The 2020 George Floyd/BLM/Police Brutality Protests Discussion Thread

[Scaff]

No. The reason I pointed that out is that imo people with good jobs are less likely to turn to crime in the first place.
No crime or less means less police intervention required.
Yes, the police need to eliminate crime from their own department also.
As I see it this sole focus against police is not addressing the problem at its root.
Police brutality is unacceptable, just as unacceptable is having a portion of the population without good job opportunities. Also it’s unacceptable that there exists areas that are controlled largely by gangs. That’s not right

It’s never been a sole focus on the police. As has been said to you numerous times, these communities have been asking for help with redevelopment and jobs for decades. You saying why don’t they look at that as well is utterly ignorant and insulting.

Look at the numbers. There’s inequity and disproportion in the numbers of crimes they commit.
Hence my desire to see job training. Job creation, and quality education.
Imo if people see others around them having good jobs and being able to live better lives, others will do so also, but the oppurtunity needs to be there.
Imo maybe if there were good paying jobs that provided a possibility of a better lifestyle than people wouldn’t turn to crime so easily.
Focusing on criminal police and directing rage towards the police is understandable, but imo that approach will have only limited results long term at correcting the inequities present in the U.S. right now.
Imo it’s best to address the problem at its root cause as opposed to trying to treat the symptoms and allowing the numbers to continue as they have the last half century.
Police brutality is a horrible symptom of much bigger problems. It needs to be stamped out yes, and I support that, but I’m not dumb enough to pretend that treating symptoms cure diseases.

You seem unaware that the police have targeted and arrested people in these communities for crimes they also haven’t committed for decades as well. Take a look at the Central Park 5 for a start.

You also seem unaware of the number of black people who were utterly innocent who have died at the hands of the police. We also now have police forces in the US acting with pretty much not regard for the law.

 

[Groundfish]

You saying why don’t they look at that as well is utterly ignorant and insulting

The alternative appears to be defund the police.
That’s not going to create jobs.
Limiting police involvement in high crime areas seems silly to me.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Slippery Slope logical fallacy once again.

Can you give a logical end-point? I'm not talking great leaps here, I'm merely stating that if you keep re-evaluating figures of the past with values of societies tens, hundreds or thousands of years after they existed I foresee a great many becoming unsuitable.

You quoted it and referenced it and you still don't see it as context.

"But there are some statues that are quite clear cut – slavers, quite clear cut in my view"

Remove that and you do remove the context of why he said one thing about Churchill (which for the record I disagree with him on) and another for statues of slave-traders., Remove it and it looks hypocritical, add it back in and it more balanced.

What?

Why did he say Churchill should be treated differently from slavers?

The quote says only that they should, not why they should. Are you able to infer something I can't? As such it's pointless to include - it adds nothing.

You mean you didn't try and argue that Muslim countries were more violent because of Islam, odd given that it was only earlier this year (and yes I can provide more).

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/islam-whats-your-view-on-it.263208/page-173#post-12981460

But you misunderstood the statistics and conclusions of the article in that post....

Remember how you (wrongly) said the correlation between GPI and Pillars of Peace for Muslim majority countries was the same as looking at the GPI against Muslim majority countries?
Remember how you (wrongly) said that because they said there was no link with religious belief and peace that it must mean that there is no link between Islam and peace (the coin example)?
Remember how you said that because only a few examples had religion as the only contributory cause of conflict, it somehow diminished the fact that Islam was one of the religions involved in all the conflicts which had religion as a contributory cause.

How, exactly, does that prove I dislike Muslims?

 

[Scaff]

The alternative appears to be defund the police.
That’s not going to create jobs.
Limiting police involvement in high crime areas seems silly to me.

You’ve clearly not looked at any of the defund suggestions then, which cover the reduction of funds from the police (to de militarise them) and putting it into education, community improvement and job creation.

Can you give a logical end-point? I'm not talking great leaps here, I'm merely stating that if you keep re-evaluating figures of the past with values of societies tens, hundreds or thousands of years after they existed I foresee a great many becoming unsuitable.

And in doing so you illustrate why the slippery slope is a logical fallacy, on your basis nothing should ever be re-evaluated.

What?

Why did he say Churchill should be treated differently from slavers?

The quote says only that they should, not why they should. Are you able to infer something I can't? As such it's pointless to include - it adds nothing.

You honesty don’t understand why the case for removing a statue of a slave trader is clear?

But you misunderstood the statistics and conclusions of the article in that post....

Remember how you (wrongly) said the correlation between GPI and Pillars of Peace for Muslim majority countries was the same as looking at the GPI against Muslim majority countries?
Remember how you (wrongly) said that because they said there was no link with religious belief and peace that it must mean that there is no link between Islam and peace (the coin example)?
Remember how you said that because only a few examples had religion as the only contributory cause of conflict, it somehow diminished the fact that Islam was one of the religions involved in all the conflicts which had religion as a contributory cause.

How, exactly, does that prove I dislike Muslims?

No I quoted directly from the conclusion of the paper, I posted screen shots of those conclusions, and they utterly refuted your cherry picking of the data.

Lying about it will not change the quite clear evidence of that in the thread in question, as for your on going targeting of Muslims. That’s been as clear as day across all your accounts.

 

[NotThePrez]

@NotThePrez you asked what facts? Maybe you missed this in my post 395.
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htius.pdf
Many folks look at social media and news etc and form their viewpoint based on that, but as I already stated that’s a distortion from a truth about crime (murder)
That’s what I meant, and it was further supported by the link I posted here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/police-shootings-us-death-toll-gun-control-officers-a8777046.html?amp

Are you actually freaking serious right now? You're actually hand-waving Americans, your fellow citizens, dying by those who are supposed to protect us with statistics.

"Floyd family, what happened to George is unfortunate...but if you look at the stats, police homicide has been on a general upward trend over the past couple years, and homicide rates have been consistent, too. Based on my maths, his time was up."

"Ya'know, Floyd familly, social media is really blowing George's death out of proportion. They just don't have all the facts."

"Good news Floyd family! Police shooting deaths in New York are down. I'm sure George would be glad if he were here to see this."

Also, in your Independent article, a common theme in the article seems to be that police shoot because they believe the perpetrator was a threat. Was George Floyd, handcuffed, detained, and pinned down with a knee on his neck, actually a threat to those 4 officers? Did he readily have access to a weapon in that position?

Once again, you've proven that you fundamentally do not understand why American Citizens are protesting currently. Stop looking at everything in absolutes, and maybe show a certain degree of compassion for your fellow American.

Also, in response to your last post yes I think job creation is important.

Which doesn't answer the question(s) I've actually asked you:

I don't know what you do for a living, but let's say someone in your company effed up in a way that got you killed, and there was a known history of such incidents happening at your job. Inquiries into these incidents led to a noticeable lack in disciplinary action. How would you feel if your family tried to hold your place of employment, the people who are also responsible for your safety, accountable, only to have them hand-wave away your families complaints and inquiries?

So rallying to have police accountable, reduce misuse of power incidents, and overall campaign for a better society is a "letdown," then?

Be honest; do you think that "job creation" is so much more important that human rights and police accountability, that the latter isn't even worth pursuing? Because with responses like these....

So people end up hating police, which are people doing a necessary job, instead of asking why there’s so much crime or how to create more jobs.

Edit with all the passion people have right now I think it would be great to take that energy and focus it on job creation, training, education etc. what’s happened is ACAB and defund and paint slogans. It’s a letdown.

...you really don't have a good look going for you at the moment.

 

[Groundfish]

Are you actually freaking serious right now? You're actually hand-waving Americans, your fellow citizens, dying by those who are supposed to protect us with statistics

Those are the facts. Crime is disproportionate in certain population segments (murder) Not much has changed over time which imo indicates a lot.

Which doesn't answer the question(s) I've actually asked you

The only question in my mind is what will be written in history books after this murder?
Will it be after months of civil unrest legislation was passed to ban chokeholds then police departments were abolished which led to a rise in crime which led to govt stepping in again with force which led to more civil unrest repeat ad nauseum
OR
Floyd’s death led to the realization that a segment of society was being left behind.
Govt provided tax incentives to companies
to open businesses in impoverished areas and invested in the schools/infrastructure in these areas.
People went to work.
Also community colleges were opened and vocational programs had high enrollment, which led to median income rising by double...
A decade later the crime rate was halved, home ownership increased by 60 percent, the number of single parent households was reduced by 70 percent...
Also murder rates now match average instead of being unequal to other locales.

 

[Scaff]

Those are the facts. Crime is disproportionate in certain population segments (murder) Not much has changed over time which imo indicates a lot.



The only question in my mind is what will be written in history books after this murder?
Will it be after months of civil unrest legislation was passed to ban chokeholds then police departments were abolished which led to a rise in crime which led to govt stepping in again with force which led to more civil unrest repeat ad nauseum
OR
Floyd’s death led to the realization that a segment of society was being left behind.
Govt provided tax incentives to companies
to open businesses in impoverished areas and invested in the schools/infrastructure in these areas.
People went to work.
Also community colleges were opened and vocational programs had high enrollment, which led to median income rising by double...
A decade later the crime rate was halved, home ownership increased by 60 percent, the number of single parent households was reduced by 70 percent...
Also murder rates now match average instead of being unequal to other locales.

Literally no one has called for the police to be abolished, I’ve already explained this.

 

[Groundfish]

Literally no one has called for the police to be abolished, I’ve already explained this

https://medium.com/@seattleblmanon3...ill-to-the-government-of-seattle-ddaee51d3e47

 

[TexRex]

Those are the facts. Crime is disproportionate in certain population segments (murder) Not much has changed over time which imo indicates a lot.



The only question in my mind is what will be written in history books after this murder?
Will it be after months of civil unrest legislation was passed to ban chokeholds then police departments were abolished which led to a rise in crime which led to govt stepping in again with force which led to more civil unrest repeat ad nauseum
OR
Floyd’s death led to the realization that a segment of society was being left behind.
Govt provided tax incentives to companies
to open businesses in impoverished areas and invested in the schools/infrastructure in these areas.
People went to work.
Also community colleges were opened and vocational programs had high enrollment, which led to median income rising by double...
A decade later the crime rate was halved, home ownership increased by 60 percent, the number of single parent households was reduced by 70 percent...
Also murder rates now match average instead of being unequal to other locales.

Deflection and obfuscation.

 

[NotThePrez]

Those are the facts. Crime is disproportionate in certain population segments (murder) Not much has changed over time which imo indicates a lot.


The only question in my mind is what will be written in history books after this murder?
Will it be after months of civil unrest legislation was passed to ban chokeholds then police departments were abolished which led to a rise in crime which led to govt stepping in again with force which led to more civil unrest repeat ad nauseum
OR
Floyd’s death led to the realization that a segment of society was being left behind.
Govt provided tax incentives to companies
to open businesses in impoverished areas and invested in the schools/infrastructure in these areas.
People went to work.
Also community colleges were opened and vocational programs had high enrollment, which led to median income rising by double...
A decade later the crime rate was halved, home ownership increased by 60 percent, the number of single parent households was reduced by 70 percent...
Also murder rates now match average instead of being unequal to other locales.

Translation: "Everyone, stop complaining about basic human rights, feeling safe around those who are supposed to protect you, and holding authority figures who abuse their power accountable. Just shut up, be useful, and get a damn job."

Your lack of empathy is actually unbelievable.

 

[TenEightyOne]

https://medium.com/@seattleblmanon3...ill-to-the-government-of-seattle-ddaee51d3e47

I could have written that. Got a journalistic source? That's as reliable as this post, but then I am the head of NASA and I invented Google Maps.

Spoiler

In case there's anybody reading this who's even more autistic than I am... the last sentence isn't true. But why would you trust any forum post without verification?

 

[Scaff]

https://medium.com/@seattleblmanon3...ill-to-the-government-of-seattle-ddaee51d3e47

You do know that covers a replacement for the police and judicial system?

It’s not a call for anarchy, but in reality closer to the demands the Americans made to the British before the war of independence

 

[Danoff]

Those are the facts. Crime is disproportionate in certain population segments (murder) Not much has changed over time which imo indicates a lot.

Please explain which segments you're referring to and what it indicates.

 

[Groundfish]

Ok, in order from the top.
To @NotThePrez can’t believe you would say that a call to improve impoverished crime ridden areas by educating and employing the citizens there a lack of empathy. Imo it would increase their freedom and happiness.

Next we have someone question the list and I admit I wasn’t there taking that list from the folks camped out in Seattle but here’s a link
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ne...tors-black-patients-end-prisons-1510323?amp=1

Finally @Danoff you asked me to explain which tells me that you didn’t even bother to scan that data.
If you give it even a rudimentary scan you will learn more about murder rates in the USA. I think those were official numbers directly off the gov site. Post 395 links it.

 

[TexRex]

To @NotThePrez can’t believe you would say that a call to improve impoverished crime ridden areas by educating and employing the citizens there a lack of empathy. Imo it would increase their freedom and happiness.

Next we have someone question the list and I admit I wasn’t there taking that list from the folks camped out in Seattle but here’s a link
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ne...tors-black-patients-end-prisons-151

You keep deflecting from the issue of peace officers killing people when doing so can't be said to be reasonably justified and not being held accountable because of the corrupt system within which they operate.

You keep obfuscating by providing "data" which does not pertain to the issue of peace officers killing people when doing so can't be said to be reasonably justified and not being held accountable because of the corrupt system within which they operate.

Finally @Danoff you asked me to explain which tells me that you didn’t even bother to scan that data.
If you give it even a rudimentary scan you will learn more about murder rates in the USA. I think those were official numbers directly off the gov site. Post 395 links it.

You linked to a 183-page document which you say supports a claim you've made but haven't indicated specifically what it says that actually supports the claim you've made, let alone indicated where within that 183-page document it can be found. What you've done is present a pile of things and have tasked others with finding an unspecified thing. That isn't how citations work.

You're not engaging in discussion in good faith.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Your lack of empathy is actually unbelievable.

And it's this very thing that creates the systemic racism we're all sick and tired of. People need to understand what it feels like to be in the shoes of a black person right now - how can they feel safe walking out into their own neighbourhood when they're disproportionately targeted by the police? Honestly, it's a joke that it still occurs, and the ignorance of some entitled white people doesn't help.

 

[NotThePrez]

Ok, in order from the top.
To @NotThePrez can’t believe you would say that a call to improve impoverished crime ridden areas by educating and employing the citizens there a lack of empathy. Imo it would increase their freedom and happiness.

• You've repeatedly put people who live in low-income areas under the same umbrella as criminals.
  
• You've stated that people who live in low-income/crime-riddled areas should be thought of as potential criminals before they even have a chance to speak for themselves.
• You've suggested that people who live in crime-riddled areas are uneducated and/or lazy, and have no desire to better their situation without government intervention.
  
• You keep on deflecting and skirting around the issue of why the protests against police are happening in the first place, while also putting police officers on a pedestal, almost as if they can do no wrong because their job is "essential."
  
• You treat police homicide like a :censored:ing math problem!
• When asked to try to even attempt to think about why it is people are protesting, and to try and imagine things from their point of view, you deflect, skirt around questions, obfuscate (thank you @TexRex for that word), or straight-up ignore these requests.
• When called out, rather than honestly answer, you continue to deflect.
  
• You use "data" in bad faith in an effort to confuse people and to move the spotlight away from the issue of police officers abusing their powers and citizens dying as a result.
  
• You have the absolute gall to say that the people who are fighting for basic rights and human decency should stop what they're doing and just get a goddamn job.
  
• You're actively prioritizing the future of how this country "will be seen in the history books" over the well-being and rights of its citizens right :censored:ing now.

And you say all this and then talk about education and employment in low-income areas of the country as if you're doing us a :censored:ing favor, like it's something that nobody has ever thought about. Never mind the fact that, throughout history, African-Americans (as well as other minorities) not only already have and continue to contribute to American Society, but have fought, bled, had their lives destroyed (willingly or otherwise) and died not only for the security of this country, but also in hopes of having a better lives for themselves, their family, and their future generations, in many cases knowing full-well they'd be returning to an ungrateful nation (assuming they even got to return). We even had a black guy as the bloody president, and yet minorities still have to worry about crap that should've died in the 70's.

Yes, at bare minimum, you absolutely lack empathy. As far as I can tell, you also have zero respect for people who are less fortunate than you, you have zero respect for how this situation came to be in the first place (because this crap didn't pop up overnight), and you have zero respect for the people who are actually affected on a daily basis by these issues.

 

[Scaff]

• You've repeatedly put people who live in low-income areas under the same umbrella as criminals.
  
• You've stated that people who live in low-income/crime riddled areas should be thought of as potential criminals before they even have a chance to speak for themselves.
• You've suggested that people who live in crime-riddled areas are uneducated and/or lazy, and have no desire to better their situation without government intervention.
  
• You keep on deflecting and skirting around the issue of why the protests against police are happening in the first place, while also putting police officers on a pedestal, almost as if they can do no wrong because their job is "essential."
  
• You treat police homicide like a :censored:ing math problem!
• When asked to try to even attempt to think about why it is people are protesting, and to try and imagine things from their point of view, you deflect, skirt around questions, obfuscate (thank you @TexRex for that word), or straight-up ignore these requests.
• When called out, rather than honestly answer, you continue to deflect.
  
• You use "data" in bad faith in an effort to confuse people and to move the spotlight away from the issue of police officers abusing their powers and citizens dying as a result.
  
• You have the absolute gall to say that the people who are fighting for basic rights and human decency should stop what they're doing and just get a goddamn job.
  
• You're actively prioritizing the future of how this country "will be seen in the history books" over the well-being and rights of its citizens right :censored:ing now.

And you say all this and then talk about education and employment in low-income areas of the country as if you're doing us a :censored:ing favor, like it's something that nobody has ever thought about. Never mind the fact that, throughout history, African-Americans (as well as other minorities) not only already have and continue to contribute to American Society, but have fought, bled, had their lives destroyed (willingly or otherwise) and died not only for the security of this country, but also in hopes of having a better lives for themselves, their family, and their future generations, in many cases knowing full-well they'd be returning to an ungrateful nation (assuming they even got to return). We even had a black guy as the bloody president, and yet minorities still have to worry about crap that should've died in the 70's.

Yes, at bare minimum, you absolutely lack empathy. As far as I can tell, you also have zero respect for people who are less fortunate than you, you have zero respect for how this situation came to be in the first place (because this crap didn't pop up overnight), and you have zero respect for the people who are actually affected on a daily basis by these issues.

I want to like this post a thousand times.

 

[Dotini]

https://medium.com/@seattleblmanon3...ill-to-the-government-of-seattle-ddaee51d3e47

Great find!

The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal has labeled the movement anarchy.

The founding of any new nation is worthy of note, and so it is with the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, several blocks of Seattle that have been seized by protesters, Occupy Wall Street types and assorted opportunists. Now it’s up to the citizens of the CHAZ, adapting Federalist No. 1, to decide the important question: whether anarchies of men are capable or not of establishing good government.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-seattle-secessionists-11591919047

IMHO, the popularly elected city council of Seattle is dominated by socialists and crypto-communists, so this list of demands likely has a good deal of "establishment" and common citizen support. Seattle and her citizens are possibly the most liberal in the known universe, The swift removal of neoliberal Mayor Jenny Durkan needs to be an early step, and of course the self-proclained "apolitical" Chief of Police Carmen Best needs to be replaced with one more politically motivated.

As one who is steeped in the literature and the personal experience of primitive anarchy, I look forward to the social experiment in progress.

 

[killerjimbag]

Here,this is Toronto. Shooting back at whomever while hundreds of cars are driving by on a highway. Brilliant.
https://torontosun.com/news/local-n...HLw8KG4sjn-lCLCn0Y6Fgy5tKYYv2lsuN_1LQNrRubiK4

 

[HenrySwanson]

And in doing so you illustrate why the slippery slope is a logical fallacy, on your basis nothing should ever be re-evaluated.

So mine is an inaccurate prediction? If you're going to continually re-evaluate their existence then you're going to have to be consistent and judge their past lives by standards of the current age. Is it not reasonable to assume that a lot of statues will be removed?

You honesty don’t understand why the case for removing a statue of a slave trader is clear?

You honestly don't understand why the case for removing a statue of Churchill is clear?
You honestly don't understand why the case for removing a statue of Gandhi is clear?

I'll ask again, what does your quote add other than that he wants to teach Churchill's past in schools - which has nothing to do with my original point

No I quoted directly from the conclusion of the paper, I posted screen shots of those conclusions, and they utterly refuted your cherry picking of the data.

Lying about it will not change the quite clear evidence of that in the thread in question, as for your on going targeting of Muslims. That’s been as clear as day across all your accounts.

But you misinterpreted that part of the conclusion:

Religious belief as a whole (comprising of many different religions) isn't linked to peace (when using GPI metrics).

That doesn't mean you can conclude that one religion isn't linked to peace (see the biased coin example). The cherry picking accusation is also unfounded.

And what I was saying in that thread is no different to when I say Christianity is a more homophobic religion than others and yet I'm not accused of targeting Christians.

That isn't my choice but it's entirely possible that somebody may feel that way. What a strange hypotheticalismism.

Why?

I'm judging you on what you said/did 30+ years ago based on societal norms of the present day.

Safe from a negative action. Khan has said he won't remove the statue. He hasn't said it won't be removed.

Why should Churchill be safe this time around?

And if it's removed you still have your memories. You don't actually need the physical statue for that. Your heritage and memories are intact, just without the erection.

Yes I'll have those memories. But we've (potentially) destroyed the chance for thousands/millions of future students to have them.

He said the review wouldn't consider Churchill's statue for removal. He did not say it wouldn't be removed. I'm not sure which part of that statement is so hard to understand. Did he say it wouldn't ever be removed? No.

I've always said that.... If you remember the sentence after saying he was safe from the commission:

"Will we need to re-review all statues all over again in 2040 once we have more "enlightened" views on racists and their roles in government?"

implying that he isn't safe from removal in the future.

 

[Scaff]

So mine is an inaccurate prediction? If you're going to continually re-evaluate their existence then you're going to have to be consistent and judge their past lives by standards of the current age. Is it not reasonable to assume that a lot of statues will be removed?

It an assumption presented without evidence. That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Should, for example, the statue of Kimmy Saville have remained up in Scotland? NO public debate was carried out around that, no due process was followed for its removal

You honestly don't understand why the case for removing a statue of Churchill is clear?
You honestly don't understand why the case for removing a statue of Gandhi is clear?

I'll ask again, what does your quote add other than that he wants to teach Churchill's past in schools - which has nothing to do with my original point

I've already answered that twice and you have already ignored it twice.

But you misinterpreted that part of the conclusion:

Religious belief as a whole (comprising of many different religions) isn't linked to peace (when using GPI metrics).

That doesn't mean you can conclude that one religion isn't linked to peace (see the biased coin example). The cherry picking accusation is also unfounded.

And what I was saying in that thread is no different to when I say Christianity is a more homophobic religion than others and yet I'm not accused of targeting Christians.

Then head back to that thread to be proven wrong again.

Yes I'll have those memories. But we've (potentially) destroyed the chance for thousands/millions of future students to have them.

Utter and complete nonsense.

What exactly did the statue of Colston teach people about him?

Ditto any statue at all, all a statue teaches people is that at some point this person was deemed worthy of being looked up to, you really think a slave-trader is worth looking up to? (and school children in Bristol were taken to throw flowers at the statue, without any way of knowing about his full past).

Statues honour, museums and books teach, and no one has advocated removing either of those.

Let's give it a go, without a reverse image look-up or any googling, tell me what this statue teaches you, it can be found in Central Park.

 

[Groundfish]

ou've stated that people who live in low-income/crime riddled areas should be thought of as potential criminals before they even have a chance to speak for themselves

No. Where? Never did.

u've suggested that people who live in crime-riddled areas are uneducated and/or lazy, and have no desire to better their situation without government intervention

Again no.

You treat police homicide like a :censored:ing math problem!

Again no. I simply linked the actual data.
As I’ve said many times I’m horrified by murder.

You use "data" in bad faith in an effort to confuse people

No. I simply linked data.
I felt I should after my comment that social media and news can cause people’s perceptions of situations to be distorted from reality.

ou have the absolute gall to say that the people who are fighting for basic rights and human decency should stop what they're doing and just get a goddamn job.

Again no.

Yes, at bare minimum, you absolutely lack empathy. As far as I can tell, you also have zero respect for people who are less fortunate than you,

Again no. Again that’s pretty insulting.
Before I’ve touched slightly on my life, and was pretty much shutdown and told anecdotal stuff is invalid.
However I do not and never will give any respect to violent criminals.
People who are violent, sorry even if less ‘fortunate’ (whatever the heck that implies-you don’t know my life) don’t get ANY sympathy from me.
If you think I have some perfect life and have not experienced significant pain and anguish you are very very badly mistaken.
Again that’s irrelevant and anecdotal and not allowed etc.
I never said those things listed above, you are putting words in my mouth.
I am FOR improving the lives of people in areas with high crime rates plus poverty.
I am AGAINST the very poor state of the educational system as a WHOLE though.
ESPECIALLY in some poor areas.
I just think this situation results from many reasons that can’t be truly improved upon overnight. It didn’t come to be overnight.
I wanna see real change, not a knee jerk response from lawmakers and then back to business as usual.
I apologize if you honestly believe that those bullet points are my thoughts.
In actual fact they are neither my words or my thoughts tho.

 

[Danoff]

Finally @Danoff you asked me to explain which tells me that you didn’t even bother to scan that data.
If you give it even a rudimentary scan you will learn more about murder rates in the USA. I think those were official numbers directly off the gov site. Post 395 links it.

Hmm... I'm still not sure what you're trying to say with this:

Crime is disproportionate in certain population segments (murder) Not much has changed over time which imo indicates a lot.

Which segments are you talking about, and give me at least 1 example of the "a lot" that it indicates.

 

[Groundfish]

No @Danoff.
Again the info is the info in that report. You can choose to read it or not. I just linked it.

 

[TexRex]

No. Where? Never did.



Again no.



Again no. I simply linked the actual data.
As I’ve said many times I’m horrified by murder.



No. I simply linked data.
I felt I should after my comment that social media and news can cause people’s perceptions of situations to be distorted from reality.



Again no.



Again no. Again that’s pretty insulting.
Before I’ve touched slightly on my life, and was pretty much shutdown and told anecdotal stuff is invalid.
However I do not and never will give any respect to violent criminals.
People who are violent, sorry even if less ‘fortunate’ (whatever the heck that implies-you don’t know my life) don’t get ANY sympathy from me.
If you think I have some perfect life and have not experienced significant pain and anguish you are very very badly mistaken.
Again that’s irrelevant and anecdotal and not allowed etc.
I never said those things listed above, you are putting words in my mouth.
I am FOR improving the lives of people in areas with high crime rates plus poverty.
I am AGAINST the very poor state of the educational system as a WHOLE though.
ESPECIALLY in some poor areas.
I just think this situation results from many reasons that can’t be truly improved upon overnight. It didn’t come to be overnight.
I wanna see real change, not a knee jerk response from lawmakers and then back to business as usual.
I apologize if you honestly believe that those bullet points are my thoughts.
In actual fact they are neither my words or my thoughts tho.

You keep deflecting from the issue of individuals who have been sworn to uphold the law violating the law in a manner that also violates another's rights and consistently avoiding accountability, their violations having been hidden from view by a corrupt system.

This is literally the only thing I have directed at you and your repeated failure to address me demonstrates your objective to be purely one of deflection. Your selective responses to others who have brought up this issue only serve to reinforce the notion.

You're engaging others in bad faith.

 

[Groundfish]

You keep deflecting from the issue of individuals who have been sworn to uphold the law violating the law in a manner that also violates another's rights and consistently avoiding accountability, their violations having been hidden from view by a corrupt system.

This is literally the only thing I have directed at you and your repeated failure to address me demonstrates your objective to be purely one of deflection. Your selective responses to others who have brought up this issue only serve to reinforce the notion.

You're engaging others in bad faith.

TBH I am not sure how to respond to questions that presuppose a misrepresentation of the words I have typed.
How can it be bad faith to simply say here is a link to data on homocide?
Honestly don’t follow you at all, here.
What am I supposed to do diminish my thoughts by responding to misrepresentations of them?

Edit I mean it’s one thing to challenge the data and another to resort to an attack on the character of the person who put it up by saying they are in bad faith.

 

[Danoff]

No @Danoff.
Again the info is the info in that report. You can choose to read it or not. I just linked it.

I find this really interesting. So you've identified segments of the population that have disproportionate crime, but don't want to say which ones. You've identified lots of things that a lack of change over time "indicate", but you won't say what. Can you say why volunteering your conclusions is such a problem?

The problem is simple. You've given the impression that the segment of the population is "black people", and the what it indicates is that the color of a person's skin being black makes them naturally predisposed to murder. in other words, one possible interpretation of your post is that you think black people are naturally more violent.

I'm inviting you to either confirm or dispel that interpretation. Your refusal to do so raises an eyebrow.

 

[TexRex]

TBH I am not sure how to respond to questions that presuppose a misrepresentation of the words I have typed.
How can it be bad faith to simply say here is a link to data on homocide?
Honestly don’t follow you at all, here.
What am I supposed to do diminish my thoughts by responding to misrepresentations of them?

The issue is officers of the law violating the very laws they have sworn to uphold, which also happens to be the violation of people's rights; specifically the right to a fair run through the criminal justice system.

The issue isn't poverty, intelligence, crime rates, black-on-black violence or any of the other things you've brought up in an effort to deflect from the actual issue.

And wouldn't "homocide" actually be suicide?

 

[DesertPenguin]

@Groundfish How hard is it to simply say "cops are doing bad things". Holy **** dude....