• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Too Much Policing in Black Neighborhoods

Actually you do, since you are using it wrong.
Again, why are you so resistant to learning something?

You have a very non-imaginative conception of language. You think there are rules beyond understanding.

An authoritarian nature in regard to language.

Not an understanding.

And this is a common phrase.

Exponentially greater: To be greater in an exponential manner.

It is really no more complicated than that.

That's basically a circular definition, you're not showing that you understand the word.

Exponential refers to something involving exponents, generally a curve. To define a curve you need a number of data points greater than the highest exponent in the equation describing it.

You have only two data points, though--the highest exponent can only be one. An equation with the highest exponent equal to one is describing a straight line.


Now, some uneducated people might be misusing the term but it is misuse.
 
Two thoughts.

First would there be such violence if property in the area were in the hands of the residents rather than absentee land lords.

It wouldn't matter--the property soon would be in the hands of others anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

It is still wrong usage of the word exponentially. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

If something is exponentially greater than something else it means it is at least 10 times greater. Maybe 100 times greater. Maybe 1000 times, and so on.

It is something any third grader could comprehend.

You're thinking of an order of magnitude greater.

(Although that can be either 2x or 10x depending on whose talking.)

Exponential refers to the shape of a curve.

This argument of hours is a derail and obtuse. Everyone reading it knew exactly what he meant except perhaps for you, and I have my doubts as to whether you didn't. The words he typed should have, to anyone with more than a fourth grade reading level and more than a psychopath's empathy been read as 'oxy kills a bunch more of the people who take it than cocane'.

It was and continues to be an acceptable use of English. Deal with it.

Normal human beings would, in this situation, as 'wait, like, do you mean like a literal exponent, or like, an order of magnitude of difference?' or just would assume the 'order of magnitude' as the intended communication.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/04/chicago-gun-violence-unsolved-murders-deadly-year

With the continued righteous efforts of Black Lives Matter, we can get that 4% to 0%.

What, exactly, did BLM do to cause this problem?

Create mistrust of police? Nope, that's been around for...I don't even know how long.

Cause cops to shoot and kill black people, or shrug their shoulders at a murder? Also no, they're a response to that.

Did they fund drug raids far above homicide detectives, who often point out that they can't pay for witness protection? Nope, they're mostly too young for that one (Did you even know about this problem?).

I don't see anyone saying BLM caused it. What people are saying is that BLM is making things worse.

1) Effort directed at things which don't solve the problem is effort that's not directed at actually solving the problem.

2) Continually blaming whitey for the problems in the inner city hides the fact that the problems are almost entirely internal. So long as there is a believable external excuse people won't look inwards for the answers. BLM is the equivalent of providing drugs to an addict.

3) BLM is making the police more cautious about doing their jobs--and the criminals are taking advantage of this, being bolder in eliminating problems. While BLM might reduce the number of blacks shot by cops it is increasing the number of blacks who are shot.
 
Chicago Sun Times said:
In some cases, people will “bait” police officers, “literally calling them every name in the book,” in the hopes of getting them to react for a cell phone video, Angelo said. They are looking for a “pay day,” Angelo said.
This last part is a direct consequence of Chicago government being too quick to pay out ridiculously large settlements.

The problem is the cases would go before a jury that would be inclined to screw them even worse.

Perhaps what we need is a stay on all civil litigation for 1 year or until official investigation ceases, whichever comes first--keep people from suing until the facts are in.
 
Once you remove the deaths due to impurity (which would not exist if drugs were legal and produced under proper conditions) tobacco is clearly the most dangerous drug out there, killing 1/3 of it's users in time. Next in line isn't so clear cut (trying to remove the crap from the data is hard) but it looks like alcohol is in the #2 spot.

But you should not remove impurities from consideration since crack people smoke is impure. Also, smoking crack is more damaging than snorting powder and unter's original assertion was about crack and not cocaine in general.

In any case, I did not actually say he was wrong, I just asked him to back up his claim, which he did not do. He merely pointed out how many people died from smoking which in no way establishes his claim.

Crack should be blamed for deaths due to the combustion products, it shouldn't be blamed for bad cutting agents used in the cocaine.
 
What, exactly, did BLM do to cause this problem?

Create mistrust of police? Nope, that's been around for...I don't even know how long.

Cause cops to shoot and kill black people, or shrug their shoulders at a murder? Also no, they're a response to that.

Did they fund drug raids far above homicide detectives, who often point out that they can't pay for witness protection? Nope, they're mostly too young for that one (Did you even know about this problem?).

I don't see anyone saying BLM caused it. What people are saying is that BLM is making things worse.

1) Effort directed at things which don't solve the problem is effort that's not directed at actually solving the problem.

2) Continually blaming whitey for the problems in the inner city hides the fact that the problems are almost entirely internal. So long as there is a believable external excuse people won't look inwards for the answers. BLM is the equivalent of providing drugs to an addict.

3) BLM is making the police more cautious about doing their jobs--and the criminals are taking advantage of this, being bolder in eliminating problems. While BLM might reduce the number of blacks shot by cops it is increasing the number of blacks who are shot.

Except that the crime is a result of two things: marginalization of the poor (who happen to be black, and thus forcing racist perceptions to blossom in the face of a well established human inability to separate correlation from causation), and the drug war which opens a criminal black market which can only be regulated through violence.

Neither of those things are 'internal'. The violence is an antecedent of the desperation of the poor as caused by bad schools and absentee land owners (things the communities have no control over), and the drug war.
 
I don't see anyone saying BLM caused it. What people are saying is that BLM is making things worse.

1) Effort directed at things which don't solve the problem is effort that's not directed at actually solving the problem.

2) Continually blaming whitey for the problems in the inner city hides the fact that the problems are almost entirely internal. So long as there is a believable external excuse people won't look inwards for the answers. BLM is the equivalent of providing drugs to an addict.

3) BLM is making the police more cautious about doing their jobs--and the criminals are taking advantage of this, being bolder in eliminating problems. While BLM might reduce the number of blacks shot by cops it is increasing the number of blacks who are shot.

Except that the crime is a result of two things: marginalization of the poor (who happen to be black, and thus forcing racist perceptions to blossom in the face of a well established human inability to separate correlation from causation), and the drug war which opens a criminal black market which can only be regulated through violence.

Crime is the result of an individual choice to commit crime. Plenty of poor people don't go out and shoot people. Indeed, only a tiny sliver of poor people do that. And plenty of crime has nothing to do with drugs. Like beating up and shooting an elderly man watering his lawn. Criminals have independent agency just like everyone else.
 
Poverty and drugs are not the cause of violent crime.

There's not much violent crime here. There's a bit of the usual enterprise one finds everywhere there are drugs and poor people, which is to say, everywhere. But even the crime here is pretty well predictable. The police chief's assistant notes that if they know the nature and location of a particular crime, they can more or less drive straight to the perpetrator.

There's a great deal of drug use, welfare fraud, and the like, but the overall crime rate throughout Appalachia is about two thirds the national average, and the rate of violent crime is half the national average. Booneville Police Chief Johnny Logsdon is justifiably skeptical of the area's reputation for drug-fueled crime. But he is not blinkered. "We have loggers and coal producers," he says. "We have educators and local businesses, and people in the arts. And we have the same problems they have in every community." He points out that the town recently opened up a $1 million public library — a substantial investment for a town in which the value of all residential property combined would not add up to the big lottery jackpot being advertised all over. He does not deny the severity or scope of the region's problems, but he does think that they are exaggerated by visitors who are here, after all, only because Owsley holds the national title for poorest county. Owsley's dependent underclass has many of the same problems as any other dependent underclass, but with a poverty rate persistently at the 40 percent mark, the underclass plays an outsized role in local life.

http://theweek.com/articles/452321/appalachia-big-white-ghetto
 
You have a very non-imaginative conception of language. You think there are rules beyond understanding.

An authoritarian nature in regard to language.

Not an understanding.

And this is a common phrase.

Exponentially greater: To be greater in an exponential manner.

It is really no more complicated than that.

That's basically a circular definition, you're not showing that you understand the word.

Exponential refers to something involving exponents, generally a curve. To define a curve you need a number of data points greater than the highest exponent in the equation describing it.

You have only two data points, though--the highest exponent can only be one. An equation with the highest exponent equal to one is describing a straight line.


Now, some uneducated people might be misusing the term but it is misuse.

Nonsense!!!

An exponent is a notation on a variable or number.

So if something is 1000 times greater than something else it is 10 with 3 as an exponent greater.

In shorthand and without mentioning the specific exponent: Exponentially Greater.

What about it do you have trouble understanding?

It is a common phrase in English.
 
Except that the crime is a result of two things: marginalization of the poor (who happen to be black, and thus forcing racist perceptions to blossom in the face of a well established human inability to separate correlation from causation), and the drug war which opens a criminal black market which can only be regulated through violence.

Crime is the result of an individual choice to commit crime. Plenty of poor people don't go out and shoot people. Indeed, only a tiny sliver of poor people do that. And plenty of crime has nothing to do with drugs. Like beating up and shooting an elderly man watering his lawn. Criminals have independent agency just like everyone else.

How many times have you been poor? How many times have you lived in a place surrounded by poor people?

Why do you suppose that kid had a gun? Why do you suppose he had destroyed his empathy to the point of being able to beat someone up?

Criminals become criminals through a series of choices, and not all of them are easy. Sometimes the choice is watching your mom get evicted or dealing drugs. Sometimes the choice is to deal drugs or starve because nobody wants to hire a kid who graduated from a North Minneapolis highschool. And then as a product of making a decision to do crime rather than accept a horrible loss, slowly the things you have to do to continue that course defeat the reasons you started in the first place. You stop caring about the world and only look out for yourself because of the lessons the world taught you, however spurious they may be. In order to survive a hard life, people become hard.

And over time, people in a life of crime see glamor in it. Not only is the trap baited with desperate situations which crime offers to alleve, it's also baited by glamor. A carrot with the stick. People ride around in cars that are *utterly useless* to hilight how much they can afford; obviously they are wealthy enough to afford a ridiculous useless car. And people say 'I want to be able to do that, that looks cool. I want to be the guy everyone turns to look at in infamy' but more often they just end up trapped as a slave picking up scraps. By the time they realize that, they are ruined for honest work. They put on an air of bravado and toughness because it's the only way to hide how much they hate themselves and their lives and the lies that sucked them in; there's only so much room at the top, and there are far more peons rat-racing for that space than spaces to reach.

Life at the bottom sucks ass. Crime is a move of desperation to get out of that.

If you want to see what a black neighborhood would look like without the poverty, my guess is it would look a lot like Edina, but with big rims instead of SUVs.
 
Poverty and drugs are not the cause of violent crime.

There's not much violent crime here. There's a bit of the usual enterprise one finds everywhere there are drugs and poor people, which is to say, everywhere. But even the crime here is pretty well predictable. The police chief's assistant notes that if they know the nature and location of a particular crime, they can more or less drive straight to the perpetrator.

There's a great deal of drug use, welfare fraud, and the like, but the overall crime rate throughout Appalachia is about two thirds the national average, and the rate of violent crime is half the national average. Booneville Police Chief Johnny Logsdon is justifiably skeptical of the area's reputation for drug-fueled crime. But he is not blinkered. "We have loggers and coal producers," he says. "We have educators and local businesses, and people in the arts. And we have the same problems they have in every community." He points out that the town recently opened up a $1 million public library — a substantial investment for a town in which the value of all residential property combined would not add up to the big lottery jackpot being advertised all over. He does not deny the severity or scope of the region's problems, but he does think that they are exaggerated by visitors who are here, after all, only because Owsley holds the national title for poorest county. Owsley's dependent underclass has many of the same problems as any other dependent underclass, but with a poverty rate persistently at the 40 percent mark, the underclass plays an outsized role in local life.

http://theweek.com/articles/452321/appalachia-big-white-ghetto

Appalachia also has a particularly important difference from places like north Minneapolis: population density.
 
Really? Care to back that up with sources? Also, it is meaningless and absurd to use "exponentially" to compare two data points.

Sorry, but he's right.

Once you remove the deaths due to impurity (which would not exist if drugs were legal and produced under proper conditions) tobacco is clearly the most dangerous drug out there, killing 1/3 of it's users in time. Next in line isn't so clear cut (trying to remove the crap from the data is hard) but it looks like alcohol is in the #2 spot.
But tobacco deaths are due to impurity too. I doubt Nicolette patches all that deadly.
 
Other than being addictive nicotine in its pure form has hardly any negative health effects. Same can't be said about other drugs such as cocain, heroin, THC,... The fact that one can "live" on heroin a long life if it is administered in proper ways does not mean it is actual living or not dangerous.
Who would you rather have piloting the plane you are flying? A pilot who use legal heroin/cocaine or a pilot with a Nicolette patch?
If anything, nicotine actually makes pilots more concentrated at his job, that's an established fact.
 
Nicotine would not lead to higher blood pressure?

I heard a long time ago that nicotine works on 2 neurotransmitters at the same time: one makes you relaxed and one amped up. But the relaxing one wears off in a few minutes requiring another hit or you feel stressed. Can't find the chart about it now.

This is worthy of a split to the science subforum.
 
Other than being addictive nicotine in its pure form has hardly any negative health effects. Same can't be said about other drugs such as cocain, heroin, THC,... The fact that one can "live" on heroin a long life if it is administered in proper ways does not mean it is actual living or not dangerous.
Who would you rather have piloting the plane you are flying? A pilot who use legal heroin/cocaine or a pilot with a Nicolette patch?
If anything, nicotine actually makes pilots more concentrated at his job, that's an established fact.

Nobody takes nicotine in it's pure form.

And every year more people are dying because they smoked cigarettes than any other drug.
 
Back
Top Bottom