[Loki]

And if we're gonna compare studies, I'd go with the CDC's: "The CDC's cause-of-death data, based on death certificates collected at the state level, also reveals a profound racial disparity among the victims of police shootings. Between 1968 and 2011, black people were between two to eight times more likely to die at the hands of law enforcement than whites. Annually, over those 40 years, a black person was on average 4.2 times as likely to get shot and killed by a cop than a white person. "

1968 was nearly half a century ago. Can we talk about present day?

2015 saw 990 people shot and killed by the police, according to the Washington Post. The great majority were shot while attacking a police officer or other people, most with weapons. 49.9% were non-Hispanic white, 26.1% were black. Non-Hispanic whites make up 77.4% of the US population, blacks make up 13.2% of the US population.

An over-representation of 198% is actually pretty low considering the racial breakdown on violent crime in the US. Blacks made up 38% of murder offenders in the US in 2013 according to the FBI, and 22% of violent offenders in 2012/13 (link).



95.8% of the people shot and killed by the police last year were men. Does this mean men are being unfairly targeted because of their gender? Shall we start a "Men's Lives Matter" movement?

[Loki]

Consider that, if cops pull all sorts of blacks over for all sorts of minor offenses, but they pull whites essentially only if they suspect some serious crime is being committed

Where's the rolley eye thingy? Oh here it is

I was pulled over this morning for a broken brake light. I feel gypped, he didn't even shoot me or anything. Not even a good tasing. But I was polite and didn't try to grab his gun, punch him in the face, run, call him a pig, etc.

I haven't read the study, but as with any individual study, one ought not to hang much on it alone, especially not before other researchers have weighed in on why it seems not to jibe with results of other careful studies by major research institutions.

And again, even this study shows that cops are much more likely to harass and abuse blacks more than whites in all sorts of ways. Do you agree with that part of the study?

So you don't believe the part that challenges your beliefs, but the part that confirms your predetermined conclusions is A-OK? Really? lol

[Plantagenet]

Between 1968 and 2011, black people were between two to eight times more likely to die at the hands of law enforcement than whites."

1968 was nearly half a century ago. Can we talk about present day?

2015 saw 990 people shot and killed by the police, according to the Washington Post. The great majority were shot while attacking a police officer or other people, most with weapons. 49.9% were non-Hispanic white, 26.1% were black. Non-Hispanic whites make up 77.4% of the US population, blacks make up 13.2% of the US population.

An over-representation of 198% is actually pretty low considering the racial breakdown on violent crime in the US.?

Exactly right.

And the most recent study available, done by Harvard, found there is there isn't any racial bias in police shooting. None. Zero. Nada.

harvard-study-finds-no-racial-bias-police-shootings]

I mentioned this study in earlier post, and Dohboi dismissed it as "cherry picking".

Obviously the researchers at Harvard---the top University in the USA---are going to produce high quality research and aren't going to engage in "cherry picking" their data. The Harvard researchers didn't even want this result---they were clear they didn't expect it to turn out this way at all.

So the facts are the facts. In spite of the mindless anger from the Black Lives Matter crowd, there actually is no racial bias in police shootings----the data shows the police shoot everyone equally.

Cheers!

[dohboi]

Ahh, there's not possibility of racism at f'n Harvard...riiiight!!

Meanwhile, Loki doesn't seem to know the meaning of the obscure English word "if."

Really, you folks seem to be trying really really hard to not understand simple English.

And it is of course hard to explain something to people who are trying hard not to understand.

So I'll leave you all, but for others who might be interested in a thoughtful (at least on one side) dialogue on related issues, you might try: http://imgur.com/a/YkDVQ

A bit long, but worth a read, imvho.

Ciao!

[Plantagenet]

racism at f'n Harvard...

The chances that these respected academic researchers at Harvard are racists are essentially zero. Its far more likely that you don't want to accept the results of their study, and so you are smearing them by calling them racists.

Meanwhile, Loki doesn't seem to know the meaning of the obscure English word "if."

The chances that Loki doesn't know the meaning of the word "if" are essentially zero. Its far more likely that you are angry at Loki for disagreeing with you about something and so you are smearing him by implying he doesn't understand the English language.

So I'll leave you all...

When you go, please send back the old Dohboi----he used to be a calm steady thoughtful sort of guy who made a lot of interesting posts and was capable of discussing issues without flying into a rage.

Cheers!

[dohboi]

"The chances that these respected academic researchers at Harvard are racists are essentially zero."

...based on...what???

Argument from incredulity is, well, not an argument.

I hung out at Harvard for about a decade.

There are as many racists there as anywhere else, if not more.

;;;;;;;;;;

Some of my friends just got out of jail after their peaceful (for them) protest on the local highway.

Yeah, I feel some personal connections here.

Frankly, I'm a bit troubled that more people don't speak out more forcefully on these threads against obviously racist posts. Sad really. Speaks to kind of a lack of spirit, or courage, or... well, you all can tell me.

[vtsnowedin]

I have to side with Dohboi on this one even thought we seldom agree on anything. The idea that those at Harvard have risen above any racism is absurd. ( we are all naturally born racists but some of us are working on the problem while others pretend to be past it.)
The results of Harvard research is anything but unbiased and is totally driven by what result will yield the maximum future research grant dollars.
Even academic squints realize that they and their families have to eat and turn out results that are most likely to keep them gainfully employed.

[Plantagenet]

The results of Harvard research is anything but unbiased and is totally driven by what result will yield the maximum future research grant dollars.

Your suggestion that the study was slanted to yield a result that police shootings are not racially biased so as to obtain more funding is bizarre. That finding conflicts with the liberal credo.......far from attraction more research funding, it is more likely to get the professors who did the work smeared as racists.

I'm not saying there are no racists at harvard. I'm saying Dohboi's claims that there are MORE racists at Harvard then elsewhere and in particular the authors of this new report from the NBER are racists is a smear with no evidence to back it up.

Which brings us to Dohboi's attempt to smear these professors as racists:

"The chances that these respected academic researchers at Harvard are racists are essentially zero."

...based on...what???

Argument from incredulity is, well, not an argument.

I hung out at Harvard for about a decade.

There are as many racists there as anywhere else, if not more.

You are the one making an outrageous claim, i.e. that the study just released by National Bureau of Economic Research through Harvard, is nothing but "cherry picking" of the data by a bunch of racists. Do you have any proof for your ridiculous claim?

Your suggestion that there are more racists at Harvard then elsewhere is just silly. Harvard is the premier University in the entire United States. Universities, particularly elite ones like Harvard, are not know for haboring racists.

Furthermore, this study is a product of the National Bureau of Economic Research--a group with 22 Nobel Prize winners.

Again, you are quick to slander people and even entire Universities as racist but you offer no proof to support your slanders.

A few more questions for you:

---- What have you done with the old Dohboi, who was rather more calm and even tempered then you? Did you hack his account and steal his login information or something?

---- If by some chance you are the original Dohboi, then what happened to turn you into a seething rage-boy? Did you change meds or has your blood pressure recently shot up? Your behavior has definitely changed for the worse---hope you're OK.

---- AND What did you do at Harvard for the 10 years you spent there? Sex worker? CIA drug experiment subject? Homeless person?
Come on, fess up.


Dohboi spent 10 years at Harvard!

[vtsnowedin]

Your suggestion that there are more racists at Harvard then elsewhere is just silly. Harvard is the premier University in the entire United States. Universities, particularly elite ones like Harvard, are not know for haboring racists.

Well I can't say there are any more raciest at Harvard then elsewhere I see no evidence that this "Premier University" does not have a bias toward saying their alumni are the creme de la creme and everyone else (of whatever race) is just a peon.

[Loki]

Ahh, there's not possibility of racism at f'n Harvard...riiiight!!

This is exactly why cries of RACISM RACISM RACISM! from the far left are increasingly falling on deaf ears.

Mr. Fryer, the youngest African-American to receive tenure at Harvard and the first to win a John Bates Clark medal, a prize given to the most promising American economist under 40, said anger after the deaths of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray and others drove him to study the issue. “You know, protesting is not my thing,” he said. “But data is my thing. So I decided that I was going to collect a bunch of data and try to understand what really is going on when it comes to racial differences in police use of force.”


Roland G. Fryer Jr., a professor of economics at Harvard.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upsho ... pe=article

So you, a presumably lily white progressive, are claiming that this African American economist is an anti-black racist? Despite the fact that he initiated the study as his contribution to the Black Lives Matter cause, which he openly supports.

That's gloriously moronic.

It just goes to show that most progressives cannot be reasoned with. There is no evidence from any source that they will accept if it contradicts their narrative. I'm very impressed with this professor, who released findings that falsified the presumption he had going into the study. That takes courage and a high degree of intellectual honesty. You, on the other hand....well, let's just say intellectual honesty isn't the first thing that jumps to mind.

[Plantagenet]

Mr. Fryer, the youngest African-American to receive tenure at Harvard and the first to win a John Bates Clark medal, a prize given to the most promising American economist under 40, said anger after the deaths of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray and others drove him to study the issue. “You know, protesting is not my thing,” he said. “But data is my thing. So I decided that I was going to collect a bunch of data and try to understand what really is going on when it comes to racial differences in police use of force.”


Roland G. Fryer Jr., a professor of economics at Harvard.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upsho ... pe=article

Wow.

Dohboi has been smearing a brilliant young black economist at Harvard as a racist.

I think you owe Dr. Fryer an apology, Dohboi.

An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force---by
Roland G. Fryer, Jr

Cheers!

------------

[vtsnowedin]

Ahh, there's not possibility of racism at f'n Harvard...riiiight!!

This is exactly why cries of RACISM RACISM RACISM! from the far left are increasingly falling on deaf ears.

Mr. Fryer, the youngest African-American to receive tenure at Harvard and the first to win a John Bates Clark medal, a prize given to the most promising American economist under 40, said anger after the deaths of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray and others drove him to study the issue. “You know, protesting is not my thing,” he said. “But data is my thing. So I decided that I was going to collect a bunch of data and try to understand what really is going on when it comes to racial differences in police use of force.”


Roland G. Fryer Jr., a professor of economics at Harvard.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upsho ... pe=article

So you, a presumably lily white progressive, are claiming that this African American economist is an anti-black racist? Despite the fact that he initiated the study as his contribution to the Black Lives Matter cause, which he openly supports.

That's gloriously moronic.

It just goes to show that most progressives cannot be reasoned with. There is no evidence from any source that they will accept if it contradicts their narrative. I'm very impressed with this professor, who released findings that falsified the presumption he had going into the study. That takes courage and a high degree of intellectual honesty. You, on the other hand....well, let's just say intellectual honesty isn't the first thing that jumps to mind.

OK so there is one professor at Harvard that sees it your way. How many professors are there at Harvard? How many of the rest of them would be judged to be unbiased by a competent evaluation board?

[Shaved Monkey]

A cop in Australia just got charged with assault for pointing a gun at and handcuffing a guy he pulled over.

[dohboi]

You specifically claimed that because it was from Harvard, that it couldn't be biassed or racist. That is the faulty assumption I was challenging.

This really is getting silly, so I will now leave y'all to stew in your own savory juices for a while.

but with one more link that you won't look at or address any more than you have anything else: http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/07/1 ... fic-stops/

[Loki]

You specifically claimed that because it was from Harvard, that it couldn't be biassed or racist. That is the faulty assumption I was challenging.

This really is getting silly, so I will now leave y'all to stew in your own savory juices for a while.

lol

Thanks for confirming.

[Loki]

OK so there is one professor at Harvard that sees it your way. How many professors are there at Harvard? How many of the rest of them would be judged to be unbiased by a competent evaluation board?

The charge was that this specific study about racial bias in police shootings was potentially written by a racist (AKA, someone who disagrees with the progressive narrative). This is patently absurd. The professor's cv is readily available online. If this guy has a history of anti-black racism, I'm the Queen of England.

If you want to argue about whether Harvard people in general are racist, I suggest you start a separate thread. It's utterly irrelevant to the discussion. Classic red herring.

[Loki]

but with one more link that you won't look at or address any more than you have anything else: http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/07/1 ... fic-stops/

From your link:

And a 2011 Department of Justice report found that nationally, relatively more black drivers (13 percent) than white (10 percent) and Hispanic (10 percent) drivers were pulled over in a traffic stop during their most recent contact with police.

So there is a slightly greater likelihood that black drivers will be pulled over compared to whites. A pretty small difference, if you ask me. To be exact, 12.8% of black drivers, 9.8% of white drivers, and 9.4% of Asian drivers had at least one incident of "involuntary contact" with the police while driving in 2011. I suspect if you controlled for social class, this difference between blacks and whites would vanish. The DOJ did not mention class/income and did not attempt to control for it. The data just aren't there since most cops don't ask for your 1040 when they pull people over.

The lower rate of involuntary contact for Asian drivers vis-a-vis whites is also interesting, as is the fact that 67.5% of drivers with involuntary contact were men. Again I ask, is it time for a Men's Lives Matter movement?

Taking another metric, if you look at Table 1 from the above cited report, black drivers who were pulled over in 2011 represented 12.6% of the total number of drivers with involuntary contact, lower than would be expected given they make up 13.2% of the US population. This discrepancy is apparently due to the fact that a smaller percentage of blacks drive than whites.

Regardless, all of this hardly constitutes definitive proof of a white supremacist conspiracy in AmeriKKKa. On the contrary, these are very small differences which, as I said, can most likely be explained with a class analysis, something that is always absent in these debates.

The DOJ report also happens to state that there was no statistically significant difference in street stops between the races in 2011 at the national level. In fact, 12.4% of street stops in 2011 were of black people, lower than would be expected given their population percentage. Perhaps black people walk less than white people?

Somehow the street stops finding got left out of your link. I'm sure it was an honest mistake.

Here's the report, read it for yourself. Stop depending on the media to filter information for you.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pbtss11.pdf

[Sixstrings]

A cop in Australia just got charged with assault for pointing a gun at and handcuffing a guy he pulled over.

Is it this story?

Police officer charged after Briton allegedly seriously assaulted in Queensland

A police officer has been charged with grievous bodily harm over the alleged assault of a young British man in north Queensland.

The alleged victim suffered injuries including a fractured jaw and eye socket, the watchdog said.

The Crime and Corruption Commission charged the constable, 41, on Thursday, alleging he assaulted the 23-year-old Briton in a display of excessive force in Cairns on 17 April.

“The CCC has reviewed the available evidence and determined there are reasonable prospects of a successful criminal prosecution,” it said.

The officer is due to face Cairns magistrates court on 11 August. ...

Queensland police said the officer had been stood down.

A police union spokesman said the union was “currently assisting the officer involved in defending the matter” but he was unable to comment further as the matter was now before the courts.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jul/07/police-charged-alleged-assault-briton-queensland

Not much detail there, about what exactly happened.

[Shaved Monkey]

......a senior constable pulled a gun on a motorist caught speeding in outback Queensland.
The driver was then handcuffed while Flanagan checked his registration but was released a short time later when the senior constable realised it was not a stolen car as he first assumed.

The couple later filed an official complaint prompting the immediate suspension of Flanagan.

He was also charged with assault and deprivation of liberty after an investigation by the Ethical Standards Command.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-06/v ... ld/7482950

[Sixstrings]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-06/vision-released-police-officer-pulls-gun-on-motorist-outback-qld/7482950

Hm, well it's hard to tell much from that video in the link..

It looks like the driver was erratic driving, he wouldn't pull over, sped up, then pulled over. (is there more to the story, was he drunk etc.)

I think police drawing their weapon (over here anyway) is justified, if it was a chase.

The second part of the video.. that's hilarious, looks like a good cop to me. That kid's a punk.

As far as the assault.. was the Brit FIGHTING the officer, and that's how he got hurt?

edit: that was FUNNY, "and I'll sit there and drink my COFFEE, in AIR CONDITIONING, while you get CONVICTED."

Is this a bad cop or good cop, guys? I think I can't tell, it's that accent, I'm cracking up.

2nd edit: well on second viewing, I guess that is a bad cop. He didn't use his lights or siren.. and then with the other incident with the kid, an officer shouldn't shove someone around like that unless they're resisting / not complying.