Why isn't there as much public outrage with the cop killer...

[hskerprid]

 

I just get tired of hearing about all the African Americans still being repressed. There s just as much opportunity for blacks as there is for any other.

 

bullsh#t.

 

The only valid argument is that, although there is less opportunity for them, it's not because they're black.

If its political correctness your after I will kindly restate. There is equal opportunity for any citizen of america regardless of race. Better?

[Moiraine]

 

 

I just get tired of hearing about all the African Americans still being repressed. There s just as much opportunity for blacks as there is for any other.

bullsh#t.

 

The only valid argument is that, although there is less opportunity for them, it's not because they're black.

If its political correctness your after I will kindly restate. There is equal opportunity for any citizen of america regardless of race. Better?

No. I don't care about your political correctness or lack thereof. I care that you are factually incorrect. Even assuming the same socioeconomic status, which is an assumption that cannot be made, blacks face obstacles that most other don't. If you can't see that you're not opening your eyes.

 

 

Meritocratic ideology imbricates the moral economy—the norms that govern economic activity and society's protections and privileges.¹⁰ Americans are conflicted about the inequality in their society and, hence, the need for and urgency of political action to promote equality.¹¹ When inequalities can be rationalized as inevitable outcomes of lack of talent, skill, or work ethic, inequalities in wealth and health can be justified as reflecting individual, not societal, failings.¹⁰

 

System justification theory illuminates the relationship between meritocratic ideology and political inaction, showing why even the most disenfranchised citizens view inequalities as necessary and even fair.¹² The theory, and related research, shows that although the system is characterized by inequalities in access to resources, life chances, and life outcomes, believing that this is a just arrangement can be palliative. This reduces anxiety, dissonance, and perceptions of unfairness.¹² Among the disadvantaged, who bear the brunt of inequalities, system-justifying attitudes are often the strongest

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2936997/

 

 

Meritocracy has been proven to not really exist but Americans believe in it more than anyone.

[Junior]

It's willful ignorance, Knapp. Plain and simple. Same thing as with climate change, the wealth gap, etc. If we pretend there's no problem, then there's no problem!

[tschu]

The answer to Knapp's last point is of course compartmentalization, as well as the fact that racism today largely isn't direct and overt, but rather a set of internal biases.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

 

Here's a thought. Why not pull all police presence from predominantly black neighborhoods and let them "police" themselves.

Or you could work to ensure that the police in a given area are demographically representative of that area. But that is less racist, so let's do your thing.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/diversity_won_t_solve_police_misconduct_black_cops_don_t_reduce_violence.html

 

The best look at this comes from Brad W. Smith, a researcher from Wayne State University in Detroit. In a 2003 paper, he looks at the impact of police diversity on officer-involved homicides in cities of more than 100,000 residents and cities of more than 250,000 residents. Regardless of city size, there wasnt a relationship between racial representation and police killingsofficer diversity didnt mean much. At most, in smaller cities, female officers were more likely to commit shootings than their male counterparts, a facthe speculatesthat could be tied to sexist pressures on female officers, who might feel the need to act tough to prove their bona fides.

 

What mattered for police shootings wasnt the makeup of the police department, it was the makeup of the city. In all measured cities, an increase in black residents brought an increase in police shootings. In smaller cities, a substantial change in the proportion of black residents resulted in a slight increase in the predicted number of police-caused homicides. And in the larger cities, the same change increased the chance for police-caused homicides by a factor of 10 compared to smaller cities. Put another way, the quickest way to predict the number of police shootings in a city is to see how many blacks live there.

 

 

Oh boy, so the article is saying that there are more police shootings in cities with higher populations? Amazing! I feel like this study would support the claim that an all-white city of 250,000 would have fewer police shootings than an all-black of 100,000.

 

Aside from that, there's nothing that will prevent the black population from increasing. So, conclusions offered by the study don't do anything to provide us with any information that could produce a tangible, applicable resolutions to this problem.

 

Why do African-Americans have a greater disliking of the cops? Why are African-Americans more likely to be shot by police officers, regardless of the race of said police officer? There's a disconnect or six in the system. What are those? How can we best fix these disconnects?

 

Oh and by the way, cops will still continue to be murdered by random psychos, and cops will still be involved questionable cases regarding the death of a person. None of this is to say that these won't happen. But the frequency at which they are happening is abhorrent and unfortunate. So maybe--instead of debating about why people are or are not upset and if they have the right to be upset--we should realize that there are problems in the system and come together to create an equitable solution for everyone.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

 

If your white your automatically deemed racist these days.

Wow. Really?

A little bit of a reach there, but it seems like there is an adverse amount of reverse racism these days. I just get tired of hearing about all the African Americans still being repressed. There s just as much opportunity for blacks as there is for any other.

 

It just gets old after awhile having to pay for the sins of our forefathers that occurred hundreds of years ago.

 

 

Jim Crow Laws existed well into the 1960s, my friend.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

Here's a thought. Why not pull all police presence from predominantly black neighborhoods and let them "police" themselves.

Or you could work to ensure that the police in a given area are demographically representative of that area. But that is less racist, so let's do your thing.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/diversity_won_t_solve_police_misconduct_black_cops_don_t_reduce_violence.html

 

The best look at this comes from Brad W. Smith, a researcher from Wayne State University in Detroit. In a 2003 paper, he looks at the impact of police diversity on officer-involved homicides in cities of more than 100,000 residents and cities of more than 250,000 residents. Regardless of city size, there wasnt a relationship between racial representation and police killingsofficer diversity didnt mean much. At most, in smaller cities, female officers were more likely to commit shootings than their male counterparts, a facthe speculatesthat could be tied to sexist pressures on female officers, who might feel the need to act tough to prove their bona fides.

 

What mattered for police shootings wasnt the makeup of the police department, it was the makeup of the city. In all measured cities, an increase in black residents brought an increase in police shootings. In smaller cities, a substantial change in the proportion of black residents resulted in a slight increase in the predicted number of police-caused homicides. And in the larger cities, the same change increased the chance for police-caused homicides by a factor of 10 compared to smaller cities. Put another way, the quickest way to predict the number of police shootings in a city is to see how many blacks live there.

 

 

Oh boy, so the article is saying that there are more police shootings in cities with higher populations? Amazing! I feel like this study would support the claim that an all-white city of 250,000 would have fewer police shootings than an all-black of 100,000.

 

Aside from that, there's nothing that will prevent the black population from increasing. So, conclusions offered by the study don't do anything to provide us with any information that could produce a tangible, applicable resolutions to this problem.

 

The conclusion is that increasing diversity in the police force is not a resolution. It's beneficial to know what won't help. Not all research gives the results we want.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

 

 

 

Here's a thought. Why not pull all police presence from predominantly black neighborhoods and let them "police" themselves.

Or you could work to ensure that the police in a given area are demographically representative of that area. But that is less racist, so let's do your thing.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/diversity_won_t_solve_police_misconduct_black_cops_don_t_reduce_violence.html

 

The best look at this comes from Brad W. Smith, a researcher from Wayne State University in Detroit. In a 2003 paper, he looks at the impact of police diversity on officer-involved homicides in cities of more than 100,000 residents and cities of more than 250,000 residents. Regardless of city size, there wasnt a relationship between racial representation and police killingsofficer diversity didnt mean much. At most, in smaller cities, female officers were more likely to commit shootings than their male counterparts, a facthe speculatesthat could be tied to sexist pressures on female officers, who might feel the need to act tough to prove their bona fides.

 

What mattered for police shootings wasnt the makeup of the police department, it was the makeup of the city. In all measured cities, an increase in black residents brought an increase in police shootings. In smaller cities, a substantial change in the proportion of black residents resulted in a slight increase in the predicted number of police-caused homicides. And in the larger cities, the same change increased the chance for police-caused homicides by a factor of 10 compared to smaller cities. Put another way, the quickest way to predict the number of police shootings in a city is to see how many blacks live there.

 

 

Oh boy, so the article is saying that there are more police shootings in cities with higher populations? Amazing! I feel like this study would support the claim that an all-white city of 250,000 would have fewer police shootings than an all-black of 100,000.

 

Aside from that, there's nothing that will prevent the black population from increasing. So, conclusions offered by the study don't do anything to provide us with any information that could produce a tangible, applicable resolutions to this problem.

 

The conclusion is that increasing diversity in the police force is not a resolution. It's beneficial to know what won't help. Not all research gives the results we want.

 

 

Yes, I should have mentioned that. So the next step should address why.

[hskerprid]

 

 

 

If your white your automatically deemed racist these days.

 

Wow. Really?

A little bit of a reach there, but it seems like there is an adverse amount of reverse racism these days. I just get tired of hearing about all the African Americans still being repressed. There s just as much opportunity for blacks as there is for any other.

It just gets old after awhile having to pay for the sins of our forefathers that occurred hundreds of years ago.

Jim Crow Laws existed well into the 1960s, my friend.

 

Yes and those laws were struck down in 1954 by the supreme court. Once again, let's move on its 2014. The sins of the fathers.....

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

 

 

 

If your white your automatically deemed racist these days.

Wow. Really?

A little bit of a reach there, but it seems like there is an adverse amount of reverse racism these days. I just get tired of hearing about all the African Americans still being repressed. There s just as much opportunity for blacks as there is for any other.

It just gets old after awhile having to pay for the sins of our forefathers that occurred hundreds of years ago.

Jim Crow Laws existed well into the 1960s, my friend.

Yes and those laws were struck down in 1954 by the supreme court. Once again, let's move on its 2014. The sins of the fathers.....

 

 

Okay, let's move on by addressing the fact that, despite no laws endorsing discrimination of any kind, it still exists; and that the system is setup to still disadvantage minority populations.

[Junior]

 

 

 

 

Here's a thought. Why not pull all police presence from predominantly black neighborhoods and let them "police" themselves.

 

Or you could work to ensure that the police in a given area are demographically representative of that area. But that is less racist, so let's do your thing.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/diversity_won_t_solve_police_misconduct_black_cops_don_t_reduce_violence.html

The best look at this comes from Brad W. Smith, a researcher from Wayne State University in Detroit. In a 2003 paper, he looks at the impact of police diversity on officer-involved homicides in cities of more than 100,000 residents and cities of more than 250,000 residents. Regardless of city size, there wasnt a relationship between racial representation and police killingsofficer diversity didnt mean much. At most, in smaller cities, female officers were more likely to commit shootings than their male counterparts, a facthe speculatesthat could be tied to sexist pressures on female officers, who might feel the need to act tough to prove their bona fides.

What mattered for police shootings wasnt the makeup of the police department, it was the makeup of the city. In all measured cities, an increase in black residents brought an increase in police shootings. In smaller cities, a substantial change in the proportion of black residents resulted in a slight increase in the predicted number of police-caused homicides. And in the larger cities, the same change increased the chance for police-caused homicides by a factor of 10 compared to smaller cities. Put another way, the quickest way to predict the number of police shootings in a city is to see how many blacks live there.

 

Oh boy, so the article is saying that there are more police shootings in cities with higher populations? Amazing! I feel like this study would support the claim that an all-white city of 250,000 would have fewer police shootings than an all-black of 100,000.

 

Aside from that, there's nothing that will prevent the black population from increasing. So, conclusions offered by the study don't do anything to provide us with any information that could produce a tangible, applicable resolutions to this problem.

The conclusion is that increasing diversity in the police force is not a resolution. It's beneficial to know what won't help. Not all research gives the results we want.

The point isn't that changing the demographics of the police force would inherently result in less shootings. The point is that if the demographics are appropriate for an area, then the people within that area are more likely to trust the police, and less likely to look at a police shooting as whites versus black.

 

Another point: a change of what would be statistically relevant? 100? 50? I should hope there aren't that many unjust police shootings.

 

Finally, it was said that to predict police shootings, look at the black population. Aside from the crazy racial stuff there, maybe the better thing to look at would be income. Sure Cicero, Illinois has more crime than Schaumburg. Look at the income disparity. Middle class people are less likely to commit a non banking related crime.

[Moiraine]

 

 

The conclusion is that increasing diversity in the police force is not a resolution. It's beneficial to know what won't help. Not all research gives the results we want.

The point isn't that changing the demographics of the police force would inherently result in less shootings. The point is that if the demographics are appropriate for an area, then the people within that area are more likely to trust the police, and less likely to look at a police shooting as whites versus black.

 

Another point: a change of what would be statistically relevant? 100? 50? I should hope there aren't that many unjust police shootings.

 

Finally, it was said that to predict police shootings, look at the black population. Aside from the crazy racial stuff there, maybe the better thing to look at would be income. Sure Cicero, Illinois has more crime than Schaumburg. Look at the income disparity. Middle class people are less likely to commit a non banking related crime.

 

I'm willing to bet he already took income inequality into account. I could only find the abstract but I found something else of his where he did. (It would be hard to get published anywhere credible if he hadn't since that's an obvious thing to look at). He found that minority populations are just more likely to be targetted.

 

http://socpro.oxfordjournals.org/content/socpro/61/1/83.full.pdf

 

"Turning to the minority threat variables, we find that percent black and percent Hispanic residents in a city were both related positively to the number of sustained excessive force complaints, as predicted by the threat hypothesis. A one standard deviation increase in percent black resulted in about 66 percent more sustained complaints, whereas a standard deviation increase in percent Hispanic produced about 44 percent more complaints. Majority/minority income inequality was not significantly related to sustained excessive force complaints."

 

Edit: just realized the research was linked directly from the slate article. "The measure of economic inequality (Gini Index) was not significantly related to the dependent variable, nor were the proportion of Hispanic residents or the violent crime rate."

[BIGREDIOWAN]

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Knapp, help me out here, I can't edit out the a-hole part, sorry in advance if anyone takes offense to that part. These situations were never about race, people chose to take it that route, I won't change my position on that. I grew up in a less than desirable part of town with several black/hispanic/asian friends. We had the same opportunities, some did something with those opportunities, some did not, that was their choice and a parenting issue IMO. Why does every. single. cop thread have to turn into a racial issue? One comedian said it best, "Not all black people are criminals, not all white people are racist, and not all cops are bad, it's 2014, let's get equal!" I'm not racist, I don't care how anyone tries to prove that I am through their little studies and statistics that can prove whatever they want it to prove. Doesn't mean it's the truth.................I'm tired of the biased towards my race #blue, my brother and sisters are black, white, hispanic, asian, etc and all I see is #blue and the hate directed towards us. Pretty sad honestly, "It takes a lot to give up so much for people who care so little!"

[Junior]

 

 

Maybe he was doing his job. Would have been nice to determine that in a trial. We do know that one of the prime witnesses in support of his story was a lying white supremacist with a history of phony police statements. Really neat that they let someone testify when he knew she was lying. I'm pretty sure that's a crime too.

 

 

http://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-prosecutor-some-witnesses-lied-including-woman-who-didn-t-see-shooting-000602852.html

 

 

 

A woman who swore she saw teenager Michael Brown pummel Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson and charge him “like a football player,” was lying about being at the scene of the controversial police shooting, St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch said Friday.

“I’m sure she was nowhere near the place,” McCulloch said during a St. Louis radio interview. “She recounted the statement that was right out of the newspaper.”

While investigators doubted her story, McCulloch said the woman was allowed to testify because “early on, I decided that anyone who claimed to have witnessed anything would be presented to the grand jury.”