Fight Globalism And Racial Hysteria Created By The Media.

@SW-User [quote]totally the fault of the media for exaggerated reporting and being either too dishonest or too afraid to discuss and report the facts. [/quote]

Can you give me examples of what you mean?

@Pherick Sure, this idea that there are deep-seated issues of racism in the police which is leading to a "genocide" of black Americans. It's just not true. And the media have ran with the story, which has further stressed the friction between LEO and civilian interactions.

The truth is, most studies find no racial bias in police related deaths when looking at the raw data. It's simply a narrative being pushed by BLM which most of the media is either too dishonest or too afraid to challenge.

This isn't to say there aren't any issues of systemic racism in America; I'm certain there are and I have my opinions on what they are. But we have to be able to honestly discuss the data, which is something we're not currently able to do.

@SW-User I would invite you to post those studies that you claim find no racial bias.

@Pherick Absolutely fine, but we have to be careful with what we're discussing here - specifically, the use of deadly force which is the big claim by BLM and the media.

A paper called "An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force" by Harvard economist Roland Fryer concludes in relation to deadly force:

[quote]...on the most extreme use of force - officer-involved shootings – we are unable to detect any racial differences in either the raw data or when accounting for controls.[/quote]

Another paper called "Officer characteristics and racial disparities in fatal
officer-involved shootings" by David Johnson et al concludes:

[quote]We did not find evidence for anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparity in police use of force across all shootings, and, if anything, found anti-White disparities when controlling for race-specific crime. While racial disparity did vary by type of shooting, no one type of shooting showed significant anti-Black or -Hispanic
disparity[/quote]

Now, all these studies will admit that these conclusion aren't "absolute" in that new data can always change certain conclusions, but it's very unlikely based on current studies that this "genocidal" use of force will magically appear somewhere these studies haven't already looked.

I will look these over, but one thing to note while BLM and the media do talk about the killing of POC by officers, they MANY other issues, including the day to day discrimination that they face and the killings, even recently like Floyd, that do not include a gun.

They are also very upset that when these killings do occur, the officers in charge seem to get away with no punishment even when its very blatant that they acted outside the scope of their offices.

@Pherick There's a total double standard here you're not addressing. You said:

[quote]the officers in charge seem to get away with no punishment [/quote]

Really? That's why all 4 officers involved with the death of George Floyd are currently facing the maximum sentence, including the rookie LEO who had little involvement.

Compare this to the case of Tony Timpa - a white man who was killed in the exact same way as George Floyd (knee to the neck for an excessive period of time). The officers involved even cracked jokes whilst they were doing it (all on camera). Tony didn't commit a crime - he called the police himself as he was off his medication, was acting erratically, and afraid of what he was going to do. He was cuffed by a security guard before police arrived.

No officer involved in that arrest faced criminal charges (one of those officers was a black American).

The point I'm making is; sure, there are cases where it seems clear to us that officers should face charges where they don't. But that's not a race issue, it's an accountability of law enforcement issue.

[quote]that do not include a gun[/quote]

Irrelevant. Police in the USA face the unenviable task of policing a public with 390 million guns in circulation. Every interaction an LEO has with the public carries the very real threat that a firearm will come into play.

The problem is that a lot of people just don't know how to be arrested. Rayshard Brookes is the perfect example; just because he didn't have a gun on his person doesn't mean he wasn't and didn't become a threat. Watch the video and you'll understand.

You're essentially arguing that black Americans should fear for their lives from police, and the truth is there's no justification for that (as the studies conclude). And the reason that this idea pervades our media is because BLM and proponents of BLM often don't allow honest conversation.

@SW-User The only reason the officers in Floyd's death were charged was because of the HUGE uprising from BLM and citizens over his death.

The death of the other man you mentioned, who I do not know, just means that apparently we white folk didn't care about him enough to really get upset.

Holy shit, did you just imply that Rayshard Brookes deserved to die because he "didn't know how to be arrested"? I mean that is just about as fucking racist as it gets man. He was NO threat to police officers and yet he was shot in the back. I have watched that video more times than I should have, just to try and understand why that officer gunned down an unarmed man. Its vile and disgusting.

You know what, I am going to continue to listen to all the POC I know when they tell me that there IS a reason they should fear for their lives when it comes to the police. Studies have certainly NOT concluded you are correct, you just put out two very focused studies. Two studies, about focus topics, do not a winning argument make.

Your line of arguments honestly disgusts me quite a bit. There doesn't seem to be any honesty in your line of arguments, you just want BLM and POC to be quiet and you have found a few studies that you think backs that up. Just because YOU think the media and BLM is being loud about a problem, that you claim doesn't really affect them.

@Pherick [quote]The only reason the officers in Floyd's death were charged[/quote]

Sorry friend, but you can't make that assumption. It's totally reasonable to argue that, with the amount of public footage of the incident and the egregious use of force displayed, at least Derek Chauvin would have been charged regardless. I ultimately don't know if they would've got off scot-free had BLM not got involved - we can't know that.

[quote]did you just imply that Rayshard Brookes deserved to die[/quote]

Not what I said, and you know that. No one "deserves" to die, but when you resist arrest, tackle an officer, steal his taser and run - we shouldn't be surprised that deadly force is used, regardless of whether it was ultimately necessary. My point is, the time to protest an arrest isn't during the arrest, it's afterwards with your lawyer present. The fact you can call me racist over this fairly innocuous statement is baffling to me.

[quote]Studies have certainly NOT concluded you are correct[/quote]

I have four studies which conclude that based on the available data, there's no correlation between race and police related shootings. One of these studies was carried out by a black American (the Harvard economist). Does his voice not matter? The fact you'd rather ignore facts and listen to anecdotes just proves my point - people are incapable of frank and open discussion, which will only worsen our current predicament.

[quote]There doesn't seem to be any honesty in your line of arguments[/quote]

Let's be real for a moment, Pherick - the only one of us being honest about the data right now is me, you know, the guy who is actually looking at the data and not buying into media sensationalism. You're more than happy to disregard very detailed studies into the issue. How is that not wholly unreasonable?

[quote]BLM is being loud about a problem[/quote]

People should be vocal about racism - but we need to be precise about what those problems are, and be able to demonstrate them if we're going to have any chance in remedying them.

It's really difficult to make things better, but really easy to make things worse, and currently all we've done is make things worse. The fact you imply I'm a racist is the perfect example of how we're dividing ourselves unnecessarily. There's no way you can believe I'm racist, but the fact you'd so quickly use that term to shut down and open and honest conversation is the real problem, Pherick.

@SW-User [quote]Sorry friend, but you can't make that assumption.[/quote]

Its not an assumption, you said it yourself, the white guy who died, the police weren't charged, so why where the white officers with FLoyd? Whats different? Oh a huge protest by BLM, thats what different. Your own statement confirmed what I said.

[quote]but when you resist arrest, tackle an officer, steal his taser and run - we shouldn't be surprised that deadly force is used, regardless of whether it was ultimately necessary.[/quote]

100% WRONG. You should be shocked and upset that lethal force was used in this case. Brookes was a danger to NO ONE. He was gunned down while running away. Was what he did stupid? Sure was, did he deserve to die? FUCK NO.

[quote]I have four studies which conclude that based on the available data[/quote]

You posted two studies about bias in gun deaths, nothing more. The race of person doing the study doesn't matter, and you bringing that up just shows me you are trying to twist the data and facts to make it seem like "oH look we have a black guy on our side, so we must be OK". That is not OK debate tool.

[quote]The fact you imply I'm a racist is the perfect example of how we're dividing ourselves unnecessarily. There's no way you can believe I'm racist, but the fact you'd so quickly use that term to shut down and open and honest conversation is the real problem, Pherick.[/quote]

I never called or implied you were a racist, interesting thats were you take the conversation. My whole point was that you were using a few points of data, to try and put down the entire BLM movement.

I also find it interesting that we are having alot of needed conversations about race, about privilege about all the things wrong with policing in our country and you think that is making things worse?

@SW-User I also wanted to give you some data of my own. Here is an amazing piece by the Washington Post. It has tons of studies backing up police bias is a wide variety of different looks on the subject.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/opinions/systemic-racism-police-evidence-criminal-justice-system/

It actually even has a section for dissenting opinions, with the study I believe you mentioned. It says this about it.

[quote]In 2016, the New York Times reported a working paper (i.e., not peer-reviewed) by Harvard’s Roland G. Fryer Jr. found that though there was evidence of racial bias in how and when police generally use force, there was no evidence of bias when it came to police shootings. F[b]ryer later criticized the way his study had been reported,[/b] and critics (including me) pointed out several limitations to his study.[/quote]

@Pherick

[quote]so why where the white officers with FLoyd?[/quote]

It's entirely situational. Your claim is they wouldn't have faced justice otherwise - you simply cant know that. It's possible Chauvin would have been charged regardless, it's possible he wouldn't have. It's unfalsfiable at this point.

[quote]Was what he did stupid? Sure was, did he deserve to die? FUCK NO. [/quote]

He didn't deserve to die, I've already agreed. But it's clear there was a way Rayshard could have navigated that situation which would have avoided that use of deadly force (i.e. comply with the arrest and challenge it with a lawyer afterwards).

The moment anyone, regardless of ethnicity, resists arrests and overpowers an officer, they are increasing the chances that an officer will have to discharge his weapon. Me and you both agree we want to avoid that, so understanding the best way to interact with police to maintain peace is paramount, and part of that is knowing how to be arrested.

Another part is better police training - LEO's aren't suitably trained to deal with the huge variation of interactions they're going to have with the public. It's a demanding and stressful profession, and as I've already said, with the added risk that they don't know who's armed, what they're mental state is, what danger they might be in etc.

[quote]I never called or implied you were a racist[/quote]

Sorry, Pherick, it may not have been your intention, but you did. Your comment was "[i]I mean that is just about as fucking racist as it gets man[/i]" - I take that to mean you believe my comment came from a place of racism. It didn't, and this is worth clarifying.

Agreed, Roland Fryers study shouldn't be taken in isolation, which I've already said, hence why I can provide another 3 studies with differing scopes, abstracts and methods which reach similar conclusions.

My point is this; BLM (for all the good that they have enacted and are capable of enacting) and the left leaning media is pushing a narrative which they haven't demonstrated, and is in fact very damaging. There are real issues of institutional racism that need to be addressed, but instead we're chasing our tails with a false narrative. And if anyone questions that narrative, they're branded a racist.

It's possible for proponents of BLM to hold positions worthy of criticism, just as everyone else.

[quote]we are having alot of needed conversations about race[/quote]

We're not though, that's the issue. Violence, cancel culture, social media acting as judge and jury - these are tools being used to systematically shut down conversation on both ends of the spectrum. Just because you and I are having a conversation now, doesn't mean this is common place.

@SW-User [quote]It's entirely situational. Your claim is they wouldn't have faced justice otherwise - you simply cant know that.[/quote]

Perhaps, but its certainly possible to find quite a bit of evidence that would suggest cops are not held to account when they kill someone in the line of duty. It would seem to me that the evidence shows this happens more to Blacks than whites, but it happens. So its not unbelievable to think that those police officers would have gotten away with this without the large BLM and other various protests.

[quote]But it's clear there was a way Rayshard could have navigated that situation which would have avoided that use of deadly force[/quote]

I am not sure what to say here this still seems, to me, that you are trying to put his death out of the hands of the cops. I agree that his arrest and flight were not good ideas, but we give police the power of life and death. They should always be using that power in a controlled manner. A man fleeing from you, without a weapon, is never a case for a weapon discharge.

Police take their jobs knowing exactly what they are in for on a day to day basis. That cannot be a surprise to them. They take it for many reasons, they want to help their communities, they want to protect people etc. However there always are bad apples, people who want the job perhaps for good reasons at first, but then get a taste of power and feel like they are above us. That no citizen should ever criticize or say no to them. That is not their job.

They do not get to look at a fleeing man, and decide, "He didn't listen to me, I get to kill him now".

[quote]Sorry, Pherick, it may not have been your intention, but you did. Your comment was "I mean that is just about as fucking racist as it gets man" - I take that to mean you believe my comment came from a place of racism. It didn't, and this is worth clarifying.[/quote]

Perhaps I should clarify. I think your comment came from a place of ignorance and systemic racism. [quote]You're essentially arguing that black Americans should fear for their lives from police, and the truth is there's no justification for that (as the studies conclude).[/quote] This quote is pretty clear. You are not Black, you have no idea what Black people go through on a regular basis, and I have a feeling you haven't actually sat down with many of them and asked if your statement is true. I think BLM quite clearly says they do fear from the police, and as I pointed out, your studies are very focused and perhaps not even 100% interpreted correctly (as the author of one even states).

My point here is that making assumptions for all POC because you have seen some studies, is a very ignorant thing to do. It implies that POC are lying and that their stories and feeling don't matter. I would rather ask my Black friends, (which I have) and listen to BLM. They are the truth of the situation for me. Myself, as white as they come, my white friends and family have had nasty run-ins with police, in cases where there was nothing on the line, an accident or report being made. So I have no problem believing BLM and friends on their reports that police treat them differently.

[quote]Violence, cancel culture, social media acting as judge and jury[/quote]
When I hear someone say "cancel culture" I will be honest I have to laugh. Its just not a thing. You know what it is? Its a boycott, its a time-honored capitalistic tool for a group of people to influence businesses. The right uses it CONSTANTLY. Yet I only hear it called "cancel culture" when people see other groups boycotting something they think shouldn't be boycotted.

I am not even sure what violence you are referring here to? Are their protests yes, have their been incidents of violence at some of them? Yes, usually when overwhelming force is used on what started as peaceful protests. However, 5% of violence doesn't negate or diminish the 95% of protests which are not violent.

At the end of the day, this is probably a moot point. I don't think your ideas about the current situation are correct and you aren't going to change my mind. I don't think I am going to change your mind. All I ask is that you read some of what I posted. Try and empathize with POC. Put yourself in their shoes, try and see the world through their eyes, be an ally.

Thats all I can ask.

@Pherick Agree to disagree on the first point.

[quote]They should always be using that power in a controlled manner. [b]A man fleeing from you, without a weapon, is never a case for a weapon discharge.[/b][/quote]

The above comment simply isn't true. Rayshard [b]was[/b] armed and I argue the responding officers reacted in a justifiable manner. Rayshard resisted a valid arrest (he was driving whilst literally blackout drunk). He overpowered an officer and gave him a concussion, he stole the officer's stun gun and discharged it once, he went to flee [b][i]but[/i][/b] then turned and discharged the weapon again toward the pursuing officer.

There's something called the "use of force continuum" which LEO's are taught (including at the Atlanta police academy) - essentially, you always need to be one level above the assailant . For instance, if someone assaults you unarmed, you should deploy mace or your taser. If they have a knife, a firearm etc. you should deploy your firearm.

If Rayshard managed to land a successful hit with that taser, the officer would be incapacitated for at least 5 seconds and Rayshard would have access to his firearm. In fact, a taser can kill a person if used by someone without the relevant training. So I argue that, within that very highly-charged moment, the officer acted within the continuum and had cause to discharge his firearm.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to Georgia Sheriff Alfonzo Williams - 30 years in law enforcement, 27 years teaching use of force, has trained 100's of LEO's and has shot and been shot by a taser. He rules that this shooting was totally justifiable.

[quote]I think your comment came from a place of ignorance and systemic racism. [/quote]

I've given you no reason to reach such a conclusion. You're treating me like an adversary when both of us have the same desire - to minimise inequality and injustice as much as possible. We simply disagree on the minutiae.

[quote]You are not Black, you have no idea what Black people go through[/quote]

You seem to think that listening to a few anecdotal testimonies will be sufficient to give us an adequate understanding of a problem, but I disagree. For instance, there are [b][i]millions[/i][/b] of interactions between LEO's and civilians each year, so a handful of testimonials will do very little to reveal a wider pattern in said interactions.

What we must do is analyse all the available data, look for patterns, identify where there's systemic issues, and address them. By doing this, we're taking into account [b]all[/b] experiences, not just a few anecdotes - you see, I care about every single experience, not just a handful of testimonies from my friends. And if the anecdotes are true (i.e. cops disproportionately kill unarmed black Americans) then it would become readily apparent. It, as of yet, hasn't.

I listen to a lot of black American voices on this; John McWhorter, Coleman Hughes, Thomas Sowell, Glenn Loury. These are people who for years have been raising issues surrounding systemic racism, and from whom I've learned a great deal about some of the most fundamental challenges facing black Americans today. In my opinion, we're not concentrating our efforts on the underlying issues that hold black Americans back today; that being the huge wealth disparities created as a result of Redlining and Jim Crow, which now sees black Americans 2.5x more likely to exist below the poverty line. Poverty is closely tied with many other issues facing black Americans today (i.e. crime, education, job prospects), so if we resolve one issue, it'll help at least partially in resolving others.

BLM as a movement deserves props - with its help, we're talking about universal police body cams, ending qualified immunity, and shining an ever-brighter spotlight on police interactions across the board. But it doesn't make BLM immune to criticism - it doesn't make me a racist because I call out what I think are bad ideas.

[quote]When I hear someone say "cancel culture" I will be honest I have to laugh.[/quote]

It's a name given to a legitimate phenomenon - label it whatever you like, but the idea that people can have their reputations tarnished, usually through the means of levying misinformed or entirely false allegations towards them, is a fact. Doesn't matter if you're a Democrat, a Republican or whatever - its reach is universal.