#BlackLivesMatter's War on Cops ... NOT!

[laughing dog]

Yes, there is a problem, but it is for the most part not with the police. The 5:1 discrepancy in homicide rates proves that.

The police are agents of the state. So it makes it a much larger problem. Why do you persist in deflecting from a significant problem?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

At the end of the day, the easiest way to disconnect BLM from the death of cops would be for BLM to stop calling for the death of cops.

Also at the end of the day, the easiest way to disconnect BLM from the death of cops is for cops to stop snuffing out black lives.

Then we would see more dead cops when they failed to defend themselves when they needed to.

- - - Updated - - -

Police killing folks happens in the context of crimes being committed.

That's what the police claim anyways . . . many times falsely it's found out later.

Police that are found to have lied about the circumstances of a shooting of a civilian should have their eyes put out.

Police shootings are almost a perfect match for police arrests. There's nothing racial about the decision to pull the trigger.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The only thing so far that you have proven is that you hate BLM.

As for who is more likely to be killed,

View attachment 4128

And all you're showing here is that you are simply interested in "proving" discrimination, whether it exists or not.

It has already been pointed out by multiple people that this is the wrong yardstick. Compare the racial breakdown of those being arrested and those being shot. It's a near perfect match.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And the easiest way to disconnect the BLM and to leave them mute without any support would be for the police to stop killing unarmed men and women.

ksen beat me to it.

Except that's not what happens.

Cops consider all hand-to-hand altercations to be armed because they are--the cop's gun. Note how it's the big guys getting shot while unarmed--cases where the cop feels he might lose a hand-to-hand fight.

 

[JonA]

As was already pointed out, the number is not relevant when compared to the overall population. Police do not just walk around randomly killing people (if they did, then we'd get a proportion similar to the split in the general population).

Instead, killings by police take place within the context of confrontations with criminals/suspected criminals. In that regard, whites and blacks have about equal representation in the (particularly violent) criminal population.

When we compare these figures (the ones that matter) what we see is that a white person in an encounter with police is almost twice as likely to be killed as a black person in a similar encounter.

And that's because the claim that police are behaving especially lethally toward blacks is just false.

 

[JonA]

How do you know this?

I bet people that live in violent neighborhoods give lots of damns about violence.

Well we aren't talking about them. We are talking about members of BLM.

I agree entirely with your statement. But it unfortunately has nothing to do with BLM, which has no interest in actually addressing the much larger problems facing African American communities.

Seems the BLM movement exists because people would rather have the police/state as an ally against violence rather than a perpetrator of thuggery.

And the police/state is an ally. The police aren't just killing a bunch of innocent black folk.

I'm sure there are many black folk who will visit a certain convenience store knowing there is one less person out there ready to rob the place. Or the black folk happy to go to the park again because there won't be a hooligan waving around a gun.

Those people were innocent and their lives have been made better by the actions of the police.

When 93% of crimes against black people are committed by other black people, there is no way for the police to even make a dent in protecting innocent black people without taking on black thugs, crooks, and hooligans like Michael Brown or Tamir Rice.

The only question you have to ask is whether you want the police's effort to benefit the criminals or the innocents.

It is hard to stop violence if you can't trust any authority because authority treats you like a criminal from the outset.

Nonsense. The majority of African Americans trust the police.

When the folks of BLM chant that "black lives matter", it's very clear they aren't talking about innocent black lives, just other thugs and crooks like themselves.

I reckon it is clear if viewed through the correct lens but I'm not seeing it.

The lens is the lens of reality.

 

[bilby]

The only thing so far that you have proven is that you hate BLM.

As for who is more likely to be killed,

View attachment 4128

And all you're showing here is that you are simply interested in "proving" discrimination, whether it exists or not.

It has already been pointed out by multiple people that this is the wrong yardstick. Compare the racial breakdown of those being arrested and those being shot. It's a near perfect match.

Because OBVIOUSLY if there was any racism involved, it would have NO influence on arrest rates, only on the rate of shootings.

For fucks sake Loren, do you even read the shit you write?

 

[laughing dog]

When 93% of crimes against black people are committed by other black people, there is no way for the police to even make a dent in protecting innocent black people without taking on black thugs, crooks, and hooligans like Michael Brown or Tamir Rice.

Do you really expect anyone to take your posts seriously when you claim that 12 year old Tamir Rice was a thug, crook or hooligan?

The lens is the lens of reality.

Your observation that the BLMers "aren't talking about innocent black lives, just other thugs and crooks like themselves" and the ridiculous comment about Tamir Rice leads me to strongly suspect that lens of reality is up your ass.

 

[SimpleDon]

The ProPublica data indicates a magnitude greater than yours. Can you cite something to support 2:1?

The Pro-Publica's 21:1 data, if even accurate, are only for teenagers. The 2:1 I got from quickly glancing at the numbers in the chart in the same Vox article. Actual calculation yields 2.88:1 (still far less than the 5:1 discrepancy in homicide rates!) That is much less than 21:1 so if both sets of numbers are accurate it would imply black teenagers being way out of control compared to white teenagers and also that there is probably not much difference in police shooting rates among black and white 20+ year olds.

Why do you think that black teenagers are more out of control than white teenagers?

A minor point. Blacks don't murder five times the numbers of homicides as whites. Possibly you meant to say that a black man is five times more likely to commit a murder than a while man?

Let's see. According to the FBI data for 2013;

whites murdered 2509 Whites + 189 Blacks + 32 others + 25 unknowns = 2755 total
blacks murdered 409 Whites + 2245 Blacks + 27 others + 17 unknowns = 2698 total
others murdered 49 Whites + 20 Blacks + 96 others + 3 unknowns = 168 total
unknowns murdered 38 Whites + 37 Blacks + 4 others + 23 unknowns = 102 total
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
totals murdered 3005 Whites + 2491 Blacks +159 others +68 unknowns = 5723 total

These are not the totals for the entire country, some of the more than 17,000 police agencies in the country don't report to the FBI, but the ratios are considered to be representative, which is good enough for us.

So whites kill 2755 ÷ 5723 × 100 ≈ 48% of the people who are killed in the US.

So blacks kill 2698 ÷ 5723 × 100 ≈ 47% of the people who are killed in the US.

So whites and blacks kill about the same number of people, not that blacks kill five times more people than whites.

We can normalize the numbers to see if your 5:1 ratio holds for the propensity to kill.

Since the numbers reported are under counts of the number of murders in the country we just use the percentages as representative of the number of murders each group committed since we are only interested in the ratio.

Blacks are 13.2% and whites are 77.7% of the US population.

(47% ÷ 0.132) ÷ (48% ÷ 0.777) = 5.8

Your 5:1 actually understates the greater propensity to kill of blacks.

The question becomes then does this justify the larger number of blacks killed by the police?

It would seem to when the police are apprehending people suspected of murder. But does it really? Aren't the police trained to arrest even armed suspects of murder without killing them? After all isn't there the presumption of innocence, even in cases of murder?

And even though blacks have a greater PTK, the odds of a policeman encountering a black killer drops off dramatically when the police deal with a black citizen in matters other than murder.

The population of the US in 2013 was 316.5 million. Assuming that the FBI statistics are accurate it means that the chances of a policemen meeting a black killer other than in a murder investigation are one in (316,500,000 × 0.132) ÷ 2698 = 15,485.

1:15,485 would seem to be the more pertinent set of odds than your 5:1, wouldn't it?

 

[SimpleDon]

And the easiest way to disconnect the BLM and to leave them mute without any support would be for the police to stop killing unarmed men and women.

ksen beat me to it.

Except that's not what happens.

Cops consider all hand-to-hand altercations to be armed because they are--the cop's gun. Note how it's the big guys getting shot while unarmed--cases where the cop feels he might lose a hand-to-hand fight.

So it isn't racism, it is poor training? Poor training that only manifest itself when they arrest blacks?

And that makes you feel better.

 

[SimpleDon]

As was already pointed out, the number is not relevant when compared to the overall population. Police do not just walk around randomly killing people (if they did, then we'd get a proportion similar to the split in the general population).

Instead, killings by police take place within the context of confrontations with criminals/suspected criminals. In that regard, whites and blacks have about equal representation in the (particularly violent) criminal population.

When we compare these figures (the ones that matter) what we see is that a white person in an encounter with police is almost twice as likely to be killed as a black person in a similar encounter.

And that's because the claim that police are behaving especially lethally toward blacks is just false.

So you agree with Loren that the problem isn't racism, that it is just poor training of the police?

Poor training that only shows up mainly when the police interact with blacks?

After all there is the presumption of innocence. Aren't the police trained to apprehend both armed and unarmed suspects without shooting them?

 

[laughing dog]

Cops consider all hand-to-hand altercations to be armed because they are--the cop's gun. Note how it's the big guys getting shot while unarmed--cases where the cop feels he might lose a hand-to-hand fight.

What is truly frightening is that you believe this argument defends the police when it actually damns them.

 

[JonA]

As was already pointed out, the number is not relevant when compared to the overall population. Police do not just walk around randomly killing people (if they did, then we'd get a proportion similar to the split in the general population).

Instead, killings by police take place within the context of confrontations with criminals/suspected criminals. In that regard, whites and blacks have about equal representation in the (particularly violent) criminal population.

When we compare these figures (the ones that matter) what we see is that a white person in an encounter with police is almost twice as likely to be killed as a black person in a similar encounter.

And that's because the claim that police are behaving especially lethally toward blacks is just false.

So you agree with Loren that the problem isn't racism, that it is just poor training of the police?

I said nothing about training.

Poor training that only shows up mainly when the police interact with blacks?

Again, I said nothing about training. But whatever is causing these incidents, the data I presented demonstrate clearly that your claim of "only shows up mainly when police interact with blacks" is false. Killings by police happen much more frequently when the interaction involves a white suspect than when it involves a black one.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And all you're showing here is that you are simply interested in "proving" discrimination, whether it exists or not.

It has already been pointed out by multiple people that this is the wrong yardstick. Compare the racial breakdown of those being arrested and those being shot. It's a near perfect match.

Because OBVIOUSLY if there was any racism involved, it would have NO influence on arrest rates, only on the rate of shootings.

For fucks sake Loren, do you even read the shit you write?

It could be an argument for racism in arrests. It certainly isn't an argument for racism in pulling the trigger.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We can normalize the numbers to see if your 5:1 ratio holds for the propensity to kill.

Since the numbers reported are under counts of the number of murders in the country we just use the percentages as representative of the number of murders each group committed since we are only interested in the ratio.

Blacks are 13.2% and whites are 77.7% of the US population.

(47% ÷ 0.132) ÷ (48% ÷ 0.777) = 5.8

Your 5:1 actually understates the greater propensity to kill of blacks.

I suspect the original data was "non-whites" rather than "blacks".

The question becomes then does this justify the larger number of blacks killed by the police?

It would seem to when the police are apprehending people suspected of murder. But does it really? Aren't the police trained to arrest even armed suspects of murder without killing them? After all isn't there the presumption of innocence, even in cases of murder?

And even though blacks have a greater PTK, the odds of a policeman encountering a black killer drops off dramatically when the police deal with a black citizen in matters other than murder.

The population of the US in 2013 was 316.5 million. Assuming that the FBI statistics are accurate it means that the chances of a policemen meeting a black killer other than in a murder investigation are one in (316,500,000 × 0.132) ÷ 2698 = 15,485.

1:15,485 would seem to be the more pertinent set of odds than your 5:1, wouldn't it?

Instead of focusing on murder consider that this is merely an indication of a bigger trend--more criminal activity. There's your explanation--blacks are more likely to be arrested by a cop.

- - - Updated - - -

Except that's not what happens.

Cops consider all hand-to-hand altercations to be armed because they are--the cop's gun. Note how it's the big guys getting shot while unarmed--cases where the cop feels he might lose a hand-to-hand fight.

So it isn't racism, it is poor training? Poor training that only manifest itself when they arrest blacks?

And that makes you feel better.

How do you make this out as poor training? You think cops are supermen that can win any physical altercation???

And it has already been shown that if there's any bias in pulling the trigger it's against whites, not blacks.