The predominant factor in black deaths by police is more crimes commited - not racism

[Toni]

That is a rather roundabout method of admitting there is no logical connection between the two statistics.

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

No, no it is not.

I think that Auxulus doesn't really understand what he is saying. I also think he doesn't really understand what the links he posted in the OP mean--and do not mean.

 

[Toni]

Yeah, the conviction rates pretty much prove that racism is part of the system. To argue against that, the politically incorrect need to argue that African Americans are less likely to be charged with crimes they didn't commit and thus mostly only guilty African-Americans are asked to defend themselves in court.

These are obviously weak arguments presented by the politically incorrect in a desperate attempt to preserve the injustice of the current system. They do things like this because they believe that whites are inferior and won't be able to compete if the playing field were level. It's the soft bigotry of low expectations, to borrow a phrase.

Oh, and "You must spread some reputation around before giving it to AthenaAwakened again."

Conviction rates are related to SES. Once again you are jumping to the conclusion that it's racism without considering the possibility that race is merely a proxy for SES.

Any study of racism that does not check to see if it's only a proxy for SES isn't worth the electrons it takes to store, let alone the paper to print it on.

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

 

[Davka]

I don't see why anyone would think hostility towards the police should increase the odds of being killed by the police. Professional officers of the state ought to be trained to deal with people who mistrust them so that shooting them is the last resort.

If only! The cops i encountered during my 10 years of homelessness knew good and well that the homeless mistrust the police. WHY do homeless people mistrust the police, you might ask?

Because cops tend to be total fucking assholes towards homeless people, that's why. I suspect the same just might be the same for black folks.

- - - Updated - - -

Racism denial is a form of racism.

You're setting up an unfalsifiable position. Unfalsifiable positions aren't worth anything.

I'm not setting up anything, I'm stating a fact. Facts are worth a lot on their face. Not worth a damn in your face, but that's a different problem.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Such a study would not produce good data. How an encounter with the police turns out is greatly colored by how the police expect it to go.

That's not a rebuttal. Both sides expectations matter.

Made you change your tune now didn't it?

You can't conclude bias from looking at only one side.

Who said only look at one side?

 

[Nexus]

Anyway, I agree, statistically speaking police killing is overblown. But I still think situation can be improved in terms of unnecessary deaths.

My issue isn't the probability of police misconduct its the lack of accountability afterwards. I don't count paid administrative leave or transfers as being held accountable after a cop beats or murders someone.

 

[barbos]

Anyway, I agree, statistically speaking police killing is overblown. But I still think situation can be improved in terms of unnecessary deaths.

My issue isn't the probability of police misconduct its the lack of accountability afterwards. I don't count paid administrative leave or transfers as being held accountable after a cop beats or murders someone.

I agree, there is a lack of accountability, but then there is a general lack of accountability when we talk about government, not just police.
And in this particular case these killings are framed as racism but numbers seems to say it's not the case.

 

[maxparrish]

I don't understand your point unless you unaware that individuals who are not white Anglo Saxon can be racist.

My point was to ridicule the typical cartoon liberal fantasy that some, like Davaka, desperately believe is typical experience. The cartoonist is invoking an arcane stereotype - the white guy behind the counter killing an innocent black youth because of racial hatred and prejudice.

The stereotype, and cartoon, is quite stupid and only embraced by those dwelling in the old liberal fever swamps. Read the article - what is actually real are the 50 convenience store employees that are murdered by thugs (disproportionately black)... the victims mainly being non-white immigrants trying to make a living. In short, it is a bad cartoon in the service of those who cling to a cherished fantasy.

 

[maxparrish]

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

No, no it is not.

I think that Auxulus doesn't really understand what he is saying. I also think he doesn't really understand what the links he posted in the OP mean--and do not mean.

I am sure he does understand what he is saying, as do Loren and I. His OP and followups are mainly pointing out some statistical facts and their implications. If blacks are three times more likely to commit a violent crime, then the fact that they are three more times likely to be killed in encounters with Police means suggests that racism is not a major motivation. In other words, black and white violent criminals are given equal opportunity treatment.

 

[arkirk]

There's nothing racist about his post, just some inconvenient reality. Pointing out inconvenient reality is not racism.

Racism denial is a form of racism.

The inconvenient reality of his posts are obvious, Loren and so are yours. When you observe numerous cases of cops shaking down and humiliating minority youths in your community, it does not matter what some survey they craft says. If I see the same cop behavior over and over and it is racist behavior, it becomes clear that the cops are comfortable doing it to minority kids in particular. How many young brown kids must you see pinned to a chainlink fence and hassled till you get the picture? These characters (racist cops) write the descriptions of what happens. The survey reads their descriptions. You and Axulus seem to have some stake in our perceptions of the police. It seems important to you both that we accept their absolute authority. Davka is right...denial of outright racism is a form of racism. You will not get any useful answers from the Ferguson PD or grand jury. Both are racist to the core.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Conviction rates are related to SES. Once again you are jumping to the conclusion that it's racism without considering the possibility that race is merely a proxy for SES.

Any study of racism that does not check to see if it's only a proxy for SES isn't worth the electrons it takes to store, let alone the paper to print it on.

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

 

[arkirk]

That is a rather roundabout method of admitting there is no logical connection between the two statistics.

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

Loren: I think we UNDERSTAND very well what he is saying. You and Axulus are specialists in pretending that there is no racism...just bad blacks. Both of you ought to come off your high horses and realize there is still time in your life to make peace with minorities. Your charts are charts of your own and the police attitudes, not some inherent racial crime factor. Racial descrimination is capable over time of creating economic and social stresses on the underclass that set them up to be criminals when they truly intend no criminality at all. In my community, it is hispanics that take it on the chin. The phenomenon of tough and abusive cops is well understood and you guys just refuse to understand that. There really is no logical escape from the facts of police brutality. You can't use charts to make it go away or make it right.

 

[Toni]

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

I guess you are right. Well educated, upper middle class or wealthy black Americans never experience racism, are never falsely accused of not living in their own homes or neighborhoods, are never shot dead while walking home from a convenience store, are never pulled over for non-offenses, are never hassled by police, are never followed by shop owners while white customers are not, never have shop keepers suggest they might prefer a less expensive section of the store, are never guided to a different neighborhood while looking for a home, never receive a different interest rate than whites with similar credit scores, are never assumed to be poor, ignorant, violent, unmarried parents of too many children, on welfare, never assumed to be less intelligent or less capable than their white counterparts, and it is never assumed that they earned their place at a university or their well paying job through affirmative action rather than through their own talents and accomplishments.

Whew.

Thank you for clearing that up for me. I feel much better.

 

[Toni]

I don't understand your point unless you unaware that individuals who are not white Anglo Saxon can be racist.

My point was to ridicule the typical cartoon liberal fantasy that some, like Davaka, desperately believe is typical experience. The cartoonist is invoking an arcane stereotype - the white guy behind the counter killing an innocent black youth because of racial hatred and prejudice.

The stereotype, and cartoon, is quite stupid and only embraced by those dwelling in the old liberal fever swamps. Read the article - what is actually real are the 50 convenience store employees that are murdered by thugs (disproportionately black)... the victims mainly being non-white immigrants trying to make a living. In short, it is a bad cartoon in the service of those who cling to a cherished fantasy.

Actually, my kids have all experienced the phenomenon of witnessing their black friends followed around stores while others in the same group are not. So, you are right: blacks are not regarded with greater suspicion than whites.

 

[laughing dog]

That is a rather roundabout method of admitting there is no logical connection between the two statistics.

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

That is certainly a possibility. However, no one has yet to present the logical connection between the two statistics. Now, if you believe you understand what he is saying, perhaps you could offer the logical connection between the two statistics. Until someone does offer logical connection between the two statistics, my observation stands.

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

The process you just described produces statistically biased estimates. It is a form of cherry-picking. In practice, honest and competent researchers would never use such a process.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

My point was to ridicule the typical cartoon liberal fantasy that some, like Davaka, desperately believe is typical experience. The cartoonist is invoking an arcane stereotype - the white guy behind the counter killing an innocent black youth because of racial hatred and prejudice.

The stereotype, and cartoon, is quite stupid and only embraced by those dwelling in the old liberal fever swamps. Read the article - what is actually real are the 50 convenience store employees that are murdered by thugs (disproportionately black)... the victims mainly being non-white immigrants trying to make a living. In short, it is a bad cartoon in the service of those who cling to a cherished fantasy.

Actually, my kids have all experienced the phenomenon of witnessing their black friends followed around stores while others in the same group are not. So, you are right: blacks are not regarded with greater suspicion than whites.

??? How does this response in any way address anything in the text you quoted? Did you even read it??? Why quote something if you are going to ignore it?

- - - Updated - - -

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

That is certainly a possibility. However, no one has yet to present the logical connection between the two statistics. Now, if you believe you understand what he is saying, perhaps you could offer the logical connection between the two statistics. Until someone does offer logical connection between the two statistics, my observation stands.

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

The process you just described produces statistically biased estimates. It is a form of cherry-picking. In practice, honest and competent researchers would never use such a process.

What process should be used? what process is used?

 

[Davka]

I don't understand your point unless you unaware that individuals who are not white Anglo Saxon can be racist.

My point was to ridicule the typical cartoon liberal fantasy that some, like Davaka, desperately believe is typical experience. The cartoonist is invoking an arcane stereotype - the white guy behind the counter killing an innocent black youth because of racial hatred and prejudice.

The stereotype, and cartoon, is quite stupid and only embraced by those dwelling in the old liberal fever swamps. Read the article - what is actually real are the 50 convenience store employees that are murdered by thugs (disproportionately black)... the victims mainly being non-white immigrants trying to make a living. In short, it is a bad cartoon in the service of those who cling to a cherished fantasy.

You, who have lived your life as a black male in America, are in an ideal position to tell us what the "typical experience" is for black men in America.

Oh, wait...

 

[Davka]

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

And of course the truth of this perspective is borne out by the fact that black people are only hassled in poor neighborhoods, and that a well-educated, well-spoken black professional wearing business attire would never be racially profiled by police. For example, a black Harvard professor in a nice neighborhood would be treated with nothing but respect by police if his front door happened to be jammed shut, forcing him to enter through the back and call University maintenance to report the problem.

Because the profiling is all about SES, not skin color.

 

[Axulus]

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

That is certainly a possibility. However, no one has yet to present the logical connection between the two statistics. Now, if you believe you understand what he is saying, perhaps you could offer the logical connection between the two statistics. Until someone does offer logical connection between the two statistics, my observation stands.

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

The process you just described produces statistically biased estimates. It is a form of cherry-picking. In practice, honest and competent researchers would never use such a process.

List the most relevant factors that you think puts one in a high risk category in being killed by the police, and you have your answer. If you want to claim racism is more than a tiny factor that makes police more likely to kill blacks, you need to prove it rather than assert it with cherry picked anecdotes. Not a single person in this thread has attempted to do so (which was the narrow claim I made, I did not make any claims broader than that other than that the data also don't seem to demonstrate that blacks are arrested more frequently due to racism, since victimization surveys collaborate it).

 

[laughing dog]

List the most relevant factors that you think puts one in a high risk category in being killed by the police, and you have your answer. If you want to claim racism is more than a tiny factor that makes police more likely to kill blacks, you need to prove it rather than assert it with cherry picked anecdotes. Not a single person in this thread has attempted to do so (which was the narrow claim I made, I did not make any claims broader than that other than that the data also don't seem to demonstrate that blacks are arrested more frequently due to racism, since victimization surveys collaborate it).

I am still waiting for the explanation for why the two statistics should be correlated. All I get is some form of "Figure it out yourself" which suggests to me that there is no logical reason for the two to be correlated otherwise I would have received a real explanation.

 

[laughing dog]

Actually, my kids have all experienced the phenomenon of witnessing their black friends followed around stores while others in the same group are not. So, you are right: blacks are not regarded with greater suspicion than whites.

??? How does this response in any way address anything in the text you quoted? Did you even read it??? Why quote something if you are going to ignore it?

- - - Updated - - -

No, this is a very straightforward admission that you don't understand what he's saying.

That is certainly a possibility. However, no one has yet to present the logical connection between the two statistics. Now, if you believe you understand what he is saying, perhaps you could offer the logical connection between the two statistics. Until someone does offer logical connection between the two statistics, my observation stands.

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps SES is a proxy for race. In any case, there is no good excuse for justice and safety to be dependent upon SES in a fair and just society.

They know which is which.

When you are analyzing the data you look for what variables are needed to get the best fit for the data and which ones are useless. For example, in this case:

1) Poor = more likely to convict.

2) Black = more likely to convict.

Now you do test #3, two variables, poor & black.

Which produces the best fit? If race is a proxy for SES then curves #1 and #3 will be equal and #2 will be worse. If SES is a proxy for race then #2 and #3 will be equal and #1 worse. If #3 is better than the others then both matter. When faced with two tests that produce equally good fits and one contains an extra variable you discard that curve, the extra variable is merely a proxy.

In practice honest research into racial issues almost always ends up with poor being what counts, race only being a proxy. Dishonest research almost never does this test in the first place.

The process you just described produces statistically biased estimates. It is a form of cherry-picking. In practice, honest and competent researchers would never use such a process.

What process should be used? what process is used?

I have no idea what processes are used and I suspect neither does LP. But picking variables by their contribution to the goodness of fit and then claiming some sort of statistical significance for them leads to biased estimates.