Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:44 pmKowani wrote:Arizona House of Representatives passes bill requiring a conviction before the police can seize your assets (57-2)
Billtext here
civil forfeiture is bullshit
Based and litty.
Based and litty.
NationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
US Anti-Police Protests and Riots Thread III
Page 126 of 368
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:44 pmBased and litty.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:45 pmA tall order for many.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:58 pmPaddy O Fernature wrote:
Sadly, the only thing I find surprising here is that the shooting happened before the trial and not immediately after.
I'm sort of expecting the majority of the shit to go down Monday. That is when the majority of protests are scheduled.
Of course, if he is not convicted, all hell will break loose.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:59 pmNeanderthaland wrote:Paddy O Fernature wrote:
Sadly, the only thing I find surprising here is that the shooting happened before the trial and not immediately after.
I'm sort of expecting the majority of the shit to go down Monday. That is when the majority of protests are scheduled.
Of course, if he is not convicted, all hell will break loose.
Maybe it's just pessimism but given the track record when it comes to cops actually being punished for their actions I feel like he's gonna beat the charges tbh
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:00 pmWashington Resistance Army wrote:Neanderthaland wrote:I'm sort of expecting the majority of the shit to go down Monday. That is when the majority of protests are scheduled.
Of course, if he is not convicted, all hell will break loose.
Maybe it's just pessimism but given the track record when it comes to cops actually being punished for their actions I feel like he's gonna beat the charges tbh
I’m sharing your pessimism.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:05 pmWashington Resistance Army wrote:Neanderthaland wrote:I'm sort of expecting the majority of the shit to go down Monday. That is when the majority of protests are scheduled.
Of course, if he is not convicted, all hell will break loose.
Maybe it's just pessimism but given the track record when it comes to cops actually being punished for their actions I feel like he's gonna beat the charges tbh
Well, Mohamed Noor got 12.5 years in Minneapolis. A fact which has just recently been brought back to public attention with his recent appeal.
If he does beat the charges, it's not only going to look like cops are immune from punishment. It's going to look like a particular palette of cops are immune from punishment. And that would pretty much be the end of the idea that minorities can find justice in Minnesota. I don't know how we'd ever restore trust after that. It would be a nightmare.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:08 pmNeanderthaland wrote:Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Maybe it's just pessimism but given the track record when it comes to cops actually being punished for their actions I feel like he's gonna beat the charges tbh
Well, Mohamed Noor got 12.5 years in Minneapolis. A fact which has just recently been brought back to public attention with his recent appeal.
If he does beat the charges, it's not only going to look like cops are immune from punishment. It's going to look like a particular palette of cops are immune from punishment. And that would pretty much be the end of the idea that minorities can find justice in Minnesota. I don't know how we'd ever restore trust after that. It would be a nightmare.
Noor went to prison because he killed an Australian. Had he shot a white American woman, I don't think he'd be in jail rn.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:34 pmwe will apparently be getting live coverage of the trial
jury selection starts tomorrow, opening statements monday the 29th, the trial itself is set for 3 weeks
meanwhile, the other 3 officers ( Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng, and Thomas Lane), are set to have their trial in August
jury selection starts tomorrow, opening statements monday the 29th, the trial itself is set for 3 weeks
meanwhile, the other 3 officers ( Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng, and Thomas Lane), are set to have their trial in August
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 5:33 pmBorderlands of Rojava wrote:Neanderthaland wrote:Well, Mohamed Noor got 12.5 years in Minneapolis. A fact which has just recently been brought back to public attention with his recent appeal.
If he does beat the charges, it's not only going to look like cops are immune from punishment. It's going to look like a particular palette of cops are immune from punishment. And that would pretty much be the end of the idea that minorities can find justice in Minnesota. I don't know how we'd ever restore trust after that. It would be a nightmare.
Noor went to prison because he killed an Australian. Had he shot a white American woman, I don't think he'd be in jail rn.
Yes, you've mentioned this idea.
I don't buy it.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 5:40 pmPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 7:00 pmWhat's your proof that him shooting a white woman sent him to prison? I think the fact she was a forsign national from a first world nation with strong ties to America mattered more than her skintone, u know, considering police kill whites without any qualms all the time.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 7:09 pmBorderlands of Rojava wrote:
What's your proof that him shooting a white woman sent him to prison? I think the fact she was a forsign national from a first world nation with strong ties to America mattered more than her skintone, u know, considering police kill whites without any qualms all the time.
The point is less that she was White then that he wasn't.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 7:26 pmBorderlands of Rojava wrote:
What's your proof that him shooting a white woman sent him to prison? I think the fact she was a forsign national from a first world nation with strong ties to America mattered more than her skintone, u know, considering police kill whites without any qualms all the time.
Adding on to that, there’s a narrative in some parts of the black community that the police somehow "work for" East Asians, particularly business owners. That’s verifiably false and has never been true considering how they completely abandoned the Korean-American businesses in 1992
Unfortunately that narrative has seen a bit of a resurgence due to one of the George Floyd cops, Tou Thao, being Asian
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 9:17 pmNo State Here wrote:Borderlands of Rojava wrote:
What's your proof that him shooting a white woman sent him to prison? I think the fact she was a forsign national from a first world nation with strong ties to America mattered more than her skintone, u know, considering police kill whites without any qualms all the time.
Adding on to that, there’s a narrative in some parts of the black community that the police somehow "work for" East Asians, particularly business owners. That’s verifiably false and has never been true considering how they completely abandoned the Korean-American businesses in 1992
Unfortunately that narrative has seen a bit of a resurgence due to one of the George Floyd cops, Tou Thao, being Asian
Wasn't one of the cops black too? Like the George Floyd incident was basically reality calling bullshit on the idea that diversifying the police will solve police brutality.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 9:51 pmBorderlands of Rojava wrote:No State Here wrote:Adding on to that, there’s a narrative in some parts of the black community that the police somehow "work for" East Asians, particularly business owners. That’s verifiably false and has never been true considering how they completely abandoned the Korean-American businesses in 1992
Unfortunately that narrative has seen a bit of a resurgence due to one of the George Floyd cops, Tou Thao, being Asian
Wasn't one of the cops black too? Like the George Floyd incident was basically reality calling bullshit on the idea that diversifying the police will solve police brutality.
Alexander Kueng? iirc he was lightskin and gay as well, basically calling bullshit on the intersectionality narrative.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 10:00 pmPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2021 10:07 pmShit I can't even be mad about that one honestly. That's about the smartest way to avoid being filmed.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 4:12 amso a while back i wrote this effortpost on why policing is fundamentally broken and in need of a serious overhaul
but this thread focuses a lot more on race and policing, so I'd figured I should address that
I believe that most of the regular thread participants are aware of the reality of racial (and gendered) policing bias, thankfully.
but for the lurkers, here we go. Note: Most of the data here focuses on black people in policing, as an artifact of what is essentially sampling and information bias-there's just much more data on African-American/white experiences than there is any other group.
We know, for example, that the racial attitudes of police are more regressive than the broader population. Specifically, officers are more likely believe that black people are more violent compared to most whites (a relationship that did not hold for black police officers). In fact, "being a white police officer made the respondent more than nine times as likely (odds ratio =9.013) as a nonpolice citizen to agree that African Americans are more violent than are white people." It was also more likely to make you more racially resentful than the general population: twice as likely to reject the idea that discrimination created obstacles for African Americans, 3x more likely to believe that whites are discriminated against in the workplace, 3x more likely to resent supposed 'special treatment for African-Americans." And note that all of that is exclusive to white officers-black officers don't fall into that trap at all. (The general white population, by the way, is a lot more racially resentful than we'd like to think-the average white American will score a 0.6 on the 0-1 racial resentment score, a fascinating why that's off topic).
With all that said, it is not enough to merely examine beliefs, though it appears that they have an effect on decisions to shoot anyway.
So we've examined beliefs and their effect in the lab. But now, let's flip to empirical evidence.
It starts small-with language. Looking at traffic stops, a process through which nearly a quarter of the US population will come into contact with the police, even after controlling for the race of the officer, the severity of the infraction, the location of the stop, and the outcome of the stop, police are less likely to treat black citizens with respect (though elderly people and women were also more likely to receive respect)-a thing which I believe we can all agree is necessary for fostering trust and good communal relations. And those disparities persisted even in stops when no arrest or search was made, and before the person being stopped had even said anything.
So lets keep going with traffic stops, because they're a wonderful window into this.
So this is an absolutely massive dataset of nearly 100,000,000 traffic stops across 31 different states, from 2011-2018. The results weren't pretty; "In particular, among state patrol stops, the annual per-capita stop rate for black drivers was 0.10 compared to 0.07 for white drivers; and among municipal police stops, the annual per-capita stop rate for black drivers was 0.20 compared to 0.14 for white drivers." (A disparity that decreased when the sun went down). Searches weren't any better-the bar for being searched for black and Hispanic drivers was much lower than that of white people.
But of course, it doesn't stop there. Being a minority makes you less likely to receive a discount on your speeding ticket-and that's caused by 40% of officers. And that's relevant, because fines don't increase proportionately with your speed. They increase in what are essentially brackets-and white people are substantially more likely to have the officer slot them into a lower punishment bracket than minorities are. (To calculate a differential probability of discount by an average officer, we use the fact that two-thirds of tickets are written by lenient officers and scale accordingly, finding that an average encounter leads to a 4 percentage point higher discount probability for white drivers, off a base of 30%.") And that's not because minorities are worse drivers- "Model estimates indicate that, within location, forcing all officers to treat minority drivers the same as they treat white drivers removes 83% of the gap in discounting. Only 17% of the gap is due to minorities driving faster.' Here, minority and female officers were less likely to be discriminatory, but they did not eliminate it entirely. (Older drivers and female drivers also are more likely to receive a discount, but the stop being in a majority-minority county made officers less lenient on average).
In the use of stop-and-frisk, things aren't any better. Looking to New York City, the program was excessively poor: blacks and Hispanics were stopped disproportionately often compared with their population, their crime rate, or the percentage of stops that led to arrests.
This sort of thing is what part of we mean when we say that minorities are overpoliced-the police presence exists in a way that's not justified by the conditions of their communities or their responses. And in the age of police militarization, that's only gotten worse.
Now, we turn to the big one: shootings. And for good reason, it's the most final and extreme use of force by the police, the one we can't reverse or compensate for a large portion of the time.
And it's the one where the largest debate is, because there's a vested interest in asserting that the police are justified in the majority of cases, with a "few bad apples" being the exceptions.
There's two ways to do that. The first, arguing that while minorities make up a disproportionate amount of police use-of-force deaths, they also make up a disproportionate amount of crime, so police should encounter them more often. The other, arguing that the police are justified in using self-defense methods to protect themselves.
Lets tackle the second one first, because its easier and doesn't make me cry about bad data collection.
The problem is, the evidence doesn't back it up. In fatal police shootings, civilians from minority groups were significantly more likely than Whites to have not been attacking the officer(s) or other civilians, and Black civilians were more than twice as likely as White civilians to have been unarmed. But not all shootings are technically unjustified-in some cases, civilians were armed or attacking others, and thankfully, most uses of force don't escalate to death. For example, last year, police killed "only" 1,127 people last year.
But that same year, there were
So what happens if we adjust for those things?
It doesn't get any better.
"The results, which appear in Table 2, show that black civilians have 27 percent higher odds of experiencing force during a stop than white civilians and 28 percent higher odds of officers drawing their guns (OR = 1.27 and 1.28, respectively). Importantly, these findings are net of alternative explanations including civilian behavior, the success of the stop, local crime rates, and neighborhood context."
The issue most apologists make is assuming that nationwide crime rates are good at all. Pretty much everyone draws on FBI crime statistics,, which are entirely voluntary, represent about 3% of the country, are skewed towards white and rural areas, don't have any data from Mississippi at all, and has no way of ensuring the accuracy of the little data they do receive
Now as you might have noticed, a lot of the data has noted that even after you adjust for all these other confounding factors, the racial disparity continues to exist. And that's a major theme-the other factors-poverty, crime rates, the neighborhood-they all make the living situation worse-but the problem still exists anyway.
It's a large part of how absolutely toxic the institution of policing is-you can't reform it with the administrative, managerial reforms that get promoted by the state right now. The rot runs deep, and a large part of it is the fault of larger societal attitudes and trends. Body-cameras, punishing the worst offenders, proper use-of-force guidelines help, but the institution is far too gone to be saved.
but this thread focuses a lot more on race and policing, so I'd figured I should address that
I believe that most of the regular thread participants are aware of the reality of racial (and gendered) policing bias, thankfully.
but for the lurkers, here we go. Note: Most of the data here focuses on black people in policing, as an artifact of what is essentially sampling and information bias-there's just much more data on African-American/white experiences than there is any other group.
We know, for example, that the racial attitudes of police are more regressive than the broader population. Specifically, officers are more likely believe that black people are more violent compared to most whites (a relationship that did not hold for black police officers). In fact, "being a white police officer made the respondent more than nine times as likely (odds ratio =9.013) as a nonpolice citizen to agree that African Americans are more violent than are white people." It was also more likely to make you more racially resentful than the general population: twice as likely to reject the idea that discrimination created obstacles for African Americans, 3x more likely to believe that whites are discriminated against in the workplace, 3x more likely to resent supposed 'special treatment for African-Americans." And note that all of that is exclusive to white officers-black officers don't fall into that trap at all. (The general white population, by the way, is a lot more racially resentful than we'd like to think-the average white American will score a 0.6 on the 0-1 racial resentment score, a fascinating why that's off topic).
With all that said, it is not enough to merely examine beliefs, though it appears that they have an effect on decisions to shoot anyway.
So we've examined beliefs and their effect in the lab. But now, let's flip to empirical evidence.
It starts small-with language. Looking at traffic stops, a process through which nearly a quarter of the US population will come into contact with the police, even after controlling for the race of the officer, the severity of the infraction, the location of the stop, and the outcome of the stop, police are less likely to treat black citizens with respect (though elderly people and women were also more likely to receive respect)-a thing which I believe we can all agree is necessary for fostering trust and good communal relations. And those disparities persisted even in stops when no arrest or search was made, and before the person being stopped had even said anything.
So lets keep going with traffic stops, because they're a wonderful window into this.
So this is an absolutely massive dataset of nearly 100,000,000 traffic stops across 31 different states, from 2011-2018. The results weren't pretty; "In particular, among state patrol stops, the annual per-capita stop rate for black drivers was 0.10 compared to 0.07 for white drivers; and among municipal police stops, the annual per-capita stop rate for black drivers was 0.20 compared to 0.14 for white drivers." (A disparity that decreased when the sun went down). Searches weren't any better-the bar for being searched for black and Hispanic drivers was much lower than that of white people.
But of course, it doesn't stop there. Being a minority makes you less likely to receive a discount on your speeding ticket-and that's caused by 40% of officers. And that's relevant, because fines don't increase proportionately with your speed. They increase in what are essentially brackets-and white people are substantially more likely to have the officer slot them into a lower punishment bracket than minorities are. (To calculate a differential probability of discount by an average officer, we use the fact that two-thirds of tickets are written by lenient officers and scale accordingly, finding that an average encounter leads to a 4 percentage point higher discount probability for white drivers, off a base of 30%.") And that's not because minorities are worse drivers- "Model estimates indicate that, within location, forcing all officers to treat minority drivers the same as they treat white drivers removes 83% of the gap in discounting. Only 17% of the gap is due to minorities driving faster.' Here, minority and female officers were less likely to be discriminatory, but they did not eliminate it entirely. (Older drivers and female drivers also are more likely to receive a discount, but the stop being in a majority-minority county made officers less lenient on average).
In the use of stop-and-frisk, things aren't any better. Looking to New York City, the program was excessively poor: blacks and Hispanics were stopped disproportionately often compared with their population, their crime rate, or the percentage of stops that led to arrests.
This sort of thing is what part of we mean when we say that minorities are overpoliced-the police presence exists in a way that's not justified by the conditions of their communities or their responses. And in the age of police militarization, that's only gotten worse.
Now, we turn to the big one: shootings. And for good reason, it's the most final and extreme use of force by the police, the one we can't reverse or compensate for a large portion of the time.
And it's the one where the largest debate is, because there's a vested interest in asserting that the police are justified in the majority of cases, with a "few bad apples" being the exceptions.
There's two ways to do that. The first, arguing that while minorities make up a disproportionate amount of police use-of-force deaths, they also make up a disproportionate amount of crime, so police should encounter them more often. The other, arguing that the police are justified in using self-defense methods to protect themselves.
Lets tackle the second one first, because its easier and doesn't make me cry about bad data collection.
The problem is, the evidence doesn't back it up. In fatal police shootings, civilians from minority groups were significantly more likely than Whites to have not been attacking the officer(s) or other civilians, and Black civilians were more than twice as likely as White civilians to have been unarmed. But not all shootings are technically unjustified-in some cases, civilians were armed or attacking others, and thankfully, most uses of force don't escalate to death. For example, last year, police killed "only" 1,127 people last year.
But that same year, there were
So what happens if we adjust for those things?
It doesn't get any better.
"The results, which appear in Table 2, show that black civilians have 27 percent higher odds of experiencing force during a stop than white civilians and 28 percent higher odds of officers drawing their guns (OR = 1.27 and 1.28, respectively). Importantly, these findings are net of alternative explanations including civilian behavior, the success of the stop, local crime rates, and neighborhood context."
The issue most apologists make is assuming that nationwide crime rates are good at all. Pretty much everyone draws on FBI crime statistics,, which are entirely voluntary, represent about 3% of the country, are skewed towards white and rural areas, don't have any data from Mississippi at all, and has no way of ensuring the accuracy of the little data they do receive
Now as you might have noticed, a lot of the data has noted that even after you adjust for all these other confounding factors, the racial disparity continues to exist. And that's a major theme-the other factors-poverty, crime rates, the neighborhood-they all make the living situation worse-but the problem still exists anyway.
It's a large part of how absolutely toxic the institution of policing is-you can't reform it with the administrative, managerial reforms that get promoted by the state right now. The rot runs deep, and a large part of it is the fault of larger societal attitudes and trends. Body-cameras, punishing the worst offenders, proper use-of-force guidelines help, but the institution is far too gone to be saved.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:21 amHeck of a data smack down Kowani. Good work.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:29 amhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-b ... 2aQYpk#app
Kentucky bill would make it a crime to insult a police officer
Kentucky bill would make it a crime to insult a police officer
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:32 amSan Lumen wrote:https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-bill-insult-police-officer-crime/?fbclid=IwAR3anxdii0F0fqEqLN_Jn9u-V3_Zv93ER3_AsuyCcqj3dNnumb4aZ2aQYpk#app
Kentucky bill would make it a crime to insult a police officer
But it's the liberals who are perpetually offended snowflakes.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:35 amSan Lumen wrote:https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-bill-insult-police-officer-crime/?fbclid=IwAR3anxdii0F0fqEqLN_Jn9u-V3_Zv93ER3_AsuyCcqj3dNnumb4aZ2aQYpk#app
Kentucky bill would make it a crime to insult a police officer
Siri, what is the first amendment?
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:45 amWho want to restrict free speech to preserve their feefees.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:46 amEveryone is a snowflake now. People are snowflakes for non political reasons too. When you see any single side call another side a snowflake, it's best to remind them their side isn't snowflake free. I sure as hell know my political camp isn't.
Anyways fuck the Kentucky legislature.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:59 amBorderlands of Rojava wrote:Ifreann wrote:But it's the liberals who are perpetually offended snowflakes.
Everyone is a snowflake now. People are snowflakes for non political reasons too. When you see any single side call another side a snowflake, it's best to remind them their side isn't snowflake free. I sure as hell know my political camp isn't.
Anyways fuck the Kentucky legislature.
Everyone is a snowflake about something but conservatives are particularly oblivious to that fact. "They put a trigger warning for racism on Gone With The Wind OMG!" like bro, you throw a shitfit if your kid hears the word fuck or sees a woman's nipple.