I don’t – I just want to find out how that 6x change affects it, and whether there might be other factors involved.
Same here, but it’s much harder to understand how a 13x change can lead to a 14,000x change across societies of millions. It’s still possible, but why would I just accept this without any further questions or curiosity? Are you really advocating that it’s unreasonable to posit that maybe other things might be involved, and it might be worth the time to look into it?
Then why do you think it’s possible that they don’t? I think it’s possible that they don’t because historically many factors have been involved and I know of no other society-wide disparities in which one factor around 13x leads to another factor of 14,000x.
I think I’ve explained it multiple times, but you just don’t like my explanation. Which is weird, because you also seem to believe that there’s a possibility that other factors are involved. And again, we both agree that the difference in guns and gun violence is certainly involved – it just may not be the entire 100% story with no other factors involved at all.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you have ruled out socioeconomic disadvantage and historical interpersonal and systemic racism. You’ve argued that other race groups (middle aged Chinese women, for example) are different.
So, what is your etiological model you use to explain your conclusion that black men are more violent?
Blacks are disproportionately attacked by white cops and white racists, and get worse outcomes (sentencing, etc.) throughout the American justice system. Google Charleston church massacre or Tamir Rice if you didn’t know this. Blacks are discriminated against in hiring, schooling, and even have their voting rights denied.
Can you guess any reason why some young blacks might become violent? Come on, Steophbot, we’re rooting for you: IBM’s Watson-bot would deduce the answer immediately.
I think it’s highly relevant that none of the people screaming bloody murder over Rice’s death are able to answer the question. Is it because you know you’d pull the trigger in that situation, just like anyone else with any self-preservation instinct? I can see why you wouldn’t want to admit that - can’t let facts get in the way of the Cause and all.
No, it’s because your hypothetical has nothing to do with the actual real-world Rice shooting, and we’re not interested in wasting time on your cop shooting fantasies.
If it has nothing to do with the real-world Rice shooting, then you should be able to answer the question without worrying about the harm your Cause will suffer.
…says the guy who wouldn’t free slaves at little/no risk to himself, who believes that MLK Jr.'s civil disobedience was wrong, and who believes that the only fucking morally correct actions for a slave in the pre-1860s US was to obey their master. I don’t think you’re capable of recognizing irrationality, and your constant lying (or inability to see the truth) about the dishonesty/false-statements of the officers involved in the Rice shooting demonstrates your lack of the ability to recognize dishonesty as well.
No. I wouldn’t have driven the car up within feet of Rice, and I wouldn’t have shot a child ‘armed’ with a toy before the car even fully stopped. And then I wouldn’t have lied about it afterwards.
I’m willing to acknowledge that my understanding of the world requires me to accept things that I find distasteful. Are you that capable of realizing that just because you don’t like the idea of a cop shooting an unarmed person, that doesn’t mean that it must be inherently wrong and unjustifiable?
You don’t seem to be able to accept that the real world doesn’t conform perfectly to your chosen morality.
If I’m lying, then answer the question and prove that I’m lying. Since you won’t answer, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that you know the Rice shooting was justified and don’t want to admit it.
Your understanding of the world is entirely skewed and leads you to choosing options that are morally terrible and anathema to good human behavior and good treatment of your fellow humans. And further, you didn’t say anything about what was distasteful in those quotes – you just said you wouldn’t free slaves (both out of cowardice and because you believe it would be wrong), that MLK Jr. was wrong to break the law in civil disobedience, and that the only morally correct way for a slave to behave is to fucking obey their masters. That’s what you said – nothing about what you found distasteful.
Yes, and this is entirely irrelevant since I’ve never stated that all shootings of unarmed people are wrong and unjustifiable.
Nope, but you’re incapable of accepting that obeying the law can occasionally be the morally incorrect thing to do, or that it’s possible that there might be a problem in how police officers behave and approach some situations, or any number of other things that most humans seem to have no problem understanding.
I’ve answered it, liar (“…I wouldn’t have shot a child…”). You’re incapable of finding any ‘logical conclusion’ for anything regarding this topic, you slavery-apologist.
So what you’re saying is that if you were a patrol cop who got a call that a young man had been seen brandishing a firearm in a park, and you confronted him and ordered him to show his hands, and he appeared to reach for a device tucked into his waistband that appeared to be a firearm, you wouldn’t shoot?