Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

Yes, an environment where a person's parents or grandparents were treated as second class citizens and ancestors were the property of other groups.

Everyone can pull the 'woe is me' nonsense.


My Great Grandparents were evicted off their farm, by the owners' Trinity College Dublin, who were given that land by The Crown, who took it from the Irish people.
In your opinion, how much does Trinity College and Mrs Windsor owe me.


If that's not a good enough story, I can add stories about,my granduncle, my parents and why I ended up living in Ireland at the age of 4.


I can make a excellent point, that as a Irishman a lot of people,organizations and the British and Irish Governments owe me.

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

I understand attacking the BLM organisation for their secondary beliefs is a much easier path to point scoring than dealing with the very credible and widely supported founding issue of the broader BLM movement - police reform. Despite anti-BLM posters taking this avenue again and again it is obviously such a weak argument.

Anyone with even a moderate level of intelligence can agree with elements of a person or an organisation's beliefs or policies. It isn't a difficult concept.

You have it backwards, you are judging the book by the cover, in this case "police reform" why don't you look inside that book and read it.
I'm not saying this with a "moderate level of intelligence" I am saying it with common sense and slightly above average intelligence:D

Foxtrol

Mic 1972 wrote: »

an environment where parents teach their kids about being systemic victims of white people instead of taking accountability and work hard for your goal is definitely not going to be good.
Especially if the parents are also in and out of jail, drunk and have other social issues.

Europeans were at war with one another until 70 years ago, we didn't teach our kids to hate Germans. People move on with their lives.
it's people who blame others for their failure that never amount to anything.

The only way that German comparison would make any type of sense is if the Germans were never defeated and still occupied Europe, that statues of Nazis were still up across Europe, and the Gestapo were still the police force.

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

Everyone can pull the 'woe is me' nonsense.


My Great Grandparents were evicted off their farm, by the owners' Trinity College Dublin, who were given that land by The Crown, who took it from the Irish people.
In your opinion, how much does Trinity College and Mrs Windsor owe me.


If that's not a good enough story, I can add stories about,my granduncle, my parents and why I ended up living in Ireland at the age of 4.


I can make a excellent point, that as a Irishman a lot of people,organizations and the British and Irish Governments owe me.

What does that have to do with this thread? Once again your only argument seems to be to drag the thread off topic, this time it appears towards reparations.

If you want to talk about the British and Irish government actually on topic of this thread, just look at what they did in the North with the RUC. Are you saying the reform it took to create the PSNI was a bad thing? If not, then why are you against it when BLM calls for similar in the US police force?

nullzero

The problem with BLM being taken seriously stems from prominent people in the BLM movement openly calling for violence against the police, as well as others spouting anti white racist rhetoric at any opportunity.

(I've posted extensive links to articles from reliable sources to back up what I'm saying on this and other threads).

All racism and calls for violence are an afront to civilised society, BLM needs to chastise those making such comments and categorically distance itself from any inflammatory language they have used. Until then people have every right to be distrustful of them.

Foxtrol

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Way to twist reality

Secondary beliefs - in your own words - are still BLM beliefs and are very definitely not compatible with western society.
Just because members of BLM may come from failed families it doesn't mean that nuclear family is a wrong model.

Reforming the police is Refunding the Police, and one again, a completely wrong approach

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

You have it backwards, you are judging the book by the cover, in this case "police reform" why don't you look inside that book and read it.
I'm not saying this with a "moderate level of intelligence" I am saying it with common sense and slightly above average intelligence:D

I'm not buying 'the book', I am, and the vast majority of the millions of people supporting the movement are, not joining the BLM organisation nor voting for a BLM organisation candidate in an election to lead us. What I am doing is agreeing with and with my actions supporting a specific issue that the BLM organisation are a part of and to which they share their name.

What you're both doing is akin to saying a person cannot support the goal of united Ireland unless they agree with every action carried out by the IRA and every policy espoused by Sinn Fein.

ELM327

Foxtrol wrote: »

I'm not buying 'the book', I am, and the vast majority of the millions of people supporting the movement are, not joining the BLM organisation nor voting for a BLM organisation candidate in an election to lead us. What I am doing is agreeing with and with my actions supporting a specific issue that the BLM organisation are a part of and to which they share their name.

What you're both doing is akin to saying a person cannot support the goal of united Ireland unless they agree with every action carried out by the IRA and every policy espoused by Sinn Fein.

Great point

I despise any acts of violence by any terrorist group including the modern IRA/SF but am 110% in favor of a united ireland.


I am also 100% against racism and believe in equality of opportunity for all agnostic of race color or creed, but despise the organization known as BLM for their terrorist acts of burning and looting.

Foxtrol

ELM327 wrote: »

Great point

I despise any acts of violence by any terrorist group including the modern IRA/SF but am 110% in favor of a united ireland.


I am also 100% against racism and believe in equality of opportunity for all agnostic of race color or creed, but despise the organization known as BLM for their terrorist acts of burning and looting.

Care to provide evidence of BLM organization is involved the bold?

If you're blaming them for actions of random people at protests then it is like calling the English FA hooligans because a few of their fans cause issues in a town after a game.

punisher5112

Foxtrol wrote: »

Care to provide evidence of BLM organization is involved the bold?

If you're blaming them for actions of random people at protests then it is like calling the English FA hooligans because a few of their fans cause issues in a town after a game.

They weren't protests, they are and were riots, very well organized too....

The mentality of these morons was to create as
Much hassle and damage as possible.

Going out rioting over career criminal whom ingested a cocktail of drugs, he was going to die either way, the cops called for an ambulance even early on.


Antifa and BLM is a scam.

Foxtrol

punisher5112 wrote: »

They weren't protests, they are and were riots, very well organized too....

The mentality of these morons was to create as
Much hassle and damage as possible.

Going out rioting over career criminal whom ingested a cocktail of drugs, he was going to die either way, the cops called for an ambulance even early on.


Antifa and BLM is a scam.

I see right wing media fiction continues to be peddled as fact. There were thousands of completely peaceful protests and you know full well that they weren't about one isolated incident, they were about systemic, ongoing problems.

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

"Black Lives Matter-Los Angeles and Ground Game LA have vowed to conduct a demonstration every day until Biden commits to not appointing Garcetti to the cabinet."
https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/12/02/protest-garcetti-home-black-lives-matter/

The LA protests are actually a great example of the two tier policing that is rampant in the US.

Below are two videos of the same day at the same location. The first had dozens of cops attend dressed in full riot gear who then began beating peaceful protesters, the second a larger protest and at night had a 3 cops in normal uniform.

Both were protesting the mayor, the only difference being one was part of the BLM movement while the other was a right wing anti-lockdown.

https://twitter.com/josie_huang/status/1335684321017925633?s=20

https://twitter.com/SamBraslow/status/1335782511515824130?s=20

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

What does that have to do with this thread? Once again your only argument seems to be to drag the thread off topic, this time it appears towards reparations.

If you want to talk about the British and Irish government actually on topic of this thread, just look at what they did in the North with the RUC. Are you saying the reform it took to create the PSNI was a bad thing? If not, then why are you against it when BLM calls for similar in the US police force?

But the supporters of bLM like you, for instance, keep bring up the distance past, to justify your movement in the year 2020. Blame the past for everything, it is your go to answer for everything going wrong with the black communities today.



Here is your post #1072
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115563348&postcount=1072
"Yes, an environment where a person's parents or grandparents were treated as second class citizens and ancestors were the property of other groups."


As for reparations, it is not off topic,but common knowledge, blm are pushing it.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffsb&q=reparations+blm&atb=v244-1&ia=web


As for the PSNI, that was only a part of the Good Friday agreement.


Personally I still don't trust the PSNI on investigations of the Troubles and the collusion between the RUC ,British Army,Mi-5 and the Loyalists.
I also do not trust, Jeremy Andrew Harris, OBE, QPM formerly of the RUC and PSNI, now The Garda Commissioner .

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

Care to provide evidence of BLM organization is involved the bold?

If you're blaming them for actions of random people at protests then it is like calling the English FA hooligans because a few of their fans cause issues in a town after a game.

All English soccer fans were blamed, because of the actions, of a few hooligans.

I sort of remember a blanket ban on English soccer fans traveling to away games, around Europe, late 80's early 90's, don't recall anyone screaming Racism.
If there is Soccer fans here, please correct me, Thanks.

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

I see right wing media fiction continues to be peddled as fact. There were thousands of completely peaceful protests and you know full well that they weren't about one isolated incident, they were about systemic, ongoing problems.

Right wing media, in the US and Ireland is very small. But they must be punching above their weight, since they are the big boogeyman to Leftist.

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

I'm not buying 'the book', I am, and the vast majority of the millions of people supporting the movement are, not joining the BLM organisation nor voting for a BLM organisation candidate in an election to lead us. What I am doing is agreeing with and with my actions supporting a specific issue that the BLM organisation are a part of and to which they share their name.

What you're both doing is akin to saying a person cannot support the goal of united Ireland unless they agree with every action carried out by the IRA and every policy espoused by Sinn Fein.

I had two grand uncles in the IRA, they both said that were fighting for a 32 county Republic.

Interesting fact. 1 of them was in the IRB, involved in the preparations of the 1916 rising, ended up in Frongoch, helped de Valera escape from Lincoln prison, was a officer in the IRA. My father and other family members are writing a book about him.

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

The LA protests are actually a great example of the two tier policing that is rampant in the US.

Below are two videos of the same day at the same location. The first had dozens of cops attend dressed in full riot gear who then began beating peaceful protesters, the second a larger protest and at night had a 3 cops in normal uniform.

Both were protesting the mayor, the only difference being one was part of the BLM movement while the other was a right wing anti-lockdown.

https://twitter.com/josie_huang/status/1335684321017925633?s=20

https://twitter.com/SamBraslow/status/1335782511515824130?s=20

Of course you see discrimination everywhere.


lets look at the track record of both groups.
The Anti-lock down people, have, as far as I know, have been responsible for zero looting, racism,burning etc


And


We all know what the bLM record has been.


It is very simple, not complicated at all.



PS
I know a couple of left wingers, who are against the lock down, because they believe in Civil Liberties. It is called having principals.

Biafranlivemat

Foxtrol wrote: »

Care to provide evidence of BLM organization is involved the bold?

If you're blaming them for actions of random people at protests then it is like calling the English FA hooligans because a few of their fans cause issues in a town after a game.

"Care to provide evidence of BLM organization is involved the bold?"
Not trying to start a personal fight here, but did you pay any attention to the news since May?
If your news consists of CNN,MSNBC, ABC,NBC,CBS and RTE, you need to change to a more honest news source. Just saying, that's all.

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Please read the charter

When offering fact, please offer relevant linkage, or at least source. If you do not do this upon posting, then please be willing to do so on request

.

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

As for the PSNI, that was only a part of the Good Friday agreement.

Personally I still don't trust the PSNI on investigations of the Troubles and the collusion between the RUC ,British Army,Mi-5 and the Loyalists.
I also do not trust, Jeremy Andrew Harris, OBE, QPM formerly of the RUC and PSNI, now The Garda Commissioner .

Imagine then what it is like for the black community in the US where there has been no major reform to the police and the police fight every minor change to archaic practices, that would never be allowed in other countries, like Ireland

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

"Care to provide evidence of BLM organization is involved the bold?"
Not trying to start a personal fight here, but did you pay any attention to the news since May?
If your news consists of CNN,MSNBC, ABC,NBC,CBS and RTE, you need to change to a more honest news source. Just saying, that's all.

That isn't evidence of the BLM organization being involved in 'burning and looting'.

What you have is people that attended protests committing crimes and you and other posters as using that to blame the organisers for the actions.

You're incredibly naive to think that Trumps DOJ and every police force has not been trying to tie violence to the BLM organisation and they have utterly failed to do so.

What the other poster stated and you are implying simply isn't backed up by any evidence and lives purely in your head.

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

All English soccer fans were blamed, because of the actions, of a few hooligans.

I sort of remember a blanket ban on English soccer fans traveling to away games, around Europe, late 80's early 90's, don't recall anyone screaming Racism.
If there is Soccer fans here, please correct me, Thanks.

Thank you for making my point for me.

Fans were blamed, not the English FA as an organisation, as you and other posters are trying to do here with BLM. What you're doing is during that period calling the English FA organisation hooligans due to the actions of a minority of their fans.

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

Of course you see discrimination everywhere.

lets look at the track record of both groups.
The Anti-lock down people, have, as far as I know, have been responsible for zero looting, racism,burning etc

And

We all know what the bLM record has been.

It is very simple, not complicated at all.

PS
I know a couple of left wingers, who are against the lock down, because they believe in Civil Liberties. It is called having principals.

Glad your 'principles' are coming out.

The above 'track record' argument is the exact same that was used in the north by the RUC, British Army, and British Government when it came to installing the two tier policing of protestant and catholic areas during the troubles.

nullzero

Foxtrol wrote: »

Imagine then what it is like for the black community in the US where there has been no major reform to the police and the police fight every minor change to archaic practices, that would never be allowed in other countries, like Ireland

The police enforce the law, they don't create it.

There are a disproportionate number of young black men incarcerated in the American prison system not because police are racist but because they are more likely to be involved in criminal activity that carries harsher sentencing.

Look at the disparity between the punishment for selling Cocaine against selling crack cocaine. One is a rich person's drug the other is the poor person equivalent which is met with harsher punishment.

This stems from the 1994 Crime Bill passed by the Democrats of whom Joe Biden was a senior figure in passing the Bill. Why is that important? It demonstrates that politicians will speak out of both sides of their mouths on any given topic.

The issues at play in America are more rooted in systemic suppression of the common person. The entire system is founded on the principle that the great unwashed should in as great a number as possible remain in their lower social position for all of their lives.

A lot of African Americans fall into that category and they struggle with the issues that afflict all poor people in America but ultimately the issue isn't with their skin colour, it is with their social standing. MLK began to talk about how poor whites and blacks should be joined together in solidarity over their shared plight, then he was assassinated.

Is it possible to improve policing? Of course it is but doing so via the means of violence is counter productive.
Are police systemically racist? Demonstrably not, any cases that surface of police officials making racist comments result in the termination of their employment.

The notion that African Americans are targeted by police for their enthicity and nothing else is patently false.

Retr0gamer

nullzero wrote: »

Are police systemically racist? Demonstrably not, any cases that surface of police officials making racist comments result in the termination of their employment.

The notion that African Americans are targeted by police for their enthicity and nothing else is patently false.

Actually it's been demonstrably proven that there is systemic racism in the police in America in academic papers, backed up with figures and supported by irrefutable statistical analysis. To say it isn't is to ignore the mountains of peer reviewed research and data on the subject from the likes of Harvard and other leading academic institutions.

Harvard: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/empirical_analysis_tables_figures.pdf

NCBI:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5388955/

Nature:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z

American Journal of Law and Medicine:
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Paper-Obasogie.pdf

Just a few papers from some publications with some of the highest impact factors in their research area and Nature which is up there with the highest.

And seems that peer review of most papers that show that police brutality doesn't exist have been redacted because the studies were deeply flawed or biased.

So basically saying there is no systemic racism in the police force is both wrong and ignorant.

nullzero

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Actually it's been demonstrably proven that there is systemic racism in the police in America in academic papers, backed up with figures and supported by irrefutable statistical analysis. To say it isn't is to ignore the mountains of peer reviewed research and data on the subject from the likes of Harvard and other leading academic institutions.

Harvard: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/empirical_analysis_tables_figures.pdf

NCBI:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5388955/

Nature:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z

American Journal of Law and Medicine:
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Paper-Obasogie.pdf

Just a few papers from some publications with some of the highest impact factors in their research area and Nature which is up there with the highest.

And seems that peer review of most papers that show that police brutality doesn't exist have been redacted because the studies were deeply flawed or biased.

So basically saying there is no systemic racism in the police force is both wrong and ignorant.

It's interesting how these type of papers go to such lengths to determine the numbers of interactions with police involving certain ethnic groups without asking why they are interacting with police to begin with.

There is a disproportionate number of African Americans involved in criminal activities generally, and the laws that govern how narcotics offences are defined and the laws put in place to deal with those issues are enforced are very much relevant to why there are so many interactions with police in that community.

Can it be proven that a Caucasian person committing the same crime as an African American will be treated and convicted differently?

Do you really believe that police officers are all on some way racist? What about the vast numbers of police who are part of the ethnic minorities supposedly purposefully targeted by the supposedly overtly racist police?
Look at the George Floyd situation, 4 police officers attended the scene, only one of them was white. African Americans aren't being held back within police forces either, many reach high office in their careers. Surely a systemically racist police force wouldn't allow that to occur.
If American police forces really were systemically racist no African American would ever be allowed to join.

Your assertion that the peer reviewed papers you've linked to are irrefutable doesn't stand up to scrutiny I'm afraid.
Are the statistics damming? They certainly are, but they offer content and exclude context, particularly that which doesn't suit the agenda of the paper.

On support the notion of true systemic racism the evidence required would be irrefutable evidence that police are interacting with and arresting people purely because of their skin colour and not because of their criminal actions, which is the assumption made in these type of studies.

The fact that these communities tend to be at the lower end of the social order and tend to have involvement in crimes which carry greater punishment is extremely relevant and impressively dismissed in these types of discussions.

Prior to the Civil rights movement African Americans were very much second class citizens and that situation rightly changed.

In the time since, laws in relation to the prosecution of narcotics offences have changed to increasingly target drugs sold and used by people who are part of poorer communities, and unfortunately that's the neighbourhood a lot of African Americans are still locked in, just like a lot of generationally poor white people still are.

Are we seeing huge numbers of African Americans being arrested for the crime of having black skin? Of course not, and there was a time where racism was an acceptable part of American life but that has passed, the sad reality is that we still see the same old social issues leading to criminality that leads to increased police interactions.

Retr0gamer

nullzero wrote: »

It's interesting how these type of papers go to such lengths to determine the numbers of interactions with police involving certain ethnic groups without asking why they are interacting with police to begin with.

There is a disproportionate number of African Americans involved in criminal activities generally, and the laws that govern how narcotics offences are defined and the laws put in place to deal with those issues are enforced are very much relevant to why there are so many interactions with police in that community.

Can it be proven that a Caucasian person committing the same crime as an African American will be treated and convicted differently?

Do you really believe that police officers are all on some way racist? What about the vast numbers of police who are part of the ethnic minorities supposedly purposefully targeted by the supposedly overtly racist police?
Look at the George Floyd situation, 4 police officers attended the scene, only one of them was white. African Americans aren't being held back within police forces either, many reach high office in their careers. Surely a systemically racist police force wouldn't allow that to occur.
If American police forces really were systemically racist no African American would ever be allowed to join.

Your assertion that the peer reviewed papers you've linked to are irrefutable doesn't stand up to scrutiny I'm afraid.
Are the statistics damming? They certainly are, but they offer content and exclude context, particularly that which doesn't suit the agenda of the paper.

On support the notion of true systemic racism the evidence required would be irrefutable evidence that police are interacting with and arresting people purely because of their skin colour and not because of their criminal actions, which is the assumption made in these type of studies.

The fact that these communities tend to be at the lower end of the social order and tend to have involvement in crimes which carry greater punishment is extremely relevant and impressively dismissed in these types of discussions.

And this here is the problem with presenting hard scientific fact to people outside the scientific community. All that can be offered in defense is pure anecdotal evidence. Stuff like 'is there proof that all police officers are bad' and 'is there proof that a Caucasian will receive a lighter sentence than a person of colour for the same offense'. The issue there is they seem like good arguments but aren't, they are just whataboutery.

The beauty of statistics is that these studies actually answer you questions. It's all about probability. Are all police racist. These studies definitively show that no, they aren't. But they also show definitively that there is a majority that skew towards racism, you are more likely to have a situation where
a police officer will let race negatively affect decision.

Same with the other question, will a Caucasian get a lighter sentence than a coloured person? These studies show they can get a lighter, harsher or even the equivalent sentence. They also show definitively that a coloured person is more likely to get a harsher sentence.

I love statistics when used properly. With a large enough sample size and the right method you can prove these things, unlike using anecdotal evidence. Science never asks questions like 'is there proof that all police officers are bad' and 'is there proof that a Caucasian will receive a lighter sentence than a person of colour for the same offense' becasue they are utterly meaningless and instead analyses data to get trends. Nothing is ever black and white in science, with a large data set everything is distributed in a probability curve but these probability curves will show you trends on how more probable one scenario is over another.

It's interesting how these type of papers go to such lengths to determine the numbers of interactions with police involving certain ethnic groups without asking why they are interacting with police to begin with.

That's the other beauty of statistics. With enough data and well designed study you can eliminate or negate these effects. Normalisation is one approach I'd take to this to deal with it. You can also measure how much it will affect your results and report on it if it is significant.

Are the statistics damming? They certainly are, but they offer content and exclude context, particularly that which doesn't suit the agenda of the paper.

And I can tell you this is utterly false as well. If there's limitations in the study they are mentioned and data isn't excluded or included. I can tell you now from experience that in a peer reviewed journal like Nature you would not get away with that in peer review and it would be very obvious. It's the reason why papers that showed no systemic racism were rejected because they were biased and the data was bogus.

I'm sorry but being a science denier is being a fact denier.

I'll listen to you if you can come back with some actual science and fact to disprove these facts and how statistics works.

nullzero

Retr0gamer wrote: »

And this here is the problem with presenting hard scientific fact to people outside the scientific community. All that can be offered in defense is pure anecdotal evidence. Stuff like 'is there proof that all police officers are bad' and 'is there proof that a Caucasian will receive a lighter sentence than a person of colour for the same offense'. The issue there is they seem like good arguments but aren't, they are just whataboutery.

The beauty of statistics is that these studies actually answer you questions. It's all about probability. Are all police racist. These studies definitively show that no, they aren't. But they also show definitively that there is a majority that skew towards racism, you are more likely to have a situation where
a police officer will let race negatively affect decision.

Same with the other question, will a Caucasian get a lighter sentence than a coloured person? These studies show they can get a lighter, harsher or even the equivalent sentence. They also show definitively that a coloured person is more likely to get a harsher sentence.

I love statistics when used properly. With a large enough sample size and the right method you can prove these things, unlike using anecdotal evidence. Science never asks questions like 'is there proof that all police officers are bad' and 'is there proof that a Caucasian will receive a lighter sentence than a person of colour for the same offense' becasue they are utterly meaningless and instead analyses data to get trends. Nothing is ever black and white in science, with a large data set everything is distributed in a probability curve but these probability curves will show you trends on how more probable one scenario is over another.



That's the other beauty of statistics. With enough data and well designed study you can eliminate or negate these effects. Normalisation is one approach I'd take to this to deal with it. You can also measure how much it will affect your results and report on it if it is significant.



And I can tell you this is utterly false as well. If there's limitations in the study they are mentioned and data isn't excluded or included. I can tell you now from experience that in a peer reviewed journal like Nature you would not get away with that in peer review and it would be very obvious. It's the reason why papers that showed no systemic racism were rejected because they were biased and the data was bogus.

I'm sorry but being a science denier is being a fact denier.

I'll listen to you if you can come back with some actual science and fact to disprove these facts and how statistics works.

So being involved in criminal activity has no bearing on a person's probability of interacting with police?

The way the system is structured at law making level hasn't impacted on how poorer people of all ethnic backgrounds are disproportionately on the receiving end of harsher punishment?

Prisons in all countries are filled with people who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. In America those coming from disadvantaged backgrounds can often be from certain ethnic groups. Without a doubt African Americans are disproportionately represented here, and too many are arrested and convicted for crimes that are in reality undeserving of the sentences they carry.

Do you not agree that the law is excessively harsh on these people? Does that not have an impact on the statistics you provided?

I never denied any of the statistics you provided, I merely attempted to rationalise why we have arrived at this situation. Context is important even if you want to grandstand and condescend to me for daring to ask reasonable questions related to the topic at hand.

I never denied science or facts, this is where you're beginning to steer into ad hominem territory and coming across as less than polite.

Retr0gamer

nullzero wrote: »

So being involved in criminal activity has no bearing on a person's probability of interacting with police?

The way the system is structured at law making level hasn't impacted on how poorer people of all ethnic backgrounds are disproportionately on the receiving end of harsher punishment?

Both those statements are true but a well designed statistical study will eliminate those factors from trends or account for them. With a large enough data pool.you can weigh the different sets of data. Have more black people than white people convicted? Then you can adjust the data so both a proportional with normalisation (which is not the same as manipulating the data and changing it). And you can definitely study the effect of economic background as a factor and account for it in these studies. Multiple statistical tests can account for different factors.

All studies show that accounting for economic background, race plays a big part in sentencing and police brutality and violence.

nullzero

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Both those statements are true but a well designed statistical study will eliminate those factors from trends or account for them. With a large enough data pool.you can weigh the different sets of data. Have more black people than white people convicted? Then you can adjust the data so both a proportional with normalisation (which is not the same as manipulating the data and changing it). And you can definitely study the effect of economic background as a factor and account for it in these studies. Multiple statistical tests can account for different factors.

All studies show that accounting for economic background, race plays a big part in sentencing and police brutality and violence.

Just to clarify I never suggested data was manipulated or changed at any point.

The most important factor is the way in which the law comes down heavily on crimes related to poorer people(many of whom tend to come from certain ethnic backgrounds) . Change those laws and the police cease having the same number of interactions with those people and the nature of the interactions they do have change.

The true route to police reform is to reform the laws themselves. Everything else is simply treating the symptom and not the cause.

Retr0gamer

I just put that clause in there as some people would argue it's manipulation.

I really think the law has a very minor contribution.

It's pretty much police attitude and training. They are treating policing in many places akin to being in a occupied territory where everyone is treated as armed and a threat. If there's a minor altercation they react aggressively to shut down any potential threat instead of dealing with the issue. There's no community police in many places. And they can go as overboard as they want because they are protected by their unions.

And you can trace that back to america's relationship with guns and gun control.

Changing laws won't change any of that.

nullzero

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I just put that clause in there as some people would argue it's manipulation.

I really think the law has a very minor contribution.

It's pretty much police attitude and training. They are treating policing in many places akin to being in a occupied territory where everyone is treated as armed and a threat. If there's a minor altercation they react aggressively to shut down any potential threat instead of dealing with the issue. There's no community police in many places. And they can go as overboard as they want because they are protected by their unions.

And you can trace that back to america's relationship with guns and gun control.

Changing laws won't change any of that.

The instances of police entering altercations with the people is statistically very low, something that is mentioned in a number of peer reviewed papers I've read that argue that there is a problem with systemic racism in police forces in America.

To say that the law has a very minor contribution to this situation and that changing the laws wouldn't change anything (really? Nothing at all?) whilst you previously took to your soapbox to grandstand about the scientific method and how people outside the scientific community struggle to comprehend your reasoning is frankly puzzling.

The police are charged with upholding and enforcing the law. They do not have freedom to act outside those parameters, to argue that changing those parameters would be useless makes no sense whatsoever.

I'm guessing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made no difference either.