I'm European, but what in the actual fuck?
By - polle_den_tweede
Wow, a typical leftist meme: a big wall of text...
Their world-view requires a carefully layered denial of reality, so memes aren't a good vehicle for how they communicate
Alright let’s see…
> When you enslave black people
Shameful chapter in history indeed. Not just American history, but human history, since slavery was neither invented nor exclusively practiced in America.
> but they gain liberty so you go to war but you lose
That’s the Confederates, not the United States.
The pro-slavery side was not waving this 🇺🇸 flag; the anti-slavery side was.
> so you segregate black people but they don't disappear
Again, shameful, though not peculiar to America.
> so you lynch black people
TIL murders and hate crimes only exist in America.
> but they form self defense squads so you declare those terrorist organizations
If we’re talking about the Black Panthers here, then yes, they were terrorists — and also communists who zealously (if not religiously) worshipped Mao Zedong.
> but their calls for equality gain popularity so you shoot their leader
“tHe cia ASsASsinaTeD MaRtIn LuThEr kiNg”
> but they don't disappear so you settle them in houses full of toxic lead
Because obviously no other race has ever been exposed to lead poisoning. ^/s
> but they don't all die so you train cops to kill them instead
Show me a training manual that says “shoot if Black” and I’ll change my mind.
The fact is that any 42 million Black people exist in America, and about 0.000595% of them (the vast majority of whom were indisputably armed & dangerous) are fatally shot by police every year.
If this is how you do a genocide, it must be the most inefficient genocide ever.
Ironic considering China seems pretty keen on genocide, but of course they're perfect and we are filthy capitalist scum
And they hate black people
TIL MLK was the leader of all black people
He was clearly like, their ruler. He was the alpha.
> “tHe cia ASsASsinaTeD MaRtIn LuThEr kiNg”
I tried pointing out to redditors recently that the actual bullshit conspiracy theory is that the FBI assassinated him, so they should at least claim that. You can guess how many people were able to articulate why they disagreed with me and how many just downvoted.
What is your argument that he wasnt shot?
My argument is that if you think the FBI let his whole civil rights campaign play out and then in 1968 decided to hire James Earl Ray to shoot him for no reason, you might need to stop sniffing glue.
Something like 60,000 potential black lives have been forever denied by Planned Parenthood. Yet whoever wrote the original quote probably supports them.
These commies seething like if they speak for the black people, meanwhile they are the most racist people on earth
people who use "amerikkka" unironiclly are so fucking stupid
It’s communist scum what can you do
OP, would you take part in a friendly experiment?
You're a European, but obviously paying attention to American things. Understandable if it is not too closely.
Without looking it up, what would your guess be on how many unarmed black men are killed by the American police in a year?
That would help to gauge what the perception of the issue is.
Others who have not looked it up and are able to provide a gut-feeling guess, please participate too.
And I’d like to provide some survey results and statistics on this subject later.
I don’t think magnitude is the issue here, it’s more an issue with black men being more likely to meet a violent outcome in law enforcement incidents when all other things are held equal.
If you look at 100 white people being stopped and 100 black people being stopped - violent outcome is more likely for a much larger percentage of that 100 black people. How do you drive that down? Are the cop trainings to blame? Is there something else going on?
I’m really afraid this sub is starting to go full on right-wing propaganda when initially this was a sub for non-extremists to sit back, observe extremist rhetoric, and laugh.
That is not the case though. All other things being equal white men are more likely to be shot than black men.
Yeah - but why is that not more “front and center”? Without going into conspiracy-speak, I’m surprised this is not amplified more if there is evidence to support this.
It goes against the narrative. Imagine trying to organize a rally because John Dumas got shot compared to George Floyd. As soon as we tried we would be excoriated for being racist. There is also a radically different attitude in whites. If one of ours gets shot we ask "What did this dumbass do? Oh armed robbery? Sucks to be him." You don't see that in most black men in the media.
“The narrative” is just as much as a trendy boogeyman as “capitalism” or whatever is popular on Twitter. I think there’s more work to be done here.
Acknowledging that is maybe far more productive.
If you don't think the media has an agenda you don't pay attention.
Maybe I don’t. Fair enough.
I think the media will do whatever it can to sell its product - which includes playing up conspiracies or having an entertainment good v. evil angle.
But I also think there is money to be made in reporting empirically sound evidence, so why doesn’t it show up more often?
Its still not a death penalty offense, nor one where you forfeit a right to trial by jury.
When you decide to fight the police yes you do forfeit your right to jury trial.
Police *everywhere on earth* arrest and use force against men at a much higher rate than women, and 20-year-olds at a much higher rate than 80-year-olds.
Is it because police officers are naturally (or trained to be) misandrist and ageist?
Also, I don’t know how you define the word “propaganda,” but being exposed to other people’s ideas different from your own is what living in a democracy inevitably entails. You don’t have to agree with all of them, of course. And if you think your opinions are not seen here often enough, you’re welcome to post them more often.
What you say about age and gender actually work against your point. A man is, generally, more dangerous than a woman. Likewise, and 20 year old man is generally more dangerous than an 80 year old man. That is something we can all agree with. And with that in mind, use of force being applied more liberally in those cases makes sense.
It only makes sense in the case of black people if you are willing to claim black men are more dangerous than white men.
It’s not about whether certain categories of people inherently more dangerous.
It’s about whether certain categories of people are *statistically* more likely to commit more violent crimes.
For example: All other things being equal, a poor man is not born inherently more dangerous than a rich man, but the poor man is statistically more likely to commit violent crimes (whereas the rich man is statistically more likely to commit nonviolent white-collar crimes) due to his socioeconomic conditions.
So you think racial profiling and disproportionate amounts of use of force incidents involving black people is justified?
Stop putting words in my mouth.
I didn't put any words in your mouth. I'm asking you a question to get a clearer idea of what you are trying to say. Hence the question mark...
Let me clarify my question:
You are saying that some demographics are statistically more likely to commit crimes which is why police treat them differently. So are you implying that is wrong for them to do or are you saying the statistics make that unequal treatment justified?
My whole point has been that if you want to argue “disproportionate,” you’d better use the number of the criminal population in each category, instead of the general population.
If you look at the general population of men vs. women (50%/50%), then surely it would appear that the police are prejudiced against men.
But if you look at the *criminal* population of men vs. women (95%/5%), then you’d realize that the police are simply reacting to criminal behaviors rather than acting with prejudice or malice.
Likewise, doctor misconducts and medical errors “disproportionately” affect older people than younger people — not because doctors are prejudiced against the elderly, but simply because they are *statistically* more likely to be hospitalized and to have life-threatening illnesses.
(A doctor, by the way, is [statistically 350 times more likely](https://reddit.com/r/ProtectAndServe/comments/ocifnn/_/h3vcvw6/?context=1) to wrongfully kill you through their negligence or incompetence than a cop.)
As a person of color myself, I most definitely believe that no one should be treated differently *solely* because of their race.
But in the real world, there are far more factors at play than just race, and a competent police officer understands that you must take all of those factors (the legal term is “totality of the circumstances”) into consideration.
Consider this example.
If the following is all the information you have available, who of the following is most likely to have committed a crime?
- Black man in his 30s, visibly intoxicated and mumbling to himself, wears a dirty wife-beater and shorts in the winter weather, makes furtive movements upon seeing police
- Black man in his 30s, in a wheelchair, wears a thick jacket in the winter weather, sits on the porch of his house smoking a cigarette and talking on the phone
- White woman in her 40s, wears an oversized coat with obviously bulky objects concealed inside, hurriedly walks away from a store that has seen a large number of shoplifters lately
You are jumping around a bit now. Yes, the nervous, able-bodied individual is the most likely to have committed the crime. But let's please not act as if your hypothetical is at all representative of the typical scene an officer arrives to.
Let's get back to the point though, and I'll even take race out of the equation if you'd prefer. If one group of people is shown to be statistically more likely to commit crimes in an area, is it okay for the police to profile them based on the fact that they are a member of that group? Likewise, let's say that the police in that area have more violent interactions with that group than with others. Would you feel that is understandable because police would have more reason to consider members of that group dangerous criminals?
It is not about profiling, it is about mistaken identity. A police officer not in need of a seeing eye dog is not going to mistake a black man for a white one. That is why black and white Americans alike are wrongly killed by police in proportion to the percentage of violent crimes committed by other members of their racial group.
I'm talking about use-of-force incidents in general, not shootings.
>it’s more an issue with black men being more likely to meet a violent outcome in law enforcement incidents when all other things are held equal
That's true for general violence and assholery, but I think it is very important to stress that they are LESS likely to be SHOT than whites. That surprises most people.
>Using data from Houston, Texas – where we have both ocer-involved shootings and a
randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified –
we find, after controlling for suspect demographics, ocer demographics, encounter characteristics,
suspect weapon and year fixed effects, that blacks are 27.4 percent less likely to be shot at by police
relative to non-black, non-Hispanics. This coecient is measured with considerable error and not
statistically significant. This result is remarkably robust across alternative empirical specifications
and subsets of the data.
That’s a pretty remarkable result. Why does it drown out so often?
Because of “the narrative.”
Same reason why everyone knows about [George Floyd but not Justine Damond](https://www.thefelinewarrior.com/2021/06/one-city-two-murders-two-reactions.html), even though both were in the *same* city with the *same* police department.
Edit: this *just* happened — [Damond’s killer’s murder conviction has just been overturned, and he’ll be re-sentenced on manslaughter only.](https://www.startribune.com/supreme-court-overturns-third-degree-murder-conviction-against-ex-minneapolis-police-officer-mohamed/600097386/)
John McWhorter is a guy who has written about it occasionally. He does it very eloquently and I can't reproduce it well.
What I understand it basically comes down to is that the press and people do not care.
Here is one article from him - [Racist Police Violence Reconsidered](https://quillette.com/2020/06/11/racist-police-violence-reconsidered/)
>Tony Timpa was 32 years old when he died at the hands of the Dallas police in August 2016. He suffered from mental health difficulties and was unarmed. He wasn’t resisting arrest. He had called the cops from a parking lot while intoxicated because he thought he might be a danger to himself. By the time law enforcement arrived, he had already been handcuffed by the security guards of a store nearby. **Even so, the police officers made him lie face down on the grass, and one of them pressed a knee into his back. He remained in this position for 13 minutes until he suffocated.** During the harrowing recording of his final moments, he can be heard pleading for his life. A grand jury indictment of the officers involved was overturned.
[(police body cam video)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c-E_i8Q5G0)
>Not many people have seen this video, however, and that may have something to do with the fact that Timpa was white.
I think John McWhorter is one of the few guys who can freely write on this topic because he is both black and a distinguished Ivy League professor.
I think the bigger story is that the police act overly aggressively and with excessive force equally.
The black-targeting narrative not holding up to empirical scrutiny is worth amplifying if true.
And police brutality being color-blind is a takeaway, but the fact that police-brutality exists is a bigger take away.
On a positive note: you’d be happy to learn that most Americans prefer more-policing, and the whole “defund police” movement’s extremist adherents don’t align to general public sentiment.
This was in a Niskanen Center study that came out earlier this year, I believe.
Why do cops have to kneel on handcuffed people for so long? Like wouldn’t it be better to put him in the cop car and just leave him there until they figure out what to do with him?
I will say tho I do think could use better hand to hand combat training that’s consistently trained throughout the year.
That is not standard procedure by any means.
The standard procedure is either put the arrestee in the patrol car (like you said) or, if that’s not feasible for whatever reason, have the arrestee lie on their side without pressure on their back (this is known as the “recovery position”).
In fact, one of the rookie officers in the George Floyd incident suggested that Floyd should be rolled on his side, but was dismissed by the now-jailed senior officer.
Read more: https://www.policemag.com/524139/how-to-prevent-positional-asphyxia
Unfortunately you have to choose to have cops out in the street, or training. Hand to hand is taught to soldiers because that is all they do. Training it takes a fuckton of time which is time they are not on the street catching malcontents.
This is interesting. It’s a complex issue, and there are a lot of variables that are not taken into account by outrage. I hope someday we can make really solutions and find peace.
> I’m really afraid this sub is starting to go full on right-wing propaganda when initially this was a sub for non-extremists to sit back, observe extremist rhetoric, and laugh.
Don't worry, we're still banning far-righters here regularly, we get to have the "pleasure" of listening to them have hissy fits when we catch them and ban them. So we might not be perfect at spotting them but we've been taking them out frequently anyway, and we have no love for them here.
I enjoy the discourse here. I’m happy to engage and learn - I mean I did learn a few things today in this thread alone.
I'm definitely glad ot hear that.
Thank you for all you do.
While I agree that we should be careful of making this sub right wing, I want you to consider the following.
What is the best way to be wrongfully shot by the police? Would it not be to be confused for a violent criminal? That is by mistaken identity. Even the dimmest police officer is unlikely to confuse a black person with a white one. Therefore it is not surprising that black and white Americans alike are wrongly shot by police in exact proportion to their appearance in the violent crime statistics.
Of course that leaves the underlying question about why the violent crime rates vary by race.
I know you’re trying to lead into “all black people are inherently bad and prone to violence” with what you’re setting up.
And that’s just really sad to see.
No I am not. Stop projecting.
I swear tankies and far left people likes to bring up the slavery and segeration shit
I like how the first half is all shit that the country bearing that flag fought to end
Because all of China cares so much about black people
Wall of text wall of text. The left, they simply cant meme!
“so you go to war but you lose”? Wasn’t it the confederates fighting AGAINST the US who wanted slavery?