A United States of Hate Has Exploded Under Trump

You keep saying that but you have not cited a study.

I don't need a Salon article to be right.

It's all public information available at the DOJ/FBI and most state and major metro police websites.

I have, and you have simply ignored it and repeated your denials.

You cited a bullshit comment made based on absolute population percentages implying not only a basic but a totally idiotic argument that since black people are only 13% of the population any more than that 13% represented in police shooting statistics must = racism by the criminal justice system.


They aren't denials, they are arguments that shit all over a pathetic social justice argument.

The social justice narrative only works if you ignore all the crime and police/community interaction statistics and stare at that 13%. Only if you 'adjust' based on that 13%!!! Pay no attention to the crime and police/community interaction data!!!! LOL
 
Last edited:
You cited a bullshit comment . . .

You didn't even open it, did you?

In 2015, The Washington Post launched a real-time database to track fatal police shootings, and the project continues this year. As of Sunday, 1,502 people have been shot and killed by on-duty police officers since Jan. 1, 2015. Of them, 732 were white, and 381 were black (and 382 were of another or unknown race).

But data scientists and policing experts often note, comparing how many or how often white people are killed by police to how many or how often black people are killed by the police is statistically dubious unless you first adjust for population.

According to the most recent census data, there are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population but only about 49 percent of those who are killed by police officers. African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times as great as the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer.
 
You didn't even open it, did you?

Yes I did, you still don't understand that is based off of total population demographics which have NOTHING to do with police<->criminal interactions.

"African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers."

That doesn't make black Americans 2.5 times as likely as white to be shot and killed by police officers, it makes whoever came to that conclusion a fucking moron or a dishonest bullshitting propaganda machine.
 
Last edited:
Yes I did, you still don't understand that is based off of total population demographics which have NOTHING to do with police<->criminal interactions.

"African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers."

That doesn't make black Americans 2.5 times as likely as white to be shot and killed by police officers . . .

Yes, that's exactly what it does. I cannot follow your reasoning to the contrary because you are not providing any.

Perhaps it might help if you were to link that Harvard study, which you insist you have linked several times before. I cannot recall seeing that ever, but if it is true, linking it again should be the easiest thing in the world.
 
Yes, that's exactly what it does. I cannot follow your reasoning to the contrary because you are not providing any.

Total demographic populations have NOTHING to do with police<->community interactions.

Trying to provide a police/community interaction statistic (2.5x more likely to be shot if black) without taking ANY factors into consideration except total population is not only intellectually dishonest but also total bullshit.

That fact can't be provided to you in any more of a simple format.

Perhaps it might help if you were to link that Harvard study, which you insist you have linked several times before. I cannot recall seeing that ever, but if it is true, linking it again should be the easiest thing in the world.

That's because it wasn't confirmation bias provided by your Salon echo chamber so you of course totally ignored it. Because you know Salon editors are head and shoulders above Harvard when it comes to research. :rolleyes:

Not any easier or faster than googling it yourself, if I spoon feed you again you'll just ignore it and ask me again next week.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that's exactly what it does. I cannot follow your reasoning to the contrary because you are not providing any.

Perhaps it might help if you were to link that Harvard study, which you insist you have linked several times before. I cannot recall seeing that ever, but if it is true, linking it again should be the easiest thing in the world.

YOU said that they are 2.5 times more likely to be shot WHEN THEY ENCOUNTER A COP and the article above says nothing of the sort. MORE Black encounters with cops are resolved without the citizen being shot than White encounters are.

The reverse is true if we are talking about cops being shot.

Which shows either restraint or wary competance on the part of cops. Maybe they are more carefull in encounters involving blacks, which would make sense, since blacks are more likely to shoot cops than whites.

And you have not even begun to address whether said shootings are justified or not, counselor. Blacks are far more likely to be the agressors and/or the victims in a violent crime. Police responding to a violent crime at times must shoot.

Either you have respect for the due process of law or you should hang up your law license, you hypocrite.

You don't get to count ANY shootings you cannot get atba minimum a manslaughter conviction.

You definately cannot count any shooting that a grand jury will not return a true bill on.
 
That's because it wasn't confirmation bias provided by your Salon echo chamber so you of course totally ignored it. Because you know Salon editors are head and shoulders above Harvard when it comes to research. :rolleyes:

Actually, that article was from the Chicago Times, referring to a study done by the Washington Post.
 
Total demographic populations have NOTHING to do with police<->community interactions.

Trying to provide a police/community interaction statistic (2.5x more likely to be shot if black) without taking ANY factors into consideration except total population is not only intellectually dishonest but also total bullshit.

That fact can't be provided to you in any more of a simple format.



That's because it wasn't confirmation bias provided by your Salon echo chamber so you of course totally ignored it.

Not any easier or faster than googling it yourself.

That study was not conducted by a genuine black guy because he can't possibly be a genuine black guy and come up with the opposite conclusion that he had originally hypothesised when he began the study.

He, like Oreo, had been exposed to the fact-free narrative bolstered by the meaningless nose count. When he actually applied statistical method and fpund the narrative to be demonstrably false, he should not have published the study.
 
Actually, that article was from the Chicago Times, referring to a study done by the Washington Post.

Fine, but the "study" was done by an idiot who made false assumptions based upon irrelevant shit.

Either you think community/police interactions fall along total population demographic percentages like the idiot who conducted said "study" or you realize cops don't interact with black Americans 13% of the time because they are 13% of the population and there is a whole lot more to the picture than the bullshit being presented.

Cops interact with black people, who commit the majority of violent crimes, more often, and shoot less of them.

Ignoring that fact is the only way that 13%=2.5 times more likely!! and pretty much all of the BLM bullshit flies.
 
Fine, but the "study" was done by an idiot who made false assumptions based upon irrelevant shit.

Either you think community/police interactions fall along total population demographic percentages like the idiot who conducted said "study" or you realize cops don't interact with black Americans 13% of the time because they are 13% of the population and there is a whole lot more to the picture than the bullshit being presented.

Cops interact with black people, who commit the majority of violent crimes, more often, and shoot less of them.

Ignoring that fact is the only way that 13%=2.5 times more likely!! and pretty much all of the BLM bullshit flies.

Wasted breath. I always feel like a complete idiot whenever I take oreo off of ignore so that I can follow along with a conversational thread. It always ends up meaningless gibberish.

Oreo is a lawyer in Florida where Travon Martin became the poster-boy for the original angry-up-the-black-community-that-typically-does-not-vote-and-have-suffered-disproportionately-during-the-Obama-non-recovery in order to get them to show up and, once again, vote for a guy on the color of his skin, rather than the content of his character. It sort of worked.

That morphed into the BLM movement, about cops specifically, even before it was called BLM. that was a cynical effort on the part of Democrats specifically to angry up blacks and get them to the polls in the midterm elections which historically they don't bother to vote in. That failed, and led to riots and deaths.

Oreo is well aware that Zimmerman only stood trial after prosecutorial misconduct got a reluctant grand jury to return a true bill. It only did so because the prosecutor with held exculpatory evidence, specifically clear, photographic evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. The Jury did see that and had no choice but to agree the shooting WAS warranted. The POTUS, himself a recipient of a participation trophy from, arguably, the finest law school in the nation, cast a cloud over that process and Oreo, as an officer of the court is duty-bound to renounce that. He doesn't.

Michael Brown committed suicide by cop. That was not his intention, but that shooting was necessitated by his actions. That shooting is still mentioned as if it was not 100% justified. People get their ideas about guns, violence and self defense from movies. They have no concept that even an unarmed assailant within seven yards of an armed man is a deadly threat.

Five years of this race-baiting nonsense based on correlation equaling causation, when the actual facts don't even correlate. BLM is nothing but a vehicle to shift responsibility for probkems endemic to black neighborhoods onto someone else besides the actual criminals that commit actual violent crime and the culture those criminals grew up in. It happens with that level of violence no where else in impoverished America. Not quite even in Hispanic neighborhoods we are importing machete-weilding teenage killers from El Salvador into.

Complete waste of time. Been argued ad ifinitum and those that believe Michael Brown had his hands up, despite the Obama Justice Department that desparately wanted that to be true says it was not true, STILL believe that.
 
That's because it wasn't confirmation bias provided by your Salon echo chamber so you of course totally ignored it. Because you know Salon editors are head and shoulders above Harvard when it comes to research. :rolleyes:

Not any easier or faster than googling it yourself, if I spoon feed you again you'll just ignore it and ask me again next week.

I understand. There is, in fact, no Harvard study.
 
I understand. There is, in fact, no Harvard study.

https://www.google.com/url?q=http://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/main-july_2016.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiRuanE1ZvSAhUpi1QKHb1UAYgQFggcMAY&usg=AFQjCNFABcNFgcqB1KcCDWGTGNBHzW4NMg

Now two choices.

Google for confirmation bias and find Snopes or The Washington Post to "debunk" the study without addressing the actual statistical analysis found therin, because liberals don't do actual maths, else they wouldn't be liberals...

Or. . . as you usually do, slink away and "win" another fight, another day.

Speaking of which, I see you chose not to address your complete moral bankruptcy with regards to what should be your professional ethics regarding respect for the due process of law.

Which makes you both a coward and a hypocrite.
 
Last edited:
Hate and rage in the form of protest is replacing the award party in Hollywood.


I just cannot get enough of this shit!
 

Interesting. This study finds blacks and Hispanics are at no greater risk than whites from lethal force by the police -- but are 50% more likely to encounter non-lethal force.

You must admit they have a legitimate beef, even if it's not the one they think they have. Black Injuries Matter.
 
You must admit they have a legitimate beef

Only if I'm interested in maintaining the social justice narrative.

For those of us who do not ignore the rest of the story to maintain that narrative it's pretty fucking obvious why that is.

Behavior.....

It matters, no matter how unbelievably DESPERATE you and the other social justice warriors out there are to pretend it has nothing to do with it because the USA is just so fucking evil and racist with all it's whiteness.

even if it's not the one they think they have. Black Injuries Matter.

Right........try not acting like assholes, might solve that issue.
 
Back
Top