USA Violence and Civil Unrest in America [Daily protests ongoing against Racism and Police Brutality]

  • Advertisement
  • Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    I think it's now time to bring back some reasoned ideas to this thread. Disclaimer: This post is necessarily verbose and possibly multi-syllabic.



    What does competence have to do with crime and police brutality? I know you’re much more discerning than this, there is a more sophisticated way of assessing why crime occurs than simply someone’s competence. People can still exert bad behavior even when there aren’t structural impediments to them living a good life. At least one source attempts to give us some explanation to the phenomenon using multiple methods and lenses. The determinative factor is actually which crimes are policed and which aren’t. Behavior alone is a grossly inadequate framework for understanding crime. There’s almost the assumption built into this line of argumentation that some people innately have intelligent characteristics and others lack as much, simply by their biological nature or genetic composition.

    You say “our” like we own it. This is what the New York Times wrote about Maronites when they emigrated to the US in the late 19th century. Things change with time. Inclusion and exclusion to power structures, including to western civilization, is often conditional on consent and compliance, not always hard work, perseverance, and values. I think it is naive to assume that different cultures can come into constant contact without experiencing some tension, hostility, or even violence, but absent a discussion of tangible power, the civilizational clash model falls apart, and Huntington and most, if not all, scholars of global politics acknowledge as much. Your analysis, therefore, is one rooted in deference, rather than independence from the established powers because you’ve chosen not to elicit even the slightest critique toward the most basic transgressions of the police.

    We can talk about the SAT another time, but SAT scores are laughably bad determinants of competence. Imagine only hiring someone for a job if they passed an exam but couldn’t apply the skills needed to competently complete the job. In fact, the system decays when it perpetuates its admissions standards only based on the SAT and not a variety of academic and personal factors that might determine whether a student is competent or not.




    Sure, but we have to ask why we would excuse those corrupt officers for bad behavior. Again, I am not talking about individual cops and their merits. Please understand the essence of my argument is not limited to behavioral explanations.

    Nevertheless, the stats necessitate a discussion of police training and standards. It’s not simply an issue of the policeman acting with poor judgment. When such poor judgment is repeatedly displayed, it calls into question the standards, practices, and training he received. If you work for a company that has loose rules for managing your behavior and allows you significant discretion in conducting your business and there’s little to no accountability for your loose behavior, in fact there’s are entire institutions (including police unions, and officers themselves) and groups of people who blindly support and defend your behavior, effectively disabling accountability, and you and many of your coworkers continuously misinterpret its rules and act in a manner that negatively hurts your clients, would you not say there is a systemic issue and not simply bad actors in those positions?

    A report on a documentary highlighting the dangers of militarized police training provides additional evidence that this issue is embedded within policing in much of the country. Another element that shows the systemic nature of the problem at hand is how medical examiners' reports can often be manipulated to, seemingly, cover up murders. Even some former cops agree there’s a police training issue, especially when cops are undertrained in conflict resolution, imbibed with battle rhetoric, and their main reaction to many situations that can be resolved otherwise is to use brutal force.

    “Well, if he just complied…”, one might say. However, compliance is not simply something desired for the officers to do their jobs, it is what the system necessitates in order to defeat any form of dissent, justification for legal recourse, and if the rules of compliance are not followed, then murder is justified.

    If you’re so worried about things changing for the worse, baddi tamnak. What you’re seeing today is not the change you think it is. Barring a seismic shift in the political power balance, systemic change will not occur. The most that you could expect are some changes to policing at the local level, culminating mostly in a shift in tactics, possibly spurned by funding cuts that require more resourcefulness, as well as forcing some police to fall on their swords in terms of convictions, firings, resignations, replacements and the like. Asking Mitch and Nancy to institute any kind of reforms is the equivalent of asking the Nabih of Lebanon to fight corruption, they ruin more than they help, just like Clinton did in the 90s because their role is to reinforce the preexisting power structure, the only difference is the words they use to do it. It’d be naive to assume that they will prostrate as easily and as quickly as some of those white people at the protests. The corporate and cultural elements are separately performative and most people aren’t buying them. Maybe I'm naive, but I always thought upholding American values and norms and western civilization meant justice for all. Upholding justice and small changes to police tactics =/= the demise of western civilization. Most white people and many Republicans recognize at least that there’s a problem that needs to be addressed.




    Nope, they’re not very telling. In fact, pulling these numbers without providing proper context kills the point of providing statistics to being with. Crime and policing are not mutually inclusive, as shown by the higher number of overall crimes committed by whites, yet the lower preponderance of policing in middle and upper class, predominantly white communities.

    To go back to the original argument, I was merely refuting your assertion that blacks commit more crimes overall, which is correct.

    As I said, the UCR numbers are not crimes committed, but crimes reported to police. Guess who is more likely to have crimes reported against them despite demonstrably similar levels of committed crimes? A black person is X times more likely to be arrested for committing an offense. So, this does not mean they are more likely to commit murder; it means they are more likely to be caught given the total number of murders committed.

    Additionally, these top researchers, who closely represent my position, explicate that crime differences virtually disappear between whites and blacks when accounting for neighborhood. Why is it that poor, predominantly black neighborhoods are targeted significantly, but affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods aren’t? The difference is poverty [see pages 339-40 here].

    It is important here to consider what I stated concerning overpolicing and underpolicing and how this supposed pathology of criminal behavior can be better explained by understanding relative deprivation and how black neighborhoods have been historically underserved and disadvantaged. They are twice as likely to get arrested for the same offense as a white person. Further, blacks can receive harsher jail/prison sentences for committing the same, minor offense as whites [Source 1, Source 2]. “blacks are 40% of drug violation arrests but only 13% of admitted drug users”, said a 1995 federal government report. So, there’s no real discrepancy between the races in terms of behavior regarding drug use. The problem must be somewhere else. The “war on drugs” has had deeply significant human costs that perpetuate the cycle of violence and crime, which, again, can be learned behavior given the circumstances, in certain neighborhoods. According to one report, we see that enforcement of drug laws, because of the war on drugs, has been most consistent in poor neighborhoods that tend to have large black populations. One example is Chicago:

    View attachment 19832

    So, policing has been most present in poor and black neighborhoods purposefully because they were targeted in the war on drugs, not simply because they consume, sell, or possess more drugs. Consider only that crack-cocaine, the drug most associated with blacks, carries the highest sentence of all drugs and resulted in immense over-criminalization [1, 2, 3], whereas the opioid crisis, which has afflicted more whites than blacks, was treated as a public health crisis that required marshaling the non-police resources of all 50-states.

    This is not to discount the effects of the economic collapse of many de-industrialized cities like Milwaukee and Detroit, and segregation, though Jim Crow laws and black codes/covenants and redlining that prevented what few black people who made it to the middle class from owning homes, property being one of the sanctified American rights. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].

    All of this is to say that, while inexcusable, crime often occurs for conditional reasons, tied to some measure of socioeconomic deprivation, and not only because of some behavioral traits extant in a given group of people. This is consistent with Merton’s strain typology, as well as the theories on learned behavior. Agency and free will can’t explain the whole story.

    Finally, simply taking the behavioral approach cannot explain why crime has fallen significantly in the United States since 1999. Did people all of a sudden decide to behave better? One source claims that the self-control might be only one possible explanation. Another source gives significantly increased policing as another very plausible explanation. But this might be suitable for another topic.




    The chart doesn't say even part of it - you’ve provided a non-explanation. What’s more, your argument is revealing itself as one that seeks to implicitly crush the protestors for even daring to exert recalcitrant behavior. This is not friendly to the established principle of freedom of speech. Notwithstanding

    You can also find a direct correlation between the collapse of the community, its socioeconomic status, and the effects of the war on drugs, sexual pathologies notwithstanding. How can you expect them to grow up in a healthy family when their entire communities have been decimated by the process I’ve explained above? It’s correct to say that the nuclear family has been eroded, and I agree that that could be problematic. But the issue has economic implications. From the CATO Institute: “Approximately 50,000–60,000 students are denied financial aid every year due to past drug convictions.6” Therefore, a drug conviction can mean that those individuals may never recover socially and economically from their sentence. Is that simply their own fault? While shockingly high among blacks, the rate for unmarried births has been increasing across the board. Nevertheless, all is not lost. According to numbers from the CDC, “black fathers (70%) were most likely to have bathed, dressed, diapered, or helped their children use the toilet every day compared with white (60%) and Hispanic fathers (45%)”, in addition to other activities like reading to them and eating meals with them. There are economic reasons why blacks do not often cohabitate, related possibly to social security, jobs, and prior convictions, even if the parents are equally involved in caring for the family. That said, kin networks might be an additional support mechanism for non-traditionally nuclear families [Source]. I will forgo talking about income for the sake of time, but the racial wealth gap shows that the median black family owns significantly less in terms of real money.

    Since raising a family requires some measure of wealth, let’s take a look at how socioeconomic status affects the average urban black family’s ability to properly raise their family. First there’s the neighborhood. Since we’ve determined the conditions of most of the neighborhoods that most black people live in, let’s assess whether individuals can raise stable families there. Historically, it goes without saying that conditions of black neighborhoods are a result of segregation. Some seminal perspectives claim that what happened in the 1970s, despite a period of relative prosperity and lower crime/violence, was a social fragmenting of predominantly black neighborhoods, not simply the family, but friends and kin, had separated from each other. That was precisely when the “war on drugs” began and the US government sought to eliminate black gangs and, by extension, community groups. Recent studies (cited is one among a series of them) of federal programs like Moving to Opportunity prove that exposure to better living environments help children’s long-term educational and career outcomes.

    Next, the problem can often be traced back to education, which has a significant correlation with wealth, in neighborhoods and families. Lack of economic success among US-born blacks compared to that of black immigrant families is inherently tied to level of education. People with lower incomes pay a lower percentage of that income toward taxes. Since lower income people tend to gather in low-income neighborhoods, their neighborhoods often contribute less into the tax system. Public schools are funded locally through property taxes, and most poor and black people do not own their homes in impoverished and ghettoized neighborhoods. Therefore, the schools received less funding, resources, and educational attention in many ways. If you can’t get a good education, you’re condemned to fail in the job market, which is often decided by your degrees, certifications, and skills. Those poor and black communities reproduce unskilled labor [1, 2, 3]. Additionally, while black wealth has slightly increased and poverty decreased over time, “white family wealth was seven times greater than black family wealth” most recently [Source]. Again, poverty isn’t an exclusively black issue. Finally, working hard and getting an education have usually not been perfect solutions for closing the wealth gap, for poor people in general, but also for most blacks. Studies find that simply putting money into schooling doesn’t address the issue of broader social deprivation.

    I never claimed that the systemic problem was ONLY one of racism against blacks, which has been well researched. My claim is that there are consistent impediments at the institutional and individual levels that are concentrated among poor US-born blacks whose largely inherited and structurally-perpetuated conditions reproduce a cyclical process of poverty and violence. It’s an iterative process whereby children grow up poor, lack proper education, skills, and training for higher-paying work, and reproduce that cycle in future generations. It’s a poverty issue foremost, compounded by the racial factor and its historical significance.




    LOL, nice deflection. I countered your anecdotal social media “evidence” with my own factual anecdotal evidence. Are you telling me I shouldn’t trust what I see in real life and only trust what I see on social media? Like I’ve said, the race aspect is the most visceral part of this, and, by attempting to counter their narrative with your own on race, you fell in their trap. I fully recognize that the issue not just one of race, which is why my discussion is one based around class/wealth/poverty.

    Nobody’s holding whole groups guilty! The point remains that there might be many of the protestors who are prejudiced or biased against white people, but to charge them with racism is false because racism entails holding a measure of power that can be officially acted upon to purposely inflict damage on another group.

    Social media can be deluding, people telling police officers to take a knee and the like are the equivalent of those in Lebanon calling for “isqat al-nizam” and indicative of the empty, performative aspects of wokeness. They amount to nothing tangible but to make people feel better about themselves. If this continues, I promise nothing will fundamentally change. I summarized what I think could change from the protests and it’s not much. The point remains that we keep seeing instances of excessive use of force by officers and the fact there will be some slight measure of accountability now is a good thing for all and doesn’t indicate a decline in western civilization.

    I’ll make the same argument that Donald Trump made after the Charlottesville protests, there are good people and bad people on both sides. And I will add to it that one group inherently exerts more power and influence than others. Those protestors brandishing their guns in statehouses looked as much like ISIS as those BLM protestors supposedly do ;).




    LOL again. I’m saying the conditions that allowed for Obama to be elected were favorable toward whites, and he advanced a system that didn’t threaten white interests, so your assertion that racism is over is incorrect because his election did not, in fact, could not, change the system. Why can’t I have this conversation? A Lebanese can’t talk about race?
    i will address your post shortly, but i appreciate the effort going into it, even if we disagree.
     
    HalaMadrid

    HalaMadrid

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    You say “our” like we own it. This is what the New York Times wrote about Maronites when they emigrated to the US in the late 19th century.
    SANCTIFIED ARAB TRAMPS. Man old NYT archives are a gold mine. I think I need a nickname change.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    I said especially Arab Sunnis, not exclusively Arab Sunnis.

    I am responding to your claims lies.
    When Western nations start to declare public holiday on Eid days, come and talk BS about Iran and its treatment of its minorities - all put together below 10%.

    No one is lynched on the streets based on his looks in Tehran. Maybe time for the US govt to take a cue from Iran.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    "It does because there is really little or no racial or ethnic discrimination in Iran." - hard to believe because I know for a fact that for example Zoroastrians and Baha'i are being openly prosecuted.

    "Please stick to the topic of the thread." - no problem, but with one stipulation: I reserve the right to respond to your posts regardless of whether they are off topic or not.
    I never denied you the right to respond. I'm only asking you not to respond with off topics, like your Muki friend is doing.
     
    AtheistForYeezus

    AtheistForYeezus

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Blacks account for 60% of all violent crime, yet we are somehow forced into believing this is OK,
    and that any deviation from this narrative makes you a racist.
    Not only that, but white people are being forced to kneel for all blacks because of some ex-felon who got abused by the police.
    White Americans are not asking black Americans to apologize for the crimes of their community.

    F.ck off, keep it in your pants and stop having that many children if you're too irresponsible to provide for them.
    Get a job, sort your shit out, and stop crying racism.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    When Western nations start to declare public holiday on Eid days, come and talk BS about Iran and its treatment of its minorities - all put together below 10%.

    No one is lynched on the streets based on his looks in Tehran. Maybe time for the US govt to take a cue from Iran.
    No one is lynched in the US based on their looks, either. You're in the wrong century.

    But in Iran. You can get killed for your opinion, religion, sexual orientation, and sexuality. In other words, you are killed for being human. I don't see people publicly executed here like they do in Iran. Cranes hanging people don't decorate my city's skyline.
     
    NewLeb

    NewLeb

    New Member
    It’s the UN...the place is run by nincompoops who spent their whole academic years reading Chomsky...

     
    NewLeb

    NewLeb

    New Member
    The ADL is a Jewish advocacy group mainly focused on “anti-semitism,” so why is it banning (not that it has the authority to) anti-Antifa speech? I always said that Marxism is an inherently Jewish ideology....

     
    proIsrael-nonIsraeli

    proIsrael-nonIsraeli

    Legendary Member
    I never denied you the right to respond. I'm only asking you not to respond with off topics, like your Muki friend is doing.
    "I never denied you the right to respond" - It's not what I implied. I am simply said that regardless of whether your posts are off topic or not I reserve the right to reply to it.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    I think it's now time to bring back some reasoned ideas to this thread. Disclaimer: This post is necessarily verbose and possibly multi-syllabic.
    i maintain that veracity is measured neither by the weight of one's gold nor by the degree of complexity of one's expression. the simplification of convoluted transcripts towards their simplest forms is always at the service of truth, and we shall therefore proceed to demonstrating this principle.

    What does competence have to do with crime and police brutality? I know you’re much more discerning than this, there is a more sophisticated way of assessing why crime occurs than simply someone’s competence. People can still exert bad behavior even when there aren’t structural impediments to them living a good life. At least one source attempts to give us some explanation to the phenomenon using multiple methods and lenses. The determinative factor is actually which crimes are policed and which aren’t. Behavior alone is a grossly inadequate framework for understanding crime. There’s almost the assumption built into this line of argumentation that some people innately have intelligent characteristics and others lack as much, simply by their biological nature or genetic composition.
    in a very relevant example which pertain to the notion i was forwarding, competence, in the line of police work, oftentimes spells the difference between maintaining a situation under control and between allowing it to escalate out of control. thus for one has to prove himself or herself quite worthy before being appointed to the post, and that is established through a hierarchy of competence, albeit the threshold qualification line is oftentimes a little bit blurry. self-control along with some other psychological requirements are an integral part of the qualification process, with the precise aim to minimize the probability of bad behavior.

    now all the way until very recently, what i forwarded above was supposedly common sense. now my interest has gone away from proving that point, towards figuring out how can one be able to formulate presumably complex thoughts without realizing something that basic? this is not a simple question, as it clearly points out a schism and a deviation from objective reality. this is usually indicative of a deeper deviation at a fundamental level.

    You say “our” like we own it. This is what the New York Times wrote about Maronites when they emigrated to the US in the late 19th century. Things change with time. Inclusion and exclusion to power structures, including to western civilization, is often conditional on consent and compliance, not always hard work, perseverance, and values. I think it is naive to assume that different cultures can come into constant contact without experiencing some tension, hostility, or even violence, but absent a discussion of tangible power, the civilizational clash model falls apart, and Huntington and most, if not all, scholars of global politics acknowledge as much. Your analysis, therefore, is one rooted in deference, rather than independence from the established powers because you’ve chosen not to elicit even the slightest critique toward the most basic transgressions of the police.
    the question that begs to be raised is how can you conclude or presume ownership when the context of the utilization of the pronoun cannot be more obvious, and quoting: "our culture, our civilization and the progress we made as human beings". which is also troubling, even without pointing out the fact that you have chosen to address the tangential form rather than address the clear cut point i was making, now could that be because the ideological perspective you carry overrules rationality in its zeal to pop up? it is not that you have not presented any evidence against the hierarchy of competence model, since there are none, it is rather that one cannot present or formulate a rationally convincing argument against that principle, and this is where that deal should be sealed.
    We can talk about the SAT another time, but SAT scores are laughably bad determinants of competence. Imagine only hiring someone for a job if they passed an exam but couldn’t apply the skills needed to competently complete the job. In fact, the system decays when it perpetuates its admissions standards only based on the SAT and not a variety of academic and personal factors that might determine whether a student is competent or not.
    SAT was presented as an example in the set of tools that are used to evaluate competence, there are other tools, the more competitive the institution is, the more elaborate and varied the tools in that set become. however to switch to a quota based system or simply to admit someone who doesn't meet the intellectual or physical requirements for the sake of diversity is counterproductive. you really wouldn't be that one patient seeing the doctor who was accepted, graduated, and was hired because of his skin color rather than his score tests, regardless of what color his skin is. again, to argue against that is irrational. the idea is to provide equal opportunity to all, not equal outcomes.

    Sure, but we have to ask why we would excuse those corrupt officers for bad behavior. Again, I am not talking about individual cops and their merits. Please understand the essence of my argument is not limited to behavioral explanations.
    why would cops be excused for their corrupt behavior? they should face the consequences of their corruption or mishandling of critical situations. you are bound to find many failures given that there is around one million police officers in the united states, it is a statistical reality, there is no escaping it. checks should be introduced into the system where they are missing to ensure that these officers are flagged as early as possible, and what these checks represent in reality is another piece in the competence assessment model.

    here are some of the flaws one can point out the ideological based approaches to this subject.
    • people are approaching the subject from a political perspective rather than a rational one.
    • the problem is solved in courts not on the streets.
    • the remedy is more competent cops, not fewer cops.
    • the rift that is being created between the left and the law enforcement agencies is destructive.
    • the most pronounced ideas on the subject are the most deviant ones.
    Nevertheless, the stats necessitate a discussion of police training and standards. It’s not simply an issue of the policeman acting with poor judgment. When such poor judgment is repeatedly displayed, it calls into question the standards, practices, and training he received. If you work for a company that has loose rules for managing your behavior and allows you significant discretion in conducting your business and there’s little to no accountability for your loose behavior, in fact there’s are entire institutions (including police unions, and officers themselves) and groups of people who blindly support and defend your behavior, effectively disabling accountability, and you and many of your coworkers continuously misinterpret its rules and act in a manner that negatively hurts your clients, would you not say there is a systemic issue and not simply bad actors in those positions?
    this poor judgment is symptom of a deeper ailment, and it is not manifesting itself strictly within law enforcement circles. it is evident in almost everything around you, pending that you possess an analytical and a critical mind capable of picking up and observing these clues. want some hints?
    • the presidential race was between donald trump and hilary clinton.
    • 1.5 million violent gang members in the USA.
    • 70000 yearly fatalities from drug overdoses.
    • 1.2 million violent crimes recorded in 2018
    what we are witnessing today is just a new controversy that will soon come back to make a new item on the list of absurdity above. i can elaborate further on numbers and statistics to show that not only you are not even close to addressing the problem, but there is nothing good at the end of the path that your arguments are drawing, there is only blood, chaos and more miseries.

    A report on a documentary highlighting the dangers of militarized police training provides additional evidence that this issue is embedded within policing in much of the country. Another element that shows the systemic nature of the problem at hand is how medical examiners' reports can often be manipulated to, seemingly, cover up murders. Even some former cops agree there’s a police training issue, especially when cops are undertrained in conflict resolution, imbibed with battle rhetoric, and their main reaction to many situations that can be resolved otherwise is to use brutal force.
    you know why there are no reports on documentaries that highlights the dangers of demilitarizing the police training? because training police in that aspect is simply common sense that the dangers of eliminating that training to the community, to the police officers, and to everyone involved will increase.

    now it goes without saying there is always a need to evolve all training programs to address their shortcomings and keep enhancing them, but this only reinforces the notion of a system built on competence, by increasing the checks and the requirements and the training of the individuals.

    “Well, if he just complied…”, one might say. However, compliance is not simply something desired for the officers to do their jobs, it is what the system necessitates in order to defeat any form of dissent, justification for legal recourse, and if the rules of compliance are not followed, then murder is justified.
    compliance reduces the risks of you getting shot. now i understand that most people who find themselves at odds with the law are not usually mathematical wizards, but they should still be able to understand basic notions of probability.

    it is much more productive to campaign for people to follow the simple instructions of law enforcement and avoid confrontation with the law, rather than campaign for police officers to stand down when people confront them or resist arrest. this is how it should be in a sane world. not that excessive use of force is not a problem or shouldn't be addressed.

    how hard is it? if you enter into a confrontation with a police officer things will definitely not turn out well for you, it is not about being shot, resisting arrest is a misdemeanor that could land you up to 1 year in jail or add 1 year to your sentencing in most states in addition a heavy fine or even get you killed if the confrontation escalates out of control. so what is the point, really?

    stick to the instructions
    stick to the instructions
    stick to the instructions
    stick to the instructions


    If you’re so worried about things changing for the worse, baddi tamnak. What you’re seeing today is not the change you think it is. Barring a seismic shift in the political power balance, systemic change will not occur. The most that you could expect are some changes to policing at the local level, culminating mostly in a shift in tactics, possibly spurned by funding cuts that require more resourcefulness, as well as forcing some police to fall on their swords in terms of convictions, firings, resignations, replacements and the like. Asking Mitch and Nancy to institute any kind of reforms is the equivalent of asking the Nabih of Lebanon to fight corruption, they ruin more than they help, just like Clinton did in the 90s because their role is to reinforce the preexisting power structure, the only difference is the words they use to do it. It’d be naive to assume that they will prostrate as easily and as quickly as some of those white people at the protests. The corporate and cultural elements are separately performative and most people aren’t buying them. Maybe I'm naive, but I always thought upholding American values and norms and western civilization meant justice for all. Upholding justice and small changes to police tactics =/= the demise of western civilization. Most white people and many Republicans recognize at least that there’s a problem that needs to be addressed.
    the political situation in the USA is a reflection of the reality of the people living there.

    Nope, they’re not very telling. In fact, pulling these numbers without providing proper context kills the point of providing statistics to being with. Crime and policing are not mutually inclusive, as shown by the higher number of overall crimes committed by whites, yet the lower preponderance of policing in middle and upper class, predominantly white communities.
    your statement does not reflect the reality of how crimes are reported or how these statistics are conducted. if a body of a killed person is found, you think it is rolled under the carpet if the murderer is white? and investigation is carried on only if the murderer is black? this is precisely the type of nonsense that is destroying america, common sense is no longer that common, not that it ever was, but every now and then it requires a jolt to reawaken the people and bring them back from that alternative reality.

    these numbers are very telling about the reality of the black community in the united states. people can only reject that out of denial or malice. the first step towards fixing these issues is to admit the problem exists, and yet here we are....

    To go back to the original argument, I was merely refuting your assertion that blacks commit more crimes overall, which is correct.

    As I said, the UCR numbers are not crimes committed, but crimes reported to police. Guess who is more likely to have crimes reported against them despite demonstrably similar levels of committed crimes? A black person is X times more likely to be arrested for committing an offense. So, this does not mean they are more likely to commit murder; it means they are more likely to be caught given the total number of murders committed.
    you are stretching logic and rationality very thin in trying to imply that these numbers are biased. granted, the number of arrests made (which is what this data indicates, not the number of reported crimes) do not automatically mean conviction, it is not however something that points towards to a systematic flaw, it rather clearly indicates a community problem; not that the systematic flaw may not be real, however its impact is minimal in comparison to the ailment that is striking the black community.

    Additionally, these top researchers, who closely represent my position, explicate that crime differences virtually disappear between whites and blacks when accounting for neighborhood. Why is it that poor, predominantly black neighborhoods are targeted significantly, but affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods aren’t? The difference is poverty [see pages 339-40 here].
    i do not think you are reading these researches correctly. a neighborhood is a reflection of how people follow their lives. in neighborhoods where there is a strong family unit, where people are provided with decent schooling and parenting, it is only normal that there will be less crimes and it is only normal that law enforcement officers will not be on high alert as much as they would be in neighborhoods ruled by gangsters.

    and this only goes to show that the problem is not systematic, but rather communal, and on a very fundamental level. where these values go down the drain, so will prosperity, and it is highly probable that crime will shortly follow. there is no escaping this reality. so why are you supporting fixing the problem elsewhere?

    It is important here to consider what I stated concerning overpolicing and underpolicing and how this supposed pathology of criminal behavior can be better explained by understanding relative deprivation and how black neighborhoods have been historically underserved and disadvantaged. They are twice as likely to get arrested for the same offense as a white person. Further, blacks can receive harsher jail/prison sentences for committing the same, minor offense as whites [Source 1, Source 2]. “blacks are 40% of drug violation arrests but only 13% of admitted drug users”, said a 1995 federal government report. So, there’s no real discrepancy between the races in terms of behavior regarding drug use. The problem must be somewhere else. The “war on drugs” has had deeply significant human costs that perpetuate the cycle of violence and crime, which, again, can be learned behavior given the circumstances, in certain neighborhoods. According to one report, we see that enforcement of drug laws, because of the war on drugs, has been most consistent in poor neighborhoods that tend to have large black populations. One example is Chicago:



    Chicago.png



    So, policing has been most present in poor and black neighborhoods purposefully because they were targeted in the war on drugs, not simply because they consume, sell, or possess more drugs. Consider only that crack-cocaine, the drug most associated with blacks, carries the highest sentence of all drugs and resulted in immense over-criminalization [1, 2, 3], whereas the opioid crisis, which has afflicted more whites than blacks, was treated as a public health crisis that required marshaling the non-police resources of all 50-states.



    This is not to discount the effects of the economic collapse of many de-industrialized cities like Milwaukee and Detroit, and segregation, though Jim Crow laws and black codes/covenants and redlining that prevented what few black people who made it to the middle class from owning homes, property being one of the sanctified American rights. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].



    All of this is to say that, while inexcusable, crime often occurs for conditional reasons, tied to some measure of socioeconomic deprivation, and not only because of some behavioral traits extant in a given group of people. This is consistent with Merton’s strain typology, as well as the theories on learned behavior. Agency and free will can’t explain the whole story.



    Finally, simply taking the behavioral approach cannot explain why crime has fallen significantly in the United States since 1999. Did people all of a sudden decide to behave better? One source claims that the self-control might be only one possible explanation. Another source gives significantly increased policing as another very plausible explanation. But this might be suitable for another topic.









    The chart doesn't say even part of it - you’ve provided a non-explanation. What’s more, your argument is revealing itself as one that seeks to implicitly crush the protestors for even daring to exert recalcitrant behavior. This is not friendly to the established principle of freedom of speech. Notwithstanding



    You can also find a direct correlation between the collapse of the community, its socioeconomic status, and the effects of the war on drugs, sexual pathologies notwithstanding. How can you expect them to grow up in a healthy family when their entire communities have been decimated by the process I’ve explained above? It’s correct to say that the nuclear family has been eroded, and I agree that that could be problematic. But the issue has economic implications. From the CATO Institute: “Approximately 50,000–60,000 students are denied financial aid every year due to past drug convictions.6” Therefore, a drug conviction can mean that those individuals may never recover socially and economically from their sentence. Is that simply their own fault? While shockingly high among blacks, the rate for unmarried births has been increasing across the board. Nevertheless, all is not lost. According to numbers from the CDC, “black fathers (70%) were most likely to have bathed, dressed, diapered, or helped their children use the toilet every day compared with white (60%) and Hispanic fathers (45%)”, in addition to other activities like reading to them and eating meals with them. There are economic reasons why blacks do not often cohabitate, related possibly to social security, jobs, and prior convictions, even if the parents are equally involved in caring for the family. That said, kin networks might be an additional support mechanism for non-traditionally nuclear families [Source]. I will forgo talking about income for the sake of time, but the racial wealth gap shows that the median black family owns significantly less in terms of real money.



    Since raising a family requires some measure of wealth, let’s take a look at how socioeconomic status affects the average urban black family’s ability to properly raise their family. First there’s the neighborhood. Since we’ve determined the conditions of most of the neighborhoods that most black people live in, let’s assess whether individuals can raise stable families there. Historically, it goes without saying that conditions of black neighborhoods are a result of segregation. Some seminal perspectives claim that what happened in the 1970s, despite a period of relative prosperity and lower crime/violence, was a social fragmenting of predominantly black neighborhoods, not simply the family, but friends and kin, had separated from each other. That was precisely when the “war on drugs” began and the US government sought to eliminate black gangs and, by extension, community groups. Recent studies (cited is one among a series of them) of federal programs like Moving to Opportunity prove that exposure to better living environments help children’s long-term educational and career outcomes.



    Next, the problem can often be traced back to education, which has a significant correlation with wealth, in neighborhoods and families. Lack of economic success among US-born blacks compared to that of black immigrant families is inherently tied to level of education. People with lower incomes pay a lower percentage of that income toward taxes. Since lower income people tend to gather in low-income neighborhoods, their neighborhoods often contribute less into the tax system. Public schools are funded locally through property taxes, and most poor and black people do not own their homes in impoverished and ghettoized neighborhoods. Therefore, the schools received less funding, resources, and educational attention in many ways. If you can’t get a good education, you’re condemned to fail in the job market, which is often decided by your degrees, certifications, and skills. Those poor and black communities reproduce unskilled labor [1, 2, 3]. Additionally, while black wealth has slightly increased and poverty decreased over time, “white family wealth was seven times greater than black family wealth” most recently [Source]. Again, poverty isn’t an exclusively black issue. Finally, working hard and getting an education have usually not been perfect solutions for closing the wealth gap, for poor people in general, but also for most blacks. Studies find that simply putting money into schooling doesn’t address the issue of broader social deprivation.



    I never claimed that the systemic problem was ONLY one of racism against blacks, which has been well researched. My claim is that there are consistent impediments at the institutional and individual levels that are concentrated among poor US-born blacks whose largely inherited and structurally-perpetuated conditions reproduce a cyclical process of poverty and violence. It’s an iterative process whereby children grow up poor, lack proper education, skills, and training for higher-paying work, and reproduce that cycle in future generations. It’s a poverty issue foremost, compounded by the racial factor and its historical significance.









    LOL, nice deflection. I countered your anecdotal social media “evidence” with my own factual anecdotal evidence. Are you telling me I shouldn’t trust what I see in real life and only trust what I see on social media? Like I’ve said, the race aspect is the most visceral part of this, and, by attempting to counter their narrative with your own on race, you fell in their trap. I fully recognize that the issue not just one of race, which is why my discussion is one based around class/wealth/poverty.



    Nobody’s holding whole groups guilty! The point remains that there might be many of the protestors who are prejudiced or biased against white people, but to charge them with racism is false because racism entails holding a measure of power that can be officially acted upon to purposely inflict damage on another group.



    Social media can be deluding, people telling police officers to take a knee and the like are the equivalent of those in Lebanon calling for “isqat al-nizam” and indicative of the empty, performative aspects of wokeness. They amount to nothing tangible but to make people feel better about themselves. If this continues, I promise nothing will fundamentally change. I summarized what I think could change from the protests and it’s not much. The point remains that we keep seeing instances of excessive use of force by officers and the fact there will be some slight measure of accountability now is a good thing for all and doesn’t indicate a decline in western civilization.



    I’ll make the same argument that Donald Trump made after the Charlottesville protests, there are good people and bad people on both sides. And I will add to it that one group inherently exerts more power and influence than others. Those protestors brandishing their guns in statehouses looked as much like ISIS as those BLM protestors supposedly do ;).
    not enough time to address all of that... you will have to take it on faith that you are not reaching the correct conclusion.

    LOL again. I’m saying the conditions that allowed for Obama to be elected were favorable toward whites, and he advanced a system that didn’t threaten white interests, so your assertion that racism is over is incorrect because his election did not, in fact, could not, change the system. Why can’t I have this conversation? A Lebanese can’t talk about race?
    you think that me telling you to drop the argument of institutional and systematic racism against black people in a country where obama was elected to the presidency, is because you are Lebanese? :( hmmm maybe i should have started with this one... ......... i think this is a show stopper.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    i maintain that veracity is measured neither by the weight of one's gold nor by the degree of complexity of one's expression. the simplification of convoluted transcripts towards their simplest forms is always at the service of truth, and we shall therefore proceed to demonstrating this principle.


    in a very relevant example which pertain to the notion i was forwarding, competence, in the line of police work, oftentimes spells the difference between maintaining a situation under control and between allowing it to escalate out of control. thus for one has to prove himself or herself quite worthy before being appointed to the post, and that is established through a hierarchy of competence, albeit the threshold qualification line is oftentimes a little bit blurry. self-control along with some other psychological requirements are an integral part of the qualification process, with the precise aim to minimize the probability of bad behavior.

    now all the way until very recently, what i forwarded above was supposedly common sense. now my interest has gone away from proving that point, towards figuring out how can one be able to formulate presumably complex thoughts without realizing something that basic? this is not a simple question, as it clearly points out a schism and a deviation from objective reality. this is usually indicative of a deeper deviation at a fundamental level.


    the question that begs to be raised is how can you conclude or presume ownership when the context of the utilization of the pronoun cannot be more obvious, and quoting: "our culture, our civilization and the progress we made as human beings". which is also troubling, even without pointing out the fact that you have chosen to address the tangential form rather than address the clear cut point i was making, now could that be because the ideological perspective you carry overrules rationality in its zeal to pop up? it is not that you have not presented any evidence against the hierarchy of competence model, since there are none, it is rather that one cannot present or formulate a rationally convincing argument against that principle, and this is where that deal should be sealed.

    SAT was presented as an example in the set of tools that are used to evaluate competence, there are other tools, the more competitive the institution is, the more elaborate and varied the tools in that set become. however to switch to a quota based system or simply to admit someone who doesn't meet the intellectual or physical requirements for the sake of diversity is counterproductive. you really wouldn't be that one patient seeing the doctor who was accepted, graduated, and was hired because of his skin color rather than his score tests, regardless of what color his skin is. again, to argue against that is irrational. the idea is to provide equal opportunity to all, not equal outcomes.


    why would cops be excused for their corrupt behavior? they should face the consequences of their corruption or mishandling of critical situations. you are bound to find many failures given that there is around one million police officers in the united states, it is a statistical reality, there is no escaping it. checks should be introduced into the system where they are missing to ensure that these officers are flagged as early as possible, and what these checks represent in reality is another piece in the competence assessment model.

    here are some of the flaws one can point out the ideological based approaches to this subject.
    • people are approaching the subject from a political perspective rather than a rational one.
    • the problem is solved in courts not on the streets.
    • the remedy is more competent cops, not fewer cops.
    • the rift that is being created between the left and the law enforcement agencies is destructive.
    • the most pronounced ideas on the subject are the most deviant ones.

    this poor judgment is symptom of a deeper ailment, and it is not manifesting itself strictly within law enforcement circles. it is evident in almost everything around you, pending that you possess an analytical and a critical mind capable of picking up and observing these clues. want some hints?
    • the presidential race was between donald trump and hilary clinton.
    • 1.5 million violent gang members in the USA.
    • 70000 yearly fatalities from drug overdoses.
    • 1.2 million violent crimes recorded in 2018
    what we are witnessing today is just a new controversy that will soon come back to make a new item on the list of absurdity above. i can elaborate further on numbers and statistics to show that not only you are not even close to addressing the problem, but there is nothing good at the end of the path that your arguments are drawing, there is only blood, chaos and more miseries.


    you know why there are no reports on documentaries that highlights the dangers of demilitarizing the police training? because training police in that aspect is simply common sense that the dangers of eliminating that training to the community, to the police officers, and to everyone involved will increase.

    now it goes without saying there is always a need to evolve all training programs to address their shortcomings and keep enhancing them, but this only reinforces the notion of a system built on competence, by increasing the checks and the requirements and the training of the individuals.


    compliance reduces the risks of you getting shot. now i understand that most people who find themselves at odds with the law are not usually mathematical wizards, but they should still be able to understand basic notions of probability.

    it is much more productive to campaign for people to follow the simple instructions of law enforcement and avoid confrontation with the law, rather than campaign for police officers to stand down when people confront them or resist arrest. this is how it should be in a sane world. not that excessive use of force is not a problem or shouldn't be addressed.

    how hard is it? if you enter into a confrontation with a police officer things will definitely not turn out well for you, it is not about being shot, resisting arrest is a misdemeanor that could land you up to 1 year in jail or add 1 year to your sentencing in most states in addition a heavy fine or even get you killed if the confrontation escalates out of control. so what is the point, really?

    stick to the instructions
    stick to the instructions
    stick to the instructions
    stick to the instructions



    the political situation in the USA is a reflection of the reality of the people living there.


    your statement does not reflect the reality of how crimes are reported or how these statistics are conducted. if a body of a killed person is found, you think it is rolled under the carpet if the murderer is white? and investigation is carried on only if the murderer is black? this is precisely the type of nonsense that is destroying america, common sense is no longer that common, not that it ever was, but every now and then it requires a jolt to reawaken the people and bring them back from that alternative reality.

    these numbers are very telling about the reality of the black community in the united states. people can only reject that out of denial or malice. the first step towards fixing these issues is to admit the problem exists, and yet here we are....


    you are stretching logic and rationality very thin in trying to imply that these numbers are biased. granted, the number of arrests made (which is what this data indicates, not the number of reported crimes) do not automatically mean conviction, it is not however something that points towards to a systematic flaw, it rather clearly indicates a community problem; not that the systematic flaw may not be real, however its impact is minimal in comparison to the ailment that is striking the black community.


    i do not think you are reading these researches correctly. a neighborhood is a reflection of how people follow their lives. in neighborhoods where there is a strong family unit, where people are provided with decent schooling and parenting, it is only normal that there will be less crimes and it is only normal that law enforcement officers will not be on high alert as much as they would be in neighborhoods ruled by gangsters.

    and this only goes to show that the problem is not systematic, but rather communal, and on a very fundamental level. where these values go down the drain, so will prosperity, and it is highly probable that crime will shortly follow. there is no escaping this reality. so why are you supporting fixing the problem elsewhere?


    not enough time to address all of that... you will have to take it on faith that you are not reaching the correct conclusion.


    you think that me telling you to drop the argument of institutional and systematic racism against black people in a country where obama was elected to the presidency, is because you are Lebanese? :( hmmm maybe i should have started with this one... ......... i think this is a show stopper.
    @Dark Angel please allow me troll you just this once: with all the stats you have presented above, I'm compelled to ask - is the US a Muslim country?
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    @Dark Angel please allow me troll you just this once: with all the stats you have presented above, I'm compelled to ask - is the US a Muslim country?
    i am glad you asked. here is the scientific answer: as long as muslims are still lining up in front of the embassies to immigrate to the USA then we can safely say it is not a muslim country.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    i am glad you asked. here is the scientific answer: as long as muslims are still lining up in front of the embassies to immigrate to the USA then we can safely say it is not a muslim country.
    Where do all those stats you are presenting fall in?
     
    Iron Maiden

    Iron Maiden

    Paragon of Bacon
    Orange Room Supporter
    SANCTIFIED ARAB TRAMPS. Man old NYT archives are a gold mine. I think I need a nickname change.
    yet again people make false comparisons and equivalancies..

    @Nevermore the NYT article comes from another era, none if the life standards were the sane, access to information and education, i wont even bother talking about openness to the world..

    maronites of the 19th century were indeed tramps, like most other people arriving to the us to be quarantined before settling in some shady neighborhood. wat is happening today is not the same at all.

    american culture is omnipresent today, the people going there know it, they might not agree to it but they sure do know it, whereas the maronite tramps of the 19th century knew jack all about anything outside their immediate village and family.

    next we’ll compare japan’s edo era art and hostile literature about chiristians do their 20th century manga culture that cant insert enough christian symbol in every nook it can find.
    get my drift?

    my little intrusion on ur discussion ends here.
     
    Top