You are a smart, capable, likeable, and talented person who will, no doubt, succeed at swaying the minds of those who disagree with you, using nothing but facts and logic.
Could someone who hasn’t put dumberassie on ignore let me know if his comments above are worth uncovering/reading? Or is it just the same old shit, where he refers back to something stupid he’s said as if it’s genius, and anyone who doesn’t get it or moves for clarification is supposed to be the one in error?
Not that I want to hijack this thread on how ZPG_Zealot is also a racist turd–I definitely think BigT is onto something there, and she’s absolutely worthy of pitting on her own demerits. In fact, @damuriajashi, I’ll tell you what. Take it to your own pit thread and maybe I’ll actually read what you have to say deign to glance at your latest steaming pile.
Maybe.
I decalred the pro-publica “research” to be bullshit because they didn’t actually do any research of any math. They looked for and found the alrgest disparirty they could find between black deaths and white deaths and pronounced it as proof of something. When it’s barely even evidence of that thing.
I declared the pro-publica statement to be meaningless in the face of peer reviewed studies that directly address the issue.
You cannot judge an argument based on facts that were not known at the time.
The study being cited does not seem to correct for the sort of things that might affect the use of deadly force. It merely provides simple ratios between black deaths and white deaths. Simple ratios may be useful in a public health research paper but don’t seem particularly new or helpful to this conversation (where I thought we were talking about the racist drivers behind the excess black deaths) even if they are useful to public health conversations.
I am open to the notion that cops are willing to kill black men more easily than white men and peer reviewed studies show that cops are willing to use excessive force against black men more frequently than white men. But the notion that a “study” by pro-publica of 36 deaths establishes something that can counter a peer reviewed study seems like a stretch.
For those who prefer bitter truths to sweet lies.
Woosh!
Basically it is, still thinks that the uncertainties of the past are good to declare studies as being bullshit, science does not work that way, even studies that claim to counter another do not make something true when more research is needed, and other studies have come that even where on the news. News that the demurer guy has missed too.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793
We use data on police-involved deaths to estimate how the risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States varies across social groups. We estimate the lifetime and age-specific risks of being killed by police by race and sex. We also provide estimates of the proportion of all deaths accounted for by police use of force. We find that African American men and women, American Indian/Alaska Native men and women, and Latino men face higher lifetime risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. We find that Latina women and Asian/Pacific Islander men and women face lower risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. Risk is highest for black men, who (at current levels of risk) face about a 1 in 1,000 chance of being killed by police over the life course. The average lifetime odds of being killed by police are about 1 in 2,000 for men and about 1 in 33,000 for women. Risk peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for all groups. For young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death.
Oh yes I can, the words you miss on purpose are: “more research is needed”. And when more research is done one has to agree with what Buck also said, you could had been correct that it was biased but more research was needed to confirm that it was bullshit as you said, now we can say that he was more on the money than you.
Well, I do declare!!!
To bad you didn’t actually use any reason, logic, or facts to back up your declarations. Just assertions.
It is a bit funny that you are taking your ignorance that when people say average, they almost always are talking about the mean, and projecting that onto another poster. It was bad enough the first time that you fucked that up, but you have doubled and tripled down on your ignorance at this point
Anyway, this thread is about how ZPG_Zealot uses slurs on a regular basis whenever she feels it would be the most harmful thing that she can do. Did you have any comments on that? Or are you just picking this as your place to smear shit on your face and then complain about the smell?
Are there any studies that take into account number of arrests or criminal convictions in looking at police killings? In other words, are the police more likely to kill black men when they are arresting them, or are they just more likely to be arresting black men? That makes quite a difference when it comes to fixing the problem.
My understanding of how it comes out is that black people and white people are about as equal to be shot per encounter.
However, black people are significantly more likely to be brutalized, whether or not there is an arrest, per encounter.
And black people have more encounters with the police than white people do. There is evidence that there is a bias in how those who are picked by the police with whom to have an encounter.
For instance:
This encounter was chosen entirely by the police. The passenger of the lyft did nothing wrong, other than to resist arrest, which they defined as him struggling to breathe as they were choking him out.
IMHO one has to look also at the close calls, on that the numbers do not make the police better either. And that is because researchers also noticed how biased police are in not reporting their abuses.
So, other ways are used to gain a better picture:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z
“We have enough evidence that tells us that action needs to be taken,” says Justin Nix, a criminologist at the University of Nebraska Omaha. “One thousand deaths a year does not have to be normal.” Since Nature reported last September on what the data say about racial bias and police killings, new evidence has continued to support a link. Data from California show that police stopped and used force against Black people disproportionately, compared with other racial groups, in 2018 (see go.nature.com/2bgfrah). A December 2019 paper reported that bias in police administrative records results in many studies underestimating levels of racial bias in policing, or even masking discrimination entirely3.
Scientists must often think creatively to work around the limitations in the data. Mark Hoekstra, an economist at Texas A&M University in College Station, has attempted to decipher the role of race in police officers’ use of force, by comparing responses to emergency calls.
Based on information from more than two million 911 calls in two US cities, he concluded that white officers dispatched to Black neighbourhoods fired their guns five times as often as Black officers dispatched for similar calls to the same neighbourhoods [4] (see ‘Answering the call’).
And the earlier cite I made mentioned this:
George Floyd, meanwhile, is one of 44 people that Minneapolis police rendered unconscious with neck restraints in the last five years, according to an NBC News analysis of police records, and three-fifths of them were Black. The Minneapolis police define “neck restraints” as any time an officer uses an arm or a leg to press someone’s neck without directly pressuring the airway.
It does. And the answer is either (a) “No, they’re not more likely to be arresting black men,” in which case, that’s pretty damming evidence against the police for shooting and killing them so much more often than they ought to just going by proportions, or (b), “Yes, they are more likely to be arresting black men.” In which case we go down this rabbit hole:
Q: “Why are the police more likely to be arresting black men?”
A: “Because that’s where all the crime is!”
Q: “How do we know that’s where all the crime is?”
A: “Because that’s where all the arrests are being made!”
And then it becomes wickedly circular. The failure to really follow that rabbit hole–to just stop at “Because that’s where all the crime is!”–is where and why scientific racism isn’t really scientific. Scientific racism never survives more than a surface-deep intrusion into the underlying “facts.” The more people like dumberassie try and use “statistics” to make their point, the more they demonstrate they don’t understand statistics. As evidenced by not grasping the importance of, if one means to specify a median, actually calling it a median, as opposed to an average, because anyone who actually “gets” statistics would understand that (1) absent context, average is generally taken to be referring to a mean, and (2) there is a more than trivial difference between mean and median, particularly when discussing what elite colleges and law schools report as part of their rankings.
But, again, scientific racists can’t think that far ahead. They just grab whatever numbers they see that they think will support their case, and then plaster them on the page without really understanding what those numbers might actually say if one bothered to look into them.
And, again, if dumbasserie wants to be educated on the subject, I’d be happy to to help if he just acknowledges and posts in his own pit thread, which is where he belongs.
And of course he’s another dumbass probably-sock who couldn’t remember which throwaway e-mail address he used to setup the account.
Nothing wrong with a fortune teller, exactly, we had a roomie back in the mid 90s that worked for Psychic Friends network as one of their tarot readers - she could do a cold reading that was frightening, and she never claimed to be psychic, just reading the cards as they fell. We ended up knowing a few other readers, and in general they just sort of did platitudes [take care of your physical self, take care of your mental self, don’t let people force you to change to be with them, don’t force anybody to change to be with you … stuff like that]
Now if you start helping people contact the dead, and charging seriously large amounts of money, and recommending investments, then you are probably a fraud and should be stopped.
Don’t hold back ASL_v2.0! Tell us what you really think! /s 
Sad, but not unexpected that the Slacker also came to praise the same guy here that also thinks that torture does work after using cites from SERE training that were not about real conditions and the ones working for that training denounced the use of that training as a way to justify the use of torture for intelligence gathering. The demurer guy ended declaring victory even after being shown that the ones that worked on the examples he used to support his view came up saying that “torture does not work”.
I believe that ZPG Zealot is sincere in her bigotries, but I seriously doubt half the things she’s claimed to have done about them, if only because doing them would make her a complete social pariah, and she claims to have many friends.
As the professional statistician in question, here was my final word on the subject.
Or in other words both studies are right, they were just looking for different things.
But Damuriajashi has his own pit thread that this discussion can hang out in. I don’t see any reason he has to monopolize this one.
As to discrimination against Romani that ZPG zealot has experienced. I have no doubt that many people she encounters do not treat her well, but I suspect that this has more to do with her being a paranoid misandrist who doesn’t understand the basics of modern civility. But its much easier for her to blame it on racism.
Thank you Buck!
To @damuriajashi, the shame you’re probably feeling will wash over and end someday. It’s okay. Everyone’s wrong sometimes. It’s probably a hard pill to swallow to realize you were just dismissing data you didn’t like, but accepting this and learning from it will help you become a better person. Best wishes on your recovery!
That’s highly unfortunate. But there seem to be quite a few alternatives to try short of abolishing the police and starting again. Hard to believe they are still using choke holds at this point, and on camera too. Impunity is the word that comes to mind.
There are other ways to find out who is committing crimes. You could look at eyewitness statements describing the race of the perpetrator, for crimes where that would be applicable. And compare crime rates in different regions with the demographics of those areas. Or do you not trust recorded crime data either?
There sure are. I wish the scientific racists all the luck in the world as they continue on their voyages of self-discovery (because at the end of the day, I seem to learn more about them than they do about anyone or anything else, every time they put forth a “study”). As it stands, I’m happy to fail to reject the null hypothesis. That is, whatever you think is connected with race or genes, I maintain a position of disbelief until such time as the evidence is actually there to support an affirmative belief. Every time “evidence” is presented which scientific racists think supports their conclusion–some kind of a causal link–I find it easily undermined by closer examination. Which gets to be telling after a time, though obviously not “conclusive.” But, again, I don’t need to draw a conclusion: I’m happy to just reject whatever nonsense the racist trolls are spouting today.
TIL there are people who think crime stats are scientific racism.
If that’s what you learned today, then you have failed. The lesson that you could have taken is not to just look at stats without analysis, because they may lead you to make unjustified conclusions.
Unfortunately, it was not today that I learned that there are people like you who will make little snide and fallacious assertions like that because they have no other leg to stand on. I seem to learn that everyday.