• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

More housekeeping underway..... "White soldier charged with assault for shoving, berating Black man in viral video"

RetiredUSN said:
Combative vs. Compliant encounters with the police make a huge difference on outcomes.

Don't even try to pretend that it doesn't make a difference.
Click to expand...

But there are different forms of combative encounters and putting all of them in the same category makes no sense. The issue is if there was a threat against the cop or not. And the study that was posted says

Black victims were significantly more likely to be unarmed than white or Hispanic victims. Black victims were also significantly less likely than whites to have posed an immediate threat to LE.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Combative vs. Compliant encounters with the police make a huge difference on outcomes.

Don't even try to pretend that it doesn't make a difference.
Click to expand...

So, calling a cop a pig equals a bullet? Or does putting your hands up to get shot anyway equal being combative? Is compliance about being handcuffed and being killed anyway?

I know your point. I'm telling you that it is pointless and merely an exercise to deny the simple truths. They are disproportionately killed because skin color is the first consideration. Every cop who yanks his/her gun out of the holster prematurely escalates and creates a combative situation. And every one of them will lie about the situation and tell you that the "criminal" was combative. They have cameras recording the situations and they still tend to lie. Some pull out their guns meaning to pull a taser after 26 years on the force! That guy died for some $350 worth of unpaid tickets because a career cop never learned the muscle memory required to pull from her Bat Belt. Another one pulls over in a well lit area for a "routine stop," while wearing an Active Duty Army uniform, only to be told that he should be sacred to get out of his car!

It all goes back to poor training and the default to protect bad apples, which breeds widespread unprofessionalism.
 
pamak said:
Why do not you actually quote the numbers or the link? And the issue is not just the raw number but the per capita ones.
Click to expand...

I'm on my phone now with limited time -hate searching studies on my phone.. But that is what a few studies show. My suspicioun is that there are more cops in black neighborhoods, so they may have more low level encounters.

i wonder too, how the numbers of death would be impacted while controlling for crime rates - i am not aware of such a study.

Comparing to population, as the original study did would imply that all races are equal in terms of crime and response to police. The media has frightened many black individuals of the police, which is likely to increase things loke bad encounters - see Chelsea handlers recent tweet asking why any black person would ever comply with the police, as there is a 50 50 chance they'll just end up dead.
 
buck said:
I'm on my phone now with limited time -hate searching studies on my phone.. But that is what a few studies show. My suspicioun is that there are more cops in black neighborhoods, so they may have more low level encounters.

i wonder too, how the numbers of death would be impacted while controlling for crime rates - i am not aware of such a study.

Comparing to population, as the original study did would imply that all races are equal in terms of crime and response to police. The media has frightened many black individuals of the police, which is likely to increase things loke bad encounters - see Chelsea handlers recent tweet asking why any black person would ever comply with the police, as there is a 50 50 chance they'll just end up dead.
Click to expand...

Racial profiling creates also more low level encounters. The issue is that those black guys who are coming to interact with the police officers do not seem to be more threatening than the white people who come to interact with the police officers (in fact the Blacks seem to be less threatening).

If police officers were not making decisions based on racial profiling, it would not make a difference the place and frequency of of their patrol. Using objective cues to suspect people would result in stopping people that pose similar levels of danger whether the police office patrols in an all black neighborhood 10 hours per day or in an all white neighborhood 2 hours per day. One group could be bigger (in absolute numbers) than the other (as a result of the patrol patterns) but the characteristics of the two groups regarding threat would be about the same. This is not the case though

Black victims were significantly more likely to be unarmed than white or Hispanic victims. Black victims were also significantly less likely than whites to have posed an immediate threat to LE.
 
Last edited:
mrdeltoid said:
The black guy is alleged to have assaulted the girl, abused animals on private property in the past, the BLM mob hurls a brick through the soldiers window endangering his family, you shrug. The white soldier pushes the alleged perpetrator, and you care about that?
The bolded is what it's all about though, isn't. Everything else is irrelevant, no?
Click to expand...
Arrest the dude who throws a brick.
 
roguenuke said:
Why should it be okay to protest this incident? Simply because? There is nothing to protest here legitimately.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion. I felt the same about the election and January 6th...and yet they have that freedom.
 
pamak said:
Racial profiling creates also more low level encounters.
Click to expand...

Possible. just to point out though, it seems that polls fairly consistently show that a Majority of black indivudals want more policing in their neighborhoods. They don't want to live with the crime in their neighborhoods either. It seems to mostly be a vocal minority of black activists and white woman calling for less policing.
 
buck said:
Possible. just to point out though, it seems that polls fairly consistently show that a Majority of black indivudals want more policing in their neighborhoods. They don't want to live with the crime in their neighborhoods either. It seems to mostly be a vocal minority of black activists and white woman calling for less policing.
Click to expand...

Not just possible. Definite!

I am fine with the claim that certain neighborhoods may need more policing. I am not for removing the police officers. from more dangerous areas (which are often within communities with higher percentage of minorities) and I do not agree with the most radical voices about defunding the police even though I agree with the proposition that certain community services (such as dealing with mentally ill people who roam the streets does require a relocation of responsibiliites and funding from law enforcement agencies to other public services and professionals who should be the prime respondents to incidents involving mentally ill people And tying my last comment to this thread, if that person was indeed mentally ill and was living in the area, he must have been known to the residents there.
 
Last edited:
Plasmaball said:
That's your opinion. I felt the same about the election and January 6th...and yet they have that freedom.
Click to expand...
Actually, the way they protested they did not have that freedom. They had no right to enter the Capitol on that day, and especially not the way they did.
 
roguenuke said:
Actually, the way they protested they did not have that freedom. They had no right to enter the Capitol on that day, and especially not the way they did.
Click to expand...
Actually they did till that point. Hell standing outside was fine till they charged the gates.thats where the chaos started
 
Plasmaball said:
Actually they did till that point. Hell standing outside was fine till they charged the gates.thats where the chaos started
Click to expand...
True, but having a right to protest (peacefully) and ethically/morally being right in doing so aren't always the same thing. Technically, people have a right to peacefully protest a Muslim family moving into their neighborhood, but most people would agree that doing so is very wrong. Protesting outside this Sgt's house (or protesting outside the Capitol) isn't really that wrong, but given that these protesters are basing their protests off of incomplete information and assumptions that are being made that are very likely wrong, that puts it as "morally" wrong for many more rational people.

And I just saw that we were talking about the Capitol mob. They actually had a slightly more ethical/moral reason to protest (regardless of how stupid their protest was) before they broke through that barricade, than those outside the Sgt's house. Both groups are wrong in their assumptions, but one group is basing their protests against a specific person/family on their personal (likely incorrect) assumptions, while the other based it against the government (which is a much more morally acceptable protest), who they were told "cheated" (pretty much all reasonable/rational people know that is a garbage claim, but they don't see that).
 
roguenuke said:
True, but having a right to protest (peacefully) and ethically/morally being right in doing so aren't always the same thing. Technically, people have a right to peacefully protest a Muslim family moving into their neighborhood, but most people would agree that doing so is very wrong. This would isn't really that wrong, but given that these protesters are basing their protests off of incomplete information and assumptions that are being made that are very likely wrong, that puts it as "morally" wrong for many more rational people.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying but this wasn't the same thing
 
Plasmaball said:
I get what you are saying but this wasn't the same thing
Click to expand...
I clarified already. These protests are morally wrong because they are still being done off of incomplete information and assumptions.
 
roguenuke said:
I clarified already. These protests are morally wrong because they are still being done off of incomplete information and assumptions.
Click to expand...
Yeah I got it the first time. Same answer
 
pamak said:
I already gave you one clue.

In NY we have a federal court decision based on the statistics of the stop and frisk tactics. A second one comes from the AZ sheriff (Arpaio) who openly admitted that he was stopping drivers based on racial profiling and was pardoned by Trump.
Click to expand...

Ok, so how do you define profiling?
 
MSgt said:
Look at my post again, look to where the words are in a light blue, and underlined. I do not present studies without links. Here it is again.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

These studies are on the government national level, using national government collected data, and are not "lies." You've seen these studies before. I don't know why you prefer to play this obtuse game. And I certainly don't understand why this truth is so offensive to you people.
Click to expand...

You people?
 
pamak said:
Did you bother to browse the study?

Here is one of the references

U.S. Department of Justice FBI. Crime in the United States, 2011. www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-;2011/persons-arrested/persons-arrested. Published September 2011.

Again, I do not understand why the claim is controversial. It stands to reason that the screw-ups of bad, racists, incompetent or simply untrained cops who initiate disproportionate interactions with certain demographic groups will naturally harm disproportionally these demographic groups
Click to expand...

How many deaths nationwide, at the hand of police were done to unarmed black men?
 
MSgt said:
It is hosted by the US National Library of Medicine National Institute of Health, which took data from the national statistics and law enforcement agencies, to include the FBI. The FBI itself will tell you that they do not know because they "do not collect such information from local law enforcement agencies." Here it is from the Statista:

"Sadly, the trend of fatal police shootings in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 213 civilians having been shot, 30 of whom were Black, in the first three months of 2021. In 2020, there were 1,021 fatal police shootings, and in 2019 there were 999 fatal shootings. Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 35 fatal shootings per million of the population as of March 2021."

But why does this matter to you? Why the need to deny simple cold-hard numbers? If the FBI had a national database that collects and presents this truth on its own, you would just dismiss that too.
Click to expand...
No, I wouldn’t... but their numbers are wrong, I believe...would it surprise you that last year there were a total of 18 black unarmed men shot, or killed? 18.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom