to use data and evidence rather than emotion and anger to come to my views here. The starting argument is that there's systemic racist abuse in the police system. But then I look at the stats which are put forward to back this up and I see -

> 80% (or whatever the figure is) of people stopped by the police were black/latino! But - these groups commit about 80% of crime, so is that a factor?
> Ah, but there's a bias in racial profiling! But - how large is it? Is it material? Does it change the overall view the stat gives? No info.
> 75% of black/latino stopped by police weren't charged with anything! But - what percentage of white people were stopped and not charged? If it's also 75%, then there's no issue. But as yet, no info.
> Blacks are far more likely to be shot by police than white people! But - they're also far more likely to come to the police's attention because of their higher crime rates. Is there a racial factor here? (I don't excuse the police killing people obviously, except in cases of clear self-defence)
> The police would never do what they did to a white person and expect to get away with it! But - they did, and no charges were pressed.

And so on.

So the problem I have is that where people are trying to make an argument but their evidence doesn't really stack up, then I don't really have much to go on to accept the argument.

I'm all ears for a genuinely solid argument to be made, but it's not happening. Which is why I'll continue to believe that bringing race into this is actually taking away from the (very real) issues of excessive police force and a ****ed-up social structure.

walshb

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

cowards and thugs

https://twitter.com/JeffShafer/status/1268684973604814857

That is not a kick in the face

ohnonotgmail

walshb wrote: »

That is not a kick in the face

that is the best rebuttal you can come up with? i suppose you think she probably deserved it?

walshb

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is the best rebuttal you can come up with? i suppose you think she probably deserved it?

No, just pointing out that it is not a kick in the face.

And kind of emphasizes the exaggeration with some clearly anti police people...

If he had lifted her up off the ground and moved her along physically I am sure you would still be crying brutality.

Anyway, she could have saved herself here, and not been causing a public nuisance. This is not to say I want to see people hurt. It's more an advice given: Take action and responsibility for your own safety.

Overheal

cdeb wrote: »

Yes, though again, I put the question earlier in the thread to try quantify how much this effect would be skewing the stats - it may have an effect, but is it material? - and no answer.

I'm trying to use data and evidence rather than emotion and anger to come to my views here. The starting argument is that there's systemic racist abuse in the police system. But then I look at the stats which are put forward to back this up and I see -

> 80% (or whatever the figure is) of people stopped by the police were black/latino! But - these groups commit about 80% of crime, so is that a factor?
> Ah, but there's a bias in racial profiling! But - how large is it? Is it material? No info.
> 75% of black/latino stopped by police weren't charged with anything! But - what percentage of white people were stopped and not charged? If it's also 75%, then there's no issue. But as yet, no info.
> Blacks are far more likely to be shot by police than white people! But - they're also far more likely to come to the police's attention because of their higher crime rates. Is there a racial factor here? (I don't excuse the police killing people obviously, except in cases of clear self-defence)
> The police would never do what they did to a white person and expect to get away with it! But - they did, and no charges were pressed.

And so on.

So the problem I have is that where people are trying to make an argument but their evidence doesn't really stack up, then I don't really have much to go on to accept the argument.

I'm all ears for a genuinely solid argument to be made, but it's not happening. Which is why I'll continue to believe that bringing race into this is actually taking away from the (very real) issues of excessive police force and a ****ed-up social structure.

Stanford open policing project shows there is undeniable bias in policing, focusing squarely in their project on traffic stops

https://openpolicing.stanford.edu/findings/

On mobile so can’t paste charts.

lawrencesummers

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is the best rebuttal you can come up with? i suppose you think she probably deserved it?

Or maybe if she had been standing up when he kicked her, it would only have been a kick in the arse.

Try that one for excusing police brutality, it’s as realistic as some of the other excuse being given

Overheal

75% of unjustified stops if there was confusion on my end it was not necessarily about race but all stops in Newark based on one study conducted by the DOJ that was a court ordered hullabaloo. On the matter of police reforms.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-agreement-city-newark-new-jersey-address-unconstitutional-policing

cdeb

Overheal wrote: »

75% of unjustified stops if there was confusion on my end it was not necessarily about race

It in fact didn't mention race at all. It's just 75% of all police stops were unjustified.

Fairly big oversight there on your part.

It did say that the PD stopped black people out of proportion to their population - but again, is it in proportion to their crime rate? If so, I would argue that's not unexpected.

Similarly, the Stanford article actually includes this part on how their findings may not be race-related (which is pretty much the same point I've been arguing all along) -

The test can fail to detect discrimination when it’s there and can indicate discrimination when it’s not there, as we and other researchers have observed.

For example, say police officers have a small universe of types of drivers they stop. In fact, suppose there are just two types of white drivers: some of the white drivers have a 5% likelihood of carrying contraband, and the others have a 75% chance of carrying contraband. Suppose there are also just two types of black drivers: some black drivers have a 5% chance of carrying contraband, and the others have a 50% chance of carrying contraband.

In this hypothetical world, consider a fair police officer who only searches drivers with at least a 10% chance of carrying something illegal — regardless of race. In that situation, the white hit rate would be 75% and the black hit rate would be 50%. The officer used the same standard to search each driver, and so did not discriminate, even though the hit rates differ

Emphasis is mine.

So you can see why I'm wary of people bandying stats about willy-nilly

Overheal

Fun fact Lafayette Square in front of the White House once upon a time was a slave market. More optics problems for Trump given that he has already violently cracked down on all the Blacks outside

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/06/05/lafayette-square-slave-market-dc-protests/

Also: Trump is in a pissing match with DC mayor because Trump has effectively annexed Lafayette Square to push forward his insecurity wall.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-trumps-incursions-dcs-mayor-takes-an-impressive-stand/2020/06/04/882d64da-a68c-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html

lulublue22

walshb wrote: »

That is not a kick in the face

Doesn’t matter bottom line there was absolutely no need to kick her. She is not a threat, she is not resisting arrest. They have neutralised whatever threat she may have posed( tbh Id question how much of a threat she ever was). That is pure scumbag behaviour and can not be justified. And before the rioters yada yada whataboutery starts Police in a democratic society should always be held to higher standards.