refreshingly honest
you can't just not drop a /s after that
refreshingly honest
you can't just not drop a /s after that
no sarcasm. it's nice when bigoted cunts like the writer show their ass.
Yeah, the usual with this topic.Also it feels like it's simply making point's against arguments that no one is making.
Assuming this is true, putting aside individual incidents and considering the average, doesn't this suggest that police officers are already being overly cautious and not engaging when they should have?Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police.
I agree, but you could've made that point without baiting posters into thinking you're agreeing with the article, right?no sarcasm. it's nice when bigoted cunts like the writer show their ass.
Can you elaborate? I don't understand.
And I corrected 'write' to 'right'
Overall, this article is a mess of cherry picked statistics. But there is one line I found worthy of discussion:
Assuming this is true, putting aside individual incidents and considering the average, doesn't this suggest that police officers are already being overly cautious and not engaging when they should have?
If your view is that this is a systemic problem across all police, what would an acceptable ratio be? If police were to be more cautious in engaging suspects, would it be ok for 3.5 officers to be killed for every black suspect killed? 4.5?
I agree, but you could've made that point without baiting posters into thinking you're agreeing with the article, right?
No big deal, just saying, these types of threads can get heated enough on their own, no need to stir shit.
She won't have far to go - the WSJ is a News Corp. property just as Fox News is.Got to pad that Fox News application.
It's because of all that "super-predator" garbage of the early '90s, which coalesced into "black kids aren't kids! they're miniature adults!"Black people, especially black men are seen as aggressive and threatening. Even at a young age black children are seen as older and face school punishment at a higher rate then other children. There been cases where a cop beat a young boy cause the boy looked at him wrong.
First off police dying in droves is a myth.Overall, this article is a mess of cherry picked statistics. But there is one line I found worthy of discussion:
Assuming this is true, putting aside individual incidents and considering the average, doesn't this suggest that police officers are already being overly cautious and not engaging when they should have?
If your view is that this is a systemic problem across all police, what would an acceptable ratio be? If police were to be more even cautious before engaging suspects, would it be ok for 3.5 officers to be killed for every black suspect killed? 4.5?
The statistic does seem hard to believe, which is why I said assuming it was accurate.
From what I understand, she's saying a police officer is more likely to consider himself in danger while confronting a black suspect as opposed to whites or hispanics because 6000 white on white deaths are a much smaller number coz whites are a majority and 6000 black on black deaths is much bigger as there are much fewer black people than white people.
I'm not saying that she's right or you're wrong, I'm just trying to understand her point. It makes sense for an officer to feel more threatened when they're told that 17% of the country's population has more homicides than the 60% majority. (I'm sorry if my numbers are wrong.)
I understand. Black people aren't biologically any more violent than any other race, and a lot of crime is because of the system and the situations that these communities are placed in. However, while this explains black on black crime, the point about an officer feeling more threatened in crime ridden areas and more likely to use force also makes sense, doesn't it?
Pretty surprising to me that more cops die from shootings than from auto accidents considering how much time they spend in cars on highways.
I saw this today and was pretty dumbfounded. It's probably the most racist and downright infuriating article I've ever seen posted on a mainstream news publication.
Edit: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myths-of-black-lives-matter-1455235686
I'm going to selectively bold some of the parts that stood out to me, and I'm going to insert some commentary in certain places.
This is interesting because right from the start this article, written by a white woman, is telling you that black people's lived experience is wrong. I think the applicable term might be whitesplaining? This goes beyond that though.
Funny statistics for the win. We can make the numbers tell a completely different story by changing what we use for the denominator. Of course now we're measuring something completely different and barely even related to what BLM is all about, but why should that stop us?
That last part is great. It's like a 12 year old getting killed for holding a toy gun is justified because minority communities are more dangerous.
Here's the one part of the entire article that has some merit, and it's buried near the end.
So here we've got victim blaming. We shouldn't be angry that people like Tamir Rice, Eric Garner or Freddie Gray were needlessly killed by police; we should really be blaming black culture.
I can't even deal with this crap. I feel like establishment conservatism has dropped all pretense of not being racist. The right is going fucking nuts.
I completely understand what she's getting at but understanding those statistics at all still don't justify the situation at hand. Ok so let's say I can understand that the police have a false perception of black violence due to their minority population compared to the majority. And I can understand the idea of being more cautious in a crime ridden area. That however has nothing to do with the larger conversation about the response to a situation in which an unarmed civilian is in fact killed by an officer. Their own false perceptions about how much more violent they believe blacks might be should not excuse that response of deadly force when unwarranted and certainly not aquitalls of offending officers that have killed unarmed black men and women.
And honestly, as entities designed to work with a community they should have a better grasp on these very statistics enough to know that a minority community will falsely seem more violent than the majority so any fear that "blacks are more dangerous" should be unfounded in an officer's mind.
The article itself is bad enough, but the WSJ editorial blurb at the top somehow makes it all worse. So Eric Garner and Tamir Rice and John Crawford II are "myths" and "fiction", WSJ editors?
Shit is garbage.
Those were black lives that mattered, and it is a scandal that outrage is heaped less on the dysfunctional culture that produces so many victims than on the police officers who try to protect them.
Pretty surprising to me that more cops die from shootings than from auto accidents considering how much time they spend in cars on highways.