[Pants-of-dog]

Wouldn't taking the gun of one of the cops justify a violent response?

Did Mr. Nichols do that?

If not, what are you trying to say?

So? Those studies don't even distinguish between proper and improper use of force.

Are you arguing that the case of Mr. Nichols was an example of a proper use of force?

If not, do you agree that we can compare the case of Mr. Nichols to the likelihood of an improper use of force against a white person?

If so, then we can safely say that Mr. Nichols would have been. more likely to survive had he been white.

Others don't even consider what happens in cases where the encounter doesn't end with death i.e. the vast majority of police encounters.

I beg to disagree, indeed, you said as much.

This is so vague and unclear as to be useless as a criticism of my position.

[wat0n]

Did Mr. Nichols do that?

If not, what are you trying to say?

He didn't, but the cops were claiming the opposite to manufacture an excuse.

Are you arguing that the case of Mr. Nichols was an example of a proper use of force?

If not, do you agree that we can compare the case of Mr. Nichols to the likelihood of an improper use of force against a white person?

If so, then we can safely say that Mr. Nichols would have been. more likely to survive had he been white.

What's the likelihood of an improper use of force against any person? Let's start assessing that before even trying to split by race.

Statistics about police killings won't suffice because they include cases where the use of force was proper.

Literally what you're doing if you just look at a database of police killings. You need far more information than that.

This is so vague and unclear as to be useless as a criticism of my position.

The fact that they did not act with premeditation or taking race in mind in anyway definitely does.

[Pants-of-dog]

He didn't, but the cops were claiming the opposite to manufacture an excuse.

Are you saying the cops knowingly lied?

And they did so on the bodycam footage?

What's the likelihood of an improper use of force against any person? Let's start assessing that before even trying to split by race.

Statistics about police killings won't suffice because they include cases where the use of force was proper.

Literally what you're doing if you just look at a database of police killings. You need far more information than that.

Please feel free to calculate the likelihood.

Meanwhile, you seem to agree that many studies exist showing that black people are disproportionately more likely to be murdered by cops. You have objections to these studies that may or not be true or relevant.

The fact that they did not act with premeditation or taking race in mind in anyway definitely does.

No, because systemic racism does not require premeditation.

And again, the only way they took race into mind was to assume they would get away with it because Mr. Nichols is black.

[wat0n]

Are you saying the cops knowingly lied?

And they did so on the bodycam footage?

That's what it seems.

Please feel free to calculate the likelihood.

Give me the data and I'll do it.

Meanwhile, you seem to agree that many studies exist showing that black people are disproportionately more likely to be murdered by cops. You have objections to these studies that may or not be true or relevant.

Word is "killed", murder implies the homicide is not justified.

No, because systemic racism does not require premeditation.

How so? Those policies are designed to achieve specific outcomes, they didn't just happen according to your narrative.

And again, the only way they took race into mind was to assume they would get away with it because Mr. Nichols is black.

If they indeed took race into mind. We can't say if they did, and the DA wasn't able to establish so.

[Pants-of-dog]

That's what it seems.

Were they unaware that they were being recorded?

Give me the data and I'll do it.

No, this is your argument, so I will let you do the work.

Word is "killed", murder implies the homicide is not justified.

How so? Those policies are designed to achieve specific outcomes, they didn't just happen according to your narrative.

Show how systemic racism requires premeditation. Thanks.

If they indeed took race into mind. We can't say if they did, and the DA wasn't able to establish so.

I already explained the extent to which they took race into mind.

Systemic racism is probably not illegal or under legal purview.

[wat0n]

Were they unaware that they were being recorded?

Doubt so, it comes from police cams.

No, this is your argument, so I will let you do the work.

My claim is that such dataset doesn't exist, so we don't know what percentage of the killings is justified. In fact, I think we don't even know the full extent of police killings IIRC.

Show how systemic racism requires premeditation. Thanks.

"Let's kick this guy's ass, nothing will happen to us!" implies premeditation. That also seems to be your narrative of how these cops took Nichol's race into account:

I already explained the extent to which they took race into mind.

Systemic racism is probably not illegal or under legal purview.

[Pants-of-dog]

Doubt so, it comes from police cams.

So, either they are incredibly stupid or they felt that cops would cover for them.

My claim is that such dataset doesn't exist, so we don't know what percentage of the killings is justified. In fact, I think we don't even know the full extent of police killings IIRC.

Oh. You are making an argument from ignorance.

"Let's kick this guy's ass, nothing will happen to us!" implies premeditation. That also seems to be your narrative of how these cops took Nichol's race into account:

No, this does not imply premeditation.

[wat0n]

So, either they are incredibly stupid or they felt that cops would cover for them.

I doubt they'd need that video if they thought others would cover for them.

Oh. You are making an argument from ignorance.

Not really. I'm showing you lack the data to sustain your claims. Saying "the available data is insufficient to say if X is true" isn't an argument from ignorance.

No, this does not imply premeditation.

It does, by definition

[Pants-of-dog]

I doubt they'd need that video if they thought others would cover for them.

Are you using “they” to mean two different groups of people here?

Not really. I'm showing you lack the data to sustain your claims. Saying "the available data is insufficient to say if X is true" isn't an argument from ignorance.

No. My claim is that many studies show that black people are far more likely to be killed by cops.

This is a verifiable fact that you already agree with.

What you are speculating about and have no data for is the possible criticism that most killings of black people are justified which would supposedly make things less racist.

It does, by definition

No, it does not.

[wat0n]

Are you using “they” to mean two different groups of people here?

No, I mean the 5 cops who were charged.

No. My claim is that many studies show that black people are far more likely to be killed by cops.

This is a verifiable fact that you already agree with.

What you are speculating about and have no data for is the possible criticism that most killings of black people are justified which would supposedly make things less racist.

Hold on. So if, for example, Black people were more likely to use deadly force against police and they were more likely to be killed by police specifically because of that, policing would still be racist?

Also, to say we know Black people are more likely to be killed by police implies we know what the probability of being killed in an interaction with police is, and that we can also separate by race. Have you ever considered that, for whatever reason, it is possible that African Americans interact more with police?

No, it does not.

You have yet to explain clearly how does it work. It's interesting how systemic racism is often framed in a conspirational way but now we're also supposed to believe there's no premeditation here.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, I mean the 5 cops who were charged.

Then please rewrite your point clearly.

Hold on. So if, for example, Black people were more likely to use deadly force against police and they were more likely to be killed by police specifically because of that, policing would still be racist?

I am not going to engage in racist hypotheticals.

Also, to say we know Black people are more likely to be killed by police implies we know what the probability of being killed in an interaction with police is, and that we can also separate by race. Have you ever considered that, for whatever reason, it is possible that African Americans interact more with police?

Yes, black people are often targeted by police far more than white people.

Are you going to argue this is not part of systemic racism?

You have yet to explain clearly how does it work. It's interesting how systemic racism is often framed in a conspirational way but now we're also supposed to believe there's no premeditation here.

No one frames systemic racism as a conspiracy.

You seem to be very confused about what systemic racism is and how it works.

[wat0n]

Then please rewrite your point clearly.

What is it that you didn't understand?

I am not going to engage in racist hypotheticals.

Note I never said those differences are due to race. They could be caused by many other things, such as poverty.

I'd say making unnecessary assumptions on the other hand reveals prejudice. After all, we have less and less reasons to do so given bodycams exist and we can therefore learn about the incidents and also how they started.

Yes, black people are often targeted by police far more than white people.

Are you going to argue this is not part of systemic racism?

What drives this? Is it because they are more likely to get 911 calls on Black people for the same allegation? As in, there are Karens who may call the police on a Black person but not on a White one? Or is it driven by encounters initiated at the discretion of police officers?

This is keeping in mind officers must respond to 911 calls as soon as they are made aware of them. As such, they don't have as much control over who they have to deal with as one might believe.

No one frames systemic racism as a conspiracy.

You seem to be very confused about what systemic racism is and how it works.

Right, systemic racism is a completely spontaneous phenomenon that takes places without any planning or intent.

[Pants-of-dog]

What drives this? Is it because they are more likely to get 911 calls on Black people for the same allegation? As in, there are Karens who may call the police on a Black person but not on a White one? Or is it driven by encounters initiated at the discretion of police officers?

It is almost certainly a whole host of reasons, including these two, as well as historical reasons, legacy of past laws and policies, prejudices, et cetera.

This is keeping in mind officers must respond to 911 calls as soon as they are made aware of them. As such, they don't have as much control over who they have to deal with as one might believe.

No one called 911 about Mr. Nichols. He was simply driving to his mother’s home.

And studies show black people are disproportionately targeted for traffic stops, even when accounting for other factors.

Right, systemic racism is a completely spontaneous phenomenon that takes places without any planning or intent.

How do you think it comes about?

Where does systemic racism come from?

[wat0n]

It is almost certainly a whole host of reasons, including these two, as well as historical reasons, legacy of past laws and policies, prejudices, et cetera.

That's vague though. Disentangling the contribution of each cause is important. If it's purely about calls, then the problem would not lie with the police but is a lot harder to solve. If deadly encounters are largely initiated by police officers then it is also important to know.

No one called 911 about Mr. Nichols. He was simply driving to his mother’s home.

Indeed, but then again this is a very particular case to say the least.

And studies show black people are disproportionately targeted for traffic stops, even when accounting for other factors.

Right, but it would not drive police killings if traffic stops are a minor share of encounters where force is used.

This is the kind of stuff we don't know as far as I'm aware, but should. And the data does exist, since it should come from police reports - it's up to the federal government to try to procure that information.

I think you can realize it's silly to propose policies (e.g. defunding the police, training officers differently or relying more on social workers) when we just don't have enough information.

How do you think it comes about?

Where does systemic racism come from?

It comes from prejudice, which in turn translates into policies and laws that are not given by God but designed by humans. The most heinous ones are also consciously designed to satisfy such prejudice, since when policies have disparate impacts with no justification then it's often just a matter of complaining so they will be changed (even if it doesn't happen overnight).

[Rich]

If that is how you want to justify these hundreds of unnecessary killings, feel free.

We don't have to justify anything. We are not answerable to Commies or their worm tongue fellow travellers. Over and over and over again we see what happens when lefties take over law and order. You, and I say you because its exactly the same people that were running the show during the Collectivisation of the peasantry, the great leap forward or the killing fields of Cambodia. You and your people killed 5 to 8 million people during Soviet collectivisation alone. We'll take no lectures from Commies, from apologists for fascist Cuba, on civil rights.

I will probably not agree that they can be justified, since other developed countries also do not have nearly as many “justified” killings.

Obviously, US society has some sort of other structural problems causing these killings.

Yes the USA has massive structural problems. It is a multicultural nightmare. It has a huge slave descended population, with low levels of attainment and success with high levels of criminality and violence. Past racism most certainly created this America. There is no disputing that. We can argue over the virtues or lack thereof of the traditional cultures of African societies, but the those cultures were eradicated by the slave owners. The culture that a large number of these slave descendants is terrible, even if there is a Black middle class and elite that has escaped from it. The central problem of this ethnicity is not lack of capital, its certainly not White Supremacist racism but cultural. In my view by the time that Lincoln became President it was already probably too late. America was probably irretrievable broken.

The problems of policing these high crime, high violence communities are a symptom. I don't know the details Tyre Nichols, even if he was the most law abiding citizen that ever exist, his death would still be fundamentally the result of this structural cultural problem.

[SpecialOlympian]

GET AVATARS YOU BORING WEIRDOS

LEARN TO USE THE MOST BASIC FUNCTIONS OF THIS FORUM

[wat0n]

Yes the USA has massive structural problems. It is a multicultural nightmare. It has a huge slave descended population, with low levels of attainment and success with high levels of criminality and violence. Past racism most certainly created this America. There is no disputing that. We can argue over the virtues or lack thereof of the traditional cultures of African societies, but the those cultures were eradicated by the slave owners. The culture that a large number of these slave descendants is terrible, even if there is a Black middle class and elite that has escaped from it. The central problem of this ethnicity is not lack of capital, its certainly not White Supremacist racism but cultural. In my view by the time that Lincoln became President it was already probably too late. America was probably irretrievable broken.

The problems of policing these high crime, high violence communities are a symptom. I don't know the details Tyre Nichols, even if he was the most law abiding citizen that ever exist, his death would still be fundamentally the result of this structural cultural problem.

OTOH, figures do show African Americans are finally catching up to Whites, even if at a slow pace. Cultures can be changed and, indeed, they do gradually.

This may sound unimportant but it's not, that culture you mention is not really homogeneous among African Americans. Upper middle class African Americans are radically different from those in the ghetto, and are far more similar to the rest of the upper middle class. And it's not homogenous among Whites either, those who live in the countryside are most certainly different from city dwellers and it shows electorally.

Perhaps that's what this country needs to aim for, and also understand - that the process of catching up is ongoing and cannot happen overnight, and that there's quite a lot of diversity within each race/ethnicity. The effect of the colonial years plus 150 years of independence with official discrimination (as in, with laws that explicitly discriminated against Black people in force) cannot really be undone in just a single generation. That's on top of the unofficial discrimination, which is probably far more important outside the government than within yet the fact that it exists doesn't help in any way whatsoever. In a way, African Americans are and have been treated as permanent immigrants, as if they had just immigrated even though they are as local as it gets.

And yet, as long as the trends in place ever since civil rights legislation began to be passed on the 1960s continue, African Americans will eventually catch up. And I think technologies like bodycams (by exposing misconduct by police and others against anyone, including people of color) and others can help with that, which should be good news since we're going to use more of that going forward.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

The case of Mr. Nichols is not particularly odd except in how it is being investigated. Cops stop black people all the time. Disproportionately so. Even when contraband is found more often in the possession of white people. What more information do we need before we try to stop police from killing people?

Now, how does systemic racism come about? How does it get formed by prejudice? Please specify the exact mechanisms. Thanks.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

The case of Mr. Nichols is not particularly odd except in how it is being investigated.

The fact that the cops are African American already makes it unusual.

Cops stop black people all the time. Disproportionately so. Even when contraband is found more often in the possession of white people. What more information do we need before we try to stop police from killing people?

I think I already addressed this question. I even provided you with credible mechanisms that would explain the discrepancy that do not rely on traffic stops.

Also, the difference in the likelihood of finding contraband (AKA "the outcome test") is not really the best measure of discrimination. You would actually prefer to use a threshold test as done (and explained) in Stanford's Open Policing project. By "threshold", I mean that cops will only conduct searches if they believe the likelihood of finding contraband is above a given level, you could then argue that if such threshold is different for different drivers (based on their race) then there could be discrimination against the group with the lower threshold. To use their example:

Hit rates can be misleading

Becker’s outcome test is a compelling measure of discrimination. But it’s also an imperfect barometer of bias. The test can fail to detect discrimination when it’s there and can indicate discrimination when it’s not there, as we and other researchers have observed.

For example, say police officers have a small universe of types of drivers they stop. In fact, suppose there are just two types of white drivers: some of the white drivers have a 5% likelihood of carrying contraband, and the others have a 75% chance of carrying contraband. Suppose there are also just two types of black drivers: some black drivers have a 5% chance of carrying contraband, and the others have a 50% chance of carrying contraband.

In this hypothetical world, consider a fair police officer who only searches drivers with at least a 10% chance of carrying something illegal — regardless of race. In that situation, the white hit rate would be 75% and the black hit rate would be 50%. The officer used the same standard to search each driver, and so did not discriminate, even though the hit rates differ.

Interestingly, the thresholds are universally lower for Hispanics than for non-Hispanic whites, while for African Americans it depends a lot on the jurisdiction. In some, they estimate that the threshold is lower for whites than for African Americans:



You can check the results out here:

https://openpolicing.stanford.edu/findings/

Even more importantly, this should not be a major factor in police killings since the lifetime risk of being killed by police is a lot higher for African Americans:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1821204116

Now, how does systemic racism come about? How does it get formed by prejudice? Please specify the exact mechanisms. Thanks.

Prejudice motivates the design and enactment of discriminatory policies. In a democracy, these policies will most commonly be put in place by elected officials (sometimes elected precisely because their platform is racist) but they can go as far as to be approved directly by voters.

I think that's a fair characterization of how systemic racism began in the US (even in the colonial era there was some measure of local self-government in the British continental North American colonies). Do you disagree? If so, how?

[Pants-of-dog]

The fact that the cops are African American already makes it unusual.

Not that I can see.

What percentage of police killings of black people are committed by black cops?

I think I already addressed this question. I even provided you with credible mechanisms that would explain the discrepancy that do not rely on traffic stops.

Maybe, but this was a traffic stop.

So let us look at that.

In terms of traffic stops leading to police killings of black people, what information do we need before addressing the systemic racism that leads to such killings?

Prejudice motivates the design and enactment of discriminatory policies. In a democracy, these policies will most commonly be put in place by elected officials (sometimes elected precisely because their platform is racist) but they can go as far as to be approved directly by voters.

I think that's a fair characterization of how systemic racism began in the US (even in the colonial era there was some measure of local self-government in the British continental North American colonies). Do you disagree? If so, how?

This does not explain how systemic racism came about.

Perhaps you would do better if you focused on a specific form of systemic racism.

For example, how did it end up that blacks get stopped more than whites in traffic stops?