Systemic / Institutional / Societal Racism

[doug rr]

no more whiskey gifs.....

[Jorge]

You did it. You used all the whiskey gifs on the internet

[Norah]

we should all record ourselves pouring/drinking whiskey, turn those into gifs, and PM them to doug to post

[BurtReynolds]

time to close RM

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tree_]

starts at 17:00

Virtue signaling now stands in for being politically concerned. A person who, in 1965 would have said "What can i do to help?", is now asking "How can I show that I'm a moral person?" But that's more Martin Luther than Martin Luther King.

[tree_]

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/file ... _fryer.pdf

...for all the eerie similarities between the current spate of police interactions with African Americans and the historical injustices which remain unhealed, the current debate is virtually data free. Understanding the extent to which there are racial differences in police use of force and (if any) whether those differences might be due
to discrimination by police or explained by other factors at the time of the incident is a question of tremendous social importance, and the subject of this paper.

In stark contrast to non-lethal uses of force, we find no racial differences in officer-involved shootings on either the extensive or intensive margins. Using data from Houston, Texas – where we have both officer-involved shootings and a randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified – we find, in the raw data, that blacks are 23.8 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5 percent less likely. Both coefficients are statistically insignificant. Adding controls for civilian demographics, officer demographics, encounter characteristics, type of weapon civilian was carrying, and year fixed effects, the black (resp. Hispanic) coefficient is 0.924 (0.417) (resp. 1.256 (0.595)). These coefficients are remarkably robust across alternative empirical specifications and subsets of the data. Partitioning the data in myriad ways, we find no evidence of racial discrimination in officer-involved shootings. Investigating the intensive margin – the timing of shootings or how many bullets were discharged in the endeavor – there are no detectable racial differences.5

[tree_]

According to this, police are more likely to use non-lethal force, but less likely to use lethal force on black people.

[Bi_3]

starts at 17:00

Virtue signaling now stands in for being politically concerned. A person who, in 1965 would have said "What can i do to help?", is now asking "How can I show that I'm a moral person?" But that's more Martin Luther than Martin Luther King.

Change my mind: The binary between racist and anti-racist is the same as the binary between between sinner and saved.

[Mickey]

Trying to imagine something more futile.

[tree_]

There are severe problems with it (the modern religion of anti-racism). It does some good things, it gets some good people elected... But it does some bad things. If you're a good anti-racist, then you're thinking about the cops that killed black men in these scenes that we know about. But you're not supposed to think about the fact that so much more murder happens to men like that in their own neighborhoods. You're supposed to think of that as maybe connected to racism in some abstract way, but you're not supposed to think about it. You're not supposed to think about all those homicides... That's somehow less important than what the occasional rogue cop does. That's modern anti-racism for you. That's backwards.

[B]

There are severe problems with it (the modern religion of anti-racism). It does some good things, it gets some good people elected... But it does some bad things. If you're a good anti-racist, then you're thinking about the cops that killed black men in these scenes that we know about. But you're not supposed to think about the fact that so much more murder happens to men like that in their own neighborhoods. You're supposed to think of that as maybe connected to racism in some abstract way, but you're not supposed to think about it. You're not supposed to think about all those homicides... That's somehow less important than what the occasional rogue cop does. That's modern anti-racism for you. That's backwards.

Maybe if the cops weren't so busy killing unarmed black men for minor offenses, they'd have more time to investigate murders.

[B]

Seriously, it's absolutely untrue. No one wants the police to ignore crime in the community. We want them to do their work correctly.

I can want police to investigate murders or assaults AND not use lethal force on unarmed suspects of selling out-of-state cigarettes.

[tree_]

For B:

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/area/workshop/leo/leo16_fryer.pdf

...for all the eerie similarities between the current spate of police interactions with African Americans and the historical injustices which remain unhealed, the current debate is virtually data free. Understanding the extent to which there are racial differences in police use of force and (if any) whether those differences might be due
to discrimination by police or explained by other factors at the time of the incident is a question of tremendous social importance, and the subject of this paper.

In stark contrast to non-lethal uses of force, we find no racial differences in officer-involved shootings on either the extensive or intensive margins. Using data from Houston, Texas – where we have both officer-involved shootings and a randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified – we find, in the raw data, that blacks are 23.8 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5 percent less likely. Both coefficients are statistically insignificant. Adding controls for civilian demographics, officer demographics, encounter characteristics, type of weapon civilian was carrying, and year fixed effects, the black (resp. Hispanic) coefficient is 0.924 (0.417) (resp. 1.256 (0.595)). These coefficients are remarkably robust across alternative empirical specifications and subsets of the data. Partitioning the data in myriad ways, we find no evidence of racial discrimination in officer-involved shootings. Investigating the intensive margin – the timing of shootings or how many bullets were discharged in the endeavor – there are no detectable racial differences.5

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tree_]

Tree, just watch Bulworth

Why?

[tree_]

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 ... able-3.xls


Black or African American victims of murder in 2016: 2,870
Committed by whites: 243
Committed by blacks: 2,570

[B]

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls


Black or African American victims of murder in 2016: 2,870
Committed by whites: 243
Committed by blacks: 2,570

So, people kill those around them. So fucking what. The numbers are the same for whites. Black people aren't more likely to kill black people than whites are to kill whites.

[tree_]

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls


Black or African American victims of murder in 2016: 2,870
Committed by whites: 243
Committed by blacks: 2,570

So, people kill those around them. So fucking what. The numbers are the same for whites. Black people aren't more likely to kill black people than whites are to kill whites.

Incorrect. If you account for population percentage, it is a bigger problem with black people. The "so fucking what" is, this is a problem that should be discussed when talking about black lives mattering and the facts seem to be taboo. Cops killing blacks isn't the biggest problem. Cops are more likely to kill white people, which also matters.

[tree_]

In 2016, there were 3,499 white victims of homicide. White people were 61% of the population.