BLM Blamed for Spike in Deaths of Chicago's Blacks

[jbird4049]

One hundred out of a thousand is ten percent. You know you're backing up my argument, right?

Unless you have some figures, all you're doing is talking. I've shown you data, and you don't accept it. Present your own, then. Let's see some work, eh? If the streets are running red with blood, step outside and take a picture, because otherwise, I've demonstrated that they aren't, and you've presented nothing other than skepticism not backed up with evidence.

Penner posted a barrage of links that he believes supports his belief that the police are too quick to kill.

You made a response to Penner's post saying he was wrong by using a single chart from the Washington Post, without any analysis of the chart.

I made a post explaining how the chart was misleading.

You responded, saying my post supported you previous post.

I responded with an argument expanding on my earlier post on why that is not so. This included inferences, reasoning, facts, and numbers, along with a link to newspaper site https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ser ... e-killings that has an extensive data that is easily searchable, along with many articles on police homicides.

You responded not with any criticisms, let alone analysis, of my arguments, or even more information in support of support of your previous statement, but only with a overblown, imaginative retort.

I've added some screen shots.

By the way, the WaPo's article is good, but not as extensively researched, and uses slightly different criteria, as the Guardian's site. The Guardian list 1146 people killed, with 234 being unarmed, or 20.42% of the total, in 2015 which is the same year as the WaPo's chart. Since the police only report about half of their homicides to the FBI, both papers have had to do extensive digging, which makes getting accurate information difficult.

[Okeefenokee]

And in all of that potentially inaccurate reporting, neither study showed that police were more likely to shoot an unarmed person than an armed one.

Even being able to base stats on shit they got from a phone call, they still couldn't show more than a minority of incidents where unarmed people were shot, and even in those stories, not all are wrong. Michael Brown wasn't armed, and that was ruled a good shoot.

[SuburbanFarmer]

And in all of that potentially inaccurate reporting, neither study showed that police were more likely to shoot an unarmed person than an armed one.

Even being able to base stats on shit they got from a phone call, they still couldn't show more than a minority of incidents where unarmed people were shot, and even in those stories, not all are wrong. Michael Brown wasn't armed, and that was ruled a good shoot.

[Okeefenokee]

And in all of that potentially inaccurate reporting, neither study showed that police were more likely to shoot an unarmed person than an armed one.

Even being able to base stats on shit they got from a phone call, they still couldn't show more than a minority of incidents where unarmed people were shot, and even in those stories, not all are wrong. Michael Brown wasn't armed, and that was ruled a good shoot.

No. We've been arguing the same thing the whole time. It's the meme that cops are gunning people down with reckless abandon. It was perpetuated prolifically for years, until a study was done that showed that wasn't the case. Then another was done and didn't show that was true either.

And all you've got it, "these numbers aren't reliable, so we don't know what the truth might be. it could be a million. we may never know."

[Xenophon]

One hundred out of a thousand is ten percent. You know you're backing up my argument, right?

Unless you have some figures, all you're doing is talking. I've shown you data, and you don't accept it. Present your own, then. Let's see some work, eh? If the streets are running red with blood, step outside and take a picture, because otherwise, I've demonstrated that they aren't, and you've presented nothing other than skepticism not backed up with evidence.

Penner posted a barrage of links that he believes supports his belief that the police are too quick to kill.

You made a response to Penner's post saying he was wrong by using a single chart from the Washington Post, without any analysis of the chart.

I made a post explaining how the chart was misleading.

You responded, saying my post supported you previous post.

I responded with an argument expanding on my earlier post on why that is not so. This included inferences, reasoning, facts, and numbers, along with a link to newspaper site https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ser ... e-killings that has an extensive data that is easily searchable, along with many articles on police homicides.

You responded not with any criticisms, let alone analysis, of my arguments, or even more information in support of support of your previous statement, but only with a overblown, imaginative retort.

I've added some screen shots.

By the way, the WaPo's article is good, but not as extensively researched, and uses slightly different criteria, as the Guardian's site. The Guardian list 1146 people killed, with 234 being unarmed, or 20.42% of the total, in 2015 which is the same year as the WaPo's chart. Since the police only report about half of their homicides to the FBI, both papers have had to do extensive digging, which makes getting accurate information difficult.

Penner is a lady.

[Okeefenokee]

and while we're at it, I can spam links too,

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22734-poli ... ottrell-jr

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22733-poli ... -barney-ii

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22739-serg ... n-goodding

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22739-serg ... n-goodding

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22745-depu ... derek-geer

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22749-seni ... -f-logsdon

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22750-seni ... k-b-dailey

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22754-majo ... y-e-barney

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22752-poli ... son-moszer

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22779-spec ... -lee-tartt

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22786-corp ... e-carrigan

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22788-offi ... ie-guindon

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22792-poli ... efan-hofer

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22801-poli ... i-d-colson

https://www.odmp.org/officer/22811-poli ... lee-jacobs

140 killed in 2016.

https://www.odmp.org/search/year?year=2016

[SuburbanFarmer]

And in all of that potentially inaccurate reporting, neither study showed that police were more likely to shoot an unarmed person than an armed one.

Even being able to base stats on shit they got from a phone call, they still couldn't show more than a minority of incidents where unarmed people were shot, and even in those stories, not all are wrong. Michael Brown wasn't armed, and that was ruled a good shoot.

No. We've been arguing the same thing the whole time. It's the meme that cops are gunning people down with reckless abandon. It was perpetuated prolifically for years, until a study was done that showed that wasn't the case. Then another was done and didn't show that was true either.

And all you've got it, "these numbers aren't reliable, so we don't know what the truth might be. it could be a million. we may never know."

Another strawman. Nobody is arguing that.

The numbers are 'too damn high'. That's the argument, and it's subjective, but it's a valid one.

[Okeefenokee]

That's a bullshit metric. Even one is too much. You're never gonna get it to zero, so saying it's too high is a cop out.

[SuburbanFarmer]

That's a bullshit metric. Even one is too much. You're never gonna get it to zero, so saying it's too high is a cop out.

Strawman #3. Nobody requires perfection.

The fact that accurate statistics are unavailable does not invalidate the argument. When did police policy change to fire off a clip any time the suspect flees the scene? That's a military/assassination mindset, not police work.

When did it become policy to blow away anyone that possibly, maybe could be holding a weapon? Not police work - military mentality.

Why the fuck do these guys need shit like APCs or tanks? Same answer.

This is the basis of a police state, not maintaining law-and-order, and not 'protecting and serving' the public. The issue is real, no matter which nits you want to pick. I really wish Myrtok had come over, because while he defended the cops flawlessly, even he had to concede that there are massive shifts happening in the force. Shit is not right.

[Penner]

(CNN)No one disputes the horror of a special-needs teen getting beaten as another teen broadcasts the torture on Facebook Live.

But, almost immediately after the video went viral, so did the claims that the Black Lives Matter Movement was to blame.
Chicago police say they see no connection between the suspects and the Black Lives Matter activist group, contrary to some reports on social media.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/us/black- ... index.html