US Anti-Police Protests and Riots Thread II

[The Emerald Legion]

And you might need to use violence to defend yourself and others against dangerous criminals too. You had better hope nobody accuses you of being a murder just for doing what is necessary to defend yourself and others.

The idea that murdering someone is ever "necessary" is abhorrent, and you should feel bad for implying that is ever the case.

"A coward believes he will ever live
if he keep him safe from strife:
but old age leaves him not long in peace
though spears may spare his life." - Havamal Stanza 16.

Then again, you're a socialist. So it's unsurprising that you empathize with robbers and criminals more than shopkeepers.

[Confessional Korea]

You don't know anything about me. You don't know how old I am, my name, my place of residence, my family background, where I have and haven't lived. I'd keep your mouth shut lad.

Looks like I struck a nerve. I know you don't live in a dictatorship, and you think it's a cool idea because you think the dictator will be on your side and not against you.

I don't live in a dictatorship currently. I've lived in multiple countries though.

Amazing how those things start happening when a bunch of cops in riot gear show up.

There was no riot police until the day after they trashed businesses and housing projects in low income neighbourhoods.

More unarmed black ppl kinda does. It isnt just more blacks in general.

No, it literally doesn't. You're presupposing that shooting an unarmed black person implies a racist bias when Correll et al. (2014) concluded no racial bias, James, Villa, and Dartha (2013) concluded police are more likely to shoot Caucasians and Hispanics than African-Americans, and James, James, and Villa (2016) concluded police had a racial bias FAVOURING African-Americans and found that 14% of non-aggressing whites were shot compared to 1% of blacks. You are drawing a conclusion that would require two sets of data from just one set of data. You cannot prove that shooting an unarmed black man is inherently racist, you cannot prove the cops doing it demonstrated a racial bias, and you cannot prove that the police force overall is composed of individuals with a racial bias. You are arguing something contrary to the multiple studies I have brought up with nothing to substantiate your claims.

[TRIEADMORE]

I’m for the cop who put the knee on the neck of George Floyd to be sentenced for murder as well as the other 3 policemen.From a certain angle in one of the videos they were assisting in restraining George Floyd. I personally am for peaceful and non-violent protest but will stand up to protect minority groups against police brutality.I am against looting and opportunism and the darker sides of human nature as some groups will take advantage of the protest to create chaos and general mayhem.

[San Lumen]

Looks like I struck a nerve. I know you don't live in a dictatorship, and you think it's a cool idea because you think the dictator will be on your side and not against you.

I don't live in a dictatorship currently. I've lived in multiple countries though.

Amazing how those things start happening when a bunch of cops in riot gear show up.

There was no riot police until the day after they trashed businesses and housing projects in low income neighbourhoods.

More unarmed black ppl kinda does. It isnt just more blacks in general.

No, it literally doesn't. You're presupposing that shooting an unarmed black person implies a racist bias when Correll et al. (2014) concluded no racial bias, James, Villa, and Dartha (2013) concluded police are more likely to shoot Caucasians and Hispanics than African-Americans, and James, James, and Villa (2016) concluded police had a racial bias FAVOURING African-Americans and found that 14% of non-aggressing whites were shot compared to 1% of blacks. You are drawing a conclusion that would require two sets of data from just one set of data. You cannot prove that shooting an unarmed black man is inherently racist, you cannot prove the cops doing it demonstrated a racial bias, and you cannot prove that the police force overall is composed of individuals with a racial bias. You are arguing something contrary to the multiple studies I have brought up with nothing to substantiate your claims.

Yet you seen to have no idea what they are like. I know people who came from them. Under your fantasy what is to stop the police and government from doing whatever they want?

[Confessional Korea]

I don't live in a dictatorship currently. I've lived in multiple countries though.


There was no riot police until the day after they trashed businesses and housing projects in low income neighbourhoods.


No, it literally doesn't. You're presupposing that shooting an unarmed black person implies a racist bias when Correll et al. (2014) concluded no racial bias, James, Villa, and Dartha (2013) concluded police are more likely to shoot Caucasians and Hispanics than African-Americans, and James, James, and Villa (2016) concluded police had a racial bias FAVOURING African-Americans and found that 14% of non-aggressing whites were shot compared to 1% of blacks. You are drawing a conclusion that would require two sets of data from just one set of data. You cannot prove that shooting an unarmed black man is inherently racist, you cannot prove the cops doing it demonstrated a racial bias, and you cannot prove that the police force overall is composed of individuals with a racial bias. You are arguing something contrary to the multiple studies I have brought up with nothing to substantiate your claims.

Yet you seen to have no idea what they are like. I know people who came from them. Under your fantasy what is to stop the police and government from doing whatever they want?

If democracy meant that the police were held to account then there would be no need for these protests, would there?

[Cisairse]

No, but you're racist for asking this question.

Cope harder. Is it racist when black people more killed black people than cops kill black people?

No, but you're racist for trying to use that as "evidence" that systemic racism isn't real.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

And yet a lot of them aren't.

Unfortunately not, but that issue is sort of being overshadowed by the looting, arson, and violent attacks on police. But yeah, when this leads to a second wave of Coronavirus infections it is going to be pretty bad.

And then there are the police shooting at random people on there porch, pushing over old men.

[Confessional Korea]

Cope harder. Is it racist when black people more killed black people than cops kill black people?

No, but you're racist for trying to use that as "evidence" that systemic racism isn't real.

I've brought forth multiple studies to justify my positions. No one is actively trying to refute them. I was actually in agreement with the protesters, in fact I'd argue I wanted to go further than them, until the beginning of the week when I was proved wrong in a friendly discussion with a friend about this, and I still have social media posts up that show me holding views contrary to what I am espousing just now. I did the research, read through a few papers, couldn't find any data that disproves the position I hold right now, and until I do, I will hold this position.

[Cisairse]

No, but you're racist for trying to use that as "evidence" that systemic racism isn't real.

I've brought forth multiple studies to justify my positions. No one is actively trying to refute them. I was actually in agreement with the protesters, in fact I'd argue I wanted to go further than them, until the beginning of the week when I was proved wrong in a friendly discussion with a friend about this, and I still have social media posts up that show me holding views contrary to what I am espousing just now. I did the research, read through a few papers, couldn't find any data that disproves the position I hold right now, and until I do, I will hold this position.

Nobody is seriously trying to refute you because what you said isn't really worth consideration. "But black people kill themselves!" is a racist dogwhistle and if you aren't trying to be racist you should stop repeating it.

[SangMar]

No, but you're racist for trying to use that as "evidence" that systemic racism isn't real.

I've brought forth multiple studies to justify my positions. No one is actively trying to refute them. I was actually in agreement with the protesters, in fact I'd argue I wanted to go further than them, until the beginning of the week when I was proved wrong in a friendly discussion with a friend about this, and I still have social media posts up that show me holding views contrary to what I am espousing just now. I did the research, read through a few papers, couldn't find any data that disproves the position I hold right now, and until I do, I will hold this position.

This is a perfect time to drop some studies of my own... of the 40% kind.

TL:DR; The 40% number is wrong and plain old bad science.

In attempt to recreate the numbers, by the same researchers, they received a rate of 24% while including shouting in the definition of violence. Further researchers found rates of 7%, 7.8%, 10%, and 13% with stricter definitions and better research methodology.
The 40% claim is intentionally misleading and unequivocally inaccurate. Numerous studies over the years report domestic violence rates in police families as low as 7%, with the highest at 40% defining violence to include shouting or a loss of temper.

The referenced study where the 40% claim originates is Neidig, P.H.., Russell, H.E. & Seng, A.F. (1992). Interspousal aggression in law enforcement families: A preliminary investigation. It states:
Survey results revealed that approximately 40% of the participating officers reported marital conflicts involving physical aggression in the previous year.
There are a number of flaws with the aforementioned study:
The study includes as 'violent incidents' a one time push, shove, shout, loss of temper, or an incidents where a spouse acted out in anger. These do not meet the legal standard for domestic violence. This same study reports that the victims reported a 10% rate of physical domestic violence from their partner. The statement doesn't indicate who the aggressor is; the officer or the spouse. The study is a survey and not an empirical scientific study. The “domestic violence” acts are not confirmed as actually being violent. The study occurred nearly 30 years ago. This study shows minority and female officers were more likely to commit the DV, and white males were least likely. Additional reference from a Congressional hearing on the study: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id= ... 003089863c
An additional study conducted by the same researcher, which reported rates of 24%, suffer from additional flaws:
The study is a survey and not an empirical scientific study. The study was not a random sample, and was isolated to high ranking officers at a police conference. This study also occurred nearly 30 years ago.
More current research, including a larger empirical study with thousands of responses from 2009 notes, 'Over 87 percent of officers reported never having engaged in physical domestic violence in their lifetime.' Blumenstein, Lindsey, Domestic violence within law enforcement families: The link between traditional police subculture and domestic violence among police (2009). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1862
Yet another study "indicated that 10 percent of respondents (148 candidates) admitted to having ever slapped, punched, or otherwise injured a spouse or romantic partner, with 7.2 percent (110 candidates) stating that this had happened once, and 2.1 percent (33 candidates) indicating that this had happened two or three times. Repeated abuse (four or more occurrences) was reported by only five respondents (0.3 percent)." A.H. Ryan JR, Department of Defense, Polygraph Institute “The Prevalence of Domestic Violence in Police Families.” https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... e_families

Another: In a 1999 study, 7% of Baltimore City police officers admitted to 'getting physical' (pushing, shoving, grabbing and/or hitting) with a partner. A 2000 study of seven law enforcement agencies in the Southeast and Midwest United States found 10% of officers reporting that they had slapped, punched, or otherwise injured their partners. L. Goodmark, 2016, BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW “Hands up at Home: Militarized Masculinity and Police Officers Who Commit Intimate Partner Abuse “. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.ed ... t=fac_pubs

Actually wanted to say though, I’m impressed that I’ve maybe seen only one 40% reference at all across 540 or so pages.

Also no, I’m not smart enough to write this - it’s a reddit copypasta.

[Confessional Korea]

I've brought forth multiple studies to justify my positions. No one is actively trying to refute them. I was actually in agreement with the protesters, in fact I'd argue I wanted to go further than them, until the beginning of the week when I was proved wrong in a friendly discussion with a friend about this, and I still have social media posts up that show me holding views contrary to what I am espousing just now. I did the research, read through a few papers, couldn't find any data that disproves the position I hold right now, and until I do, I will hold this position.

Nobody is seriously trying to refute you because what you said isn't really worth consideration. "But black people kill themselves!" is a racist dogwhistle and if you aren't trying to be racist you should stop repeating it.

No it's because you can't disprove me. There might be people that share your beliefs that can, but YOU CAN'T. "It's a dog whistle" no you just lack the emotional strength to be able to deal with people disagreeing with you.
All I've done is make conclusions based on data I have happily cited for you to fact check, and I would be more than happy to concede I was wrong if someone put forward a sound rebuttal of my claims and presented fresh evidence. Instead of attempting to do that you've just cried about me being racist.

According to you, empty talking points about RACISM AND DOGWHISTLES are worth consideration but papers by respected academics like Joseph Cesario and Joshua Correll aren't worth because umm racism or something. Grow up.

[Cisairse]

Nobody is seriously trying to refute you because what you said isn't really worth consideration. "But black people kill themselves!" is a racist dogwhistle and if you aren't trying to be racist you should stop repeating it.

No it's because you can't disprove me. There might be people that share your beliefs that can, but YOU CAN'T. "It's a dog whistle" no you just lack the emotional strength to be able to deal with people disagreeing with you.
All I've done is make conclusions based on data I have happily cited for you to fact check, and I would be more than happy to concede I was wrong if someone put forward a sound rebuttal of my claims and presented fresh evidence. Instead of attempting to do that you've just cried about me being racist.

According to you, empty talking points about RACISM AND DOGWHISTLES are worth consideration but papers by respected academics like Joseph Cesario and Joshua Correll aren't worth because umm racism or something. Grow up.

You're now spamming caps and resorting to ad hominems, but I lack emotional strength?

Okay.

[Dresderstan]

Unfortunately not, but that issue is sort of being overshadowed by the looting, arson, and violent attacks on police. But yeah, when this leads to a second wave of Coronavirus infections it is going to be pretty bad.

And then there are the police shooting at random people on there porch, pushing over old men.

Are you gonna keep repeating this phrase ad nauseum every time? This is like the tenth time you've mentioned it.

[SangMar]

And then there are the police shooting at random people on there porch, pushing over old men.

Are you gonna keep repeating this phrase ad nauseum every time? This is like the tenth time you've mentioned it.

Can I interest you in some chilled out British cops being attacked for no reason?

[Confessional Korea]

No it's because you can't disprove me. There might be people that share your beliefs that can, but YOU CAN'T. "It's a dog whistle" no you just lack the emotional strength to be able to deal with people disagreeing with you.
All I've done is make conclusions based on data I have happily cited for you to fact check, and I would be more than happy to concede I was wrong if someone put forward a sound rebuttal of my claims and presented fresh evidence. Instead of attempting to do that you've just cried about me being racist.

According to you, empty talking points about RACISM AND DOGWHISTLES are worth consideration but papers by respected academics like Joseph Cesario and Joshua Correll aren't worth because umm racism or something. Grow up.

You're now spamming caps and resorting to ad hominems, but I lack emotional strength?

Okay.

All you've done is call me racist repeatedly for making reasonable conclusions supported by the research I've cited numerous times. So based off of that I was happy to conclude that you're emotionally fragile for not being able to handle something that challenges your beliefs. If you take someone making an observation supported by your behavior as an "ad hominem" then that's a you problem.

[New haven america]

You're now spamming caps and resorting to ad hominems, but I lack emotional strength?

Okay.

All you've done is call me racist repeatedly for making reasonable conclusions supported by the research I've cited numerous times. So based off of that I was happy to conclude that you're emotionally fragile for not being able to handle something that challenges your beliefs. If you take someone making an observation supported by your behavior as an "ad hominem" then that's a you problem.

*Racist conclusions based on skewed and misunderstood data.

[Confessional Korea]

All you've done is call me racist repeatedly for making reasonable conclusions supported by the research I've cited numerous times. So based off of that I was happy to conclude that you're emotionally fragile for not being able to handle something that challenges your beliefs. If you take someone making an observation supported by your behavior as an "ad hominem" then that's a you problem.

*Racist conclusions based on skewed and misunderstood data.

Demonstrate how the data is skewed or I have misunderstood it, please? Because I'm not just making my own conclusions from the data but I'm echoing the conclusions drawn by the researchers themselves. Personally, I wouldn't say that "there is no racist bias among police officers" is a racist statement, but hey, I've been called it for less!

[Esternial]

*Racist conclusions based on skewed and misunderstood data.

Demonstrate how the data is skewed or I have misunderstood it, please? Because I'm not just making my own conclusions from the data but I'm echoing the conclusions drawn by the researchers themselves. Personally, I wouldn't say that "there is no racist bias among police officers" is a racist statement, but hey, I've been called it for less!

Could you link those? I'm having trouble tracking them down based on the authors you linked.

[New haven america]

*Racist conclusions based on skewed and misunderstood data.

Demonstrate how the data is skewed or I have misunderstood it, please? Because I'm not just making my own conclusions from the data but I'm echoing the conclusions drawn by the researchers themselves. Personally, I wouldn't say that "there is no racist bias among police officers" is a racist statement, but hey, I've been called it for less!

Well then please, link said data if you're so confident in the conclusions.

[Agarntrop]

Anything I should add to the OP?

[Gormwood]

'We were wrong': NFL commissioner says league failed to listen to players on protests

For all the fucking good it does Colin Kaepernick.

[Kathol Rift]

They don’t get that option. Police isn't a job that can just stay at home. There’s a reason that they don’t get to strike in most of the country.

The police are showing up in riot gear and in huge numbers to peaceful protests, and then gassing peaceful protesters.

Surely you and I can agree that something is happening here which doesn't need to happen.

I'm not saying the individual officers should stay home when summoned to work. I'm saying the police dispatchers, chiefs, and sheriffs shouldn't be calling up riot police to beat the shit out of people just for exercising their Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Except most of the places they are showing up are not peaceful protests. They are going to riots with their riot gear. We see the ones that go to peaceful protests and break it up on the news because that’s what makes a juicy headline. Most of the ones in riot gear are being deployed to riots. And they are usually only using force when they absolutely need to in most places, because most police departments are trying to avoid giving themselves a bad image.

[Gravlen]

Black people = 50%~ of violent crimes

Survey says:
34 %

Your math is definitely trustworthy.

[Cisairse]

The police are showing up in riot gear and in huge numbers to peaceful protests, and then gassing peaceful protesters.

Surely you and I can agree that something is happening here which doesn't need to happen.

I'm not saying the individual officers should stay home when summoned to work. I'm saying the police dispatchers, chiefs, and sheriffs shouldn't be calling up riot police to beat the shit out of people just for exercising their Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Except most of the places they are showing up are not peaceful protests. They are going to riots with their riot gear. We see the ones that go to peaceful protests and break it up on the news because that’s what makes a juicy headline. Most of the ones in riot gear are being deployed to riots. And they are usually only using force when they absolutely need to in most places, because most police departments are trying to avoid giving themselves a bad image.

This is just fundamentally untrue. Scroll through Twitter or WT and you'll see a near limitless number of videos of riot police gassing and brutalizing peaceful citizens in cities all across the country.

[Gravlen]

'We were wrong': NFL commissioner says league failed to listen to players on protests

For all the fucking good it does Colin Kaepernick.

Trump today tweeted that you should not kneel.